Lico V Comelec

LICO vs. COMELEC G.R. 205505 29 September 2015 SERENO, CJ. SUBJECT MATTER: A. Congress, House of Representatives LEGAL BASIS: Sec. 17 Art. VI of the Constitution - The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective Members. Equipoise doctrine - when the respective sets of evidence of both parties are equally balanced, the party having the burden of proof fails in that issue. Since neither party succeeds in making out a case, neither side prevails. The courts are left with no other option but to leave them as they are. This leads to the dismissal of the complaint/petition.

ACTION BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT: Before Us is a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65,seeking to annul the Resolutions in E.M. No. 12039 dated 18 July 2012 and 31 January 2013 of the COMELEC. Petitioner(s):

ATTY. ISIDRO Q. LICO et. al. in their individual capacities, and as legitimate members and officers of ADHIKAING TINATAGUYOD NG KOOPERATIBA (ATING KOOP PARTY LIST)

Respondent(s ):

THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC and the self- styled sham ATING KOOP PARTYLIST represented by AMPARO T. RIMAS

Parties

SUMMARY: - The case is between two rival factions, the Lico Group and the Rimas Group, within the same party-list organization, the Adhikaing Tinataguyod ng Kooperatiba (ATING KOOP) - Dec 11 2011 – Cebu meeting – Lico group held an election of members of the Central Committee to implement the 5-5-5 equal representation amendment during the 2nd National Convention - Jan 12 2012 – Parañaque meeting – Rimas group held a similar election creating a different Central Committee members. - Jul 18 2012 - COMELEC RESOLUTION deciding the dispute o Upheld the expulsion of Lico from ATING KOOP; o Declared Mascariña as duly qualified nominee; - SC held: o ONLY THE HRET has jurisdiction on the expulsion of Lico NOT COMELEC o Equipoise doctrine – Interim Central Committee before the questioned elections of both Lico and Rimas group remain the legitimate members ANTECEDENT FACTS: ● ●

The case is between two rival factions, the Lico Group and the Rimas Group, within the same party-list organization, the Adhikaing Tinataguyod ng Kooperatiba (ATING KOOP) ATING KOOP party-list won a seat in Congress in the May 10 2010 elections with its 1 st nominee as Atty. Isidro Lico and Mr. Roberto Mascarina as 2nd nominee.

C2023(BINAG) - CONSTI, GATMAYTAN

○

●

● ●

● ● ●

June 9 2010 - Prior to Atty. Lico’s proclamation (Dec. 9, ‘10), the Central Committee issued a Resolution where a term-sharing agreement was signed by BOTH nominees. Under the agreement, Lico shall serve as the representative only for the first year of the three-year term. May 14 2011 – ATING KOOP held its 2nd National Convention introducing the following amendments to its Constitution and by-laws: ○ Restructuring of the Central Committee which shall have 5-5-5 equal representation of its members coming from Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. A ○ Election of such Central Committee members shall be within six months after the 2 nd National Convention. The effect is that it cut short the term of the members of the Central Committee (Interim Central Committee dominated by Rimas group), prior to the 2nd national convention amendments, by 3 months. Dec 5 2011 – almost one year after Atty. Lico assumed office, the Interim Central Committee expelled him for disloyalty resulting from allegations of: ○ Malversation and graft and corruption; ○ Refusal to honor the term-sharing agreement he signed. Atty. Lico filed a motion for reconsideration with the Interim Central Committee but was denied. Dec 11 2011 – Cebu meeting – Lico group held an election of members of the Central Committee to implement the 5-5-5 equal representation amendment during the 2nd National Convention Jan 12 2012 – Parañaque meeting – Rimas group held a similar election creating a different Central Committee members.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY 



Mar 16 2012 – Rimas group filed a petition with COMELEC: o Against Lico, praying for Lico to vacate his office as Representative of ATING KOOP; o Nullify Cebu meeting and recognize the Parañaque meeting and its elected members. Jul 18 2012 - COMELEC RESOLUTION: o Said it has jurisdiction to resolve intra-party leadership dispute; o Upheld the expulsion of Lico from ATING KOOP; o Declared Mascariña as duly qualified nominee; o YET, COMELEC said it has no jurisdiction to expel Lico from the House of Representatives. The HRET has jurisdiction as it determines the qualification of members of the House of Representatives; o Recognized the Rimas group as the legitimate representative of ATING KOOP.

Hence, this Petition by the Lico group.

ISSUE(S) AND HOLDING(S): 1. WoN COMELEC has jurisdiction over the expulsion of a member of the House of Representatives from his partylist - NO. 2. WoN the Rimas group should be recognized as the legitimate representative of ATING KOOP - NO RATIO: 1. NO. It is only the HRET who has jurisdiction over the expulsion of a HoR member. 

 

LEGAL BASIS: Sec. 17 Art. VI of the Constitution - The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective Members. COMELEC, in upholding the validity of the expulsion of Lico from Ating Koop, despite its own ruling that the HRET has the exclusive jurisdiction over the disqualification issue, was found to be of no legal basis. Comelec’s citation of Lokin v Comelec (to support claim that it has jurisdiction over intra-party matters) is a misplaced argument C2023(BINAG) - CONSTI, GATMAYTAN

o





This because in Lokin, the case involved nominees prior to election NOT incumbent members of the Congress.  Lokin – nominees  Current case – Lico already a member of Congress at the time of expulsion  Rules on intra-party matters and on the jurisdiction of the HRET do not intersect Lico’s membership in Congress is obviously anchored in his membership in Ating Koop. By expelling him, his title as member of Congress is affected. The issue of expulsion should therefore be resolved by the HRET and not COMELEC. Court discussed difference of Reyes v. Comelec from the present case: o Court upheld Comelec’s jurisdiction over a disqualification case of a winning candidate who was already proclaimed and took his oath of office but has not yet officially started his term of office. o Reyes took an inconsistent, if not confusing, stance, considering that she sought remedy before the Court, and yet asserted that it is the HRET which had jurisdiction over the case o Reyes doctrine: COMELEC can have jurisdiction over disqualification cases of HoR members only if they are NOT YET assumed office and HAVE NOT officially started his/her term. Otherwise, all HoR election cases are under the jurisdiction of HRET.

2. NO. The Interim Central Committee shall be recognized.    

  



COMELEC erred in recognizing the Rimas group as the legitimate members and officers for the simple reason that the amendments to the constitution and by-laws were not registered with the COMELEC. There was no showing that the amendments of the 2nd National Convention calling for an election of Central Committee members were filed with the COMELEC. Legal Basis: A party-list organization owes its existence to the State and the latter’s approval must be obtained through its agent, the COMELEC. Dayao v. COMELEC: o “The State, through the COMELEC, is a party to the principal contracts entered into by the party-list organization and its members — the Constitution and Bylaws — such that any amendment [requires] consent of all the parties involved. An amendment to the bylaws of a party-list organization should become effective only upon approval by the COMELEC.” Assuming arguendo that the amendments, which purpose is to elect new members equally, are valid, still, both the Cebu and Paranaque meeting failed to produce evidence to prove their respective elections were lawful. Both parties failed to establish that their meetings in Cebu or Parañaque were held in accordance with due process of notifying its members and having quorum. Legal doctrine: Equipoise doctrine - when the respective sets of evidence of both parties are equally balanced, the party having the burden of proof fails in that issue. Since neither party succeeds in making out a case, neither side prevails. The courts are left with no other option but to leave them as they are. This leads to the dismissal of the complaint/petition. o Applying equipoise doctrine, Rimas group, as original petitioners had the burden of proving that it is the legitimate members and officers of Ating Koop – but FAILED TO DO SO – so Court cannot recognize them as such o Since no valid elections were held, the Interim Central Committee is deemed as the legitimate members and officers as they were holding such positions before the questioned elections of both Lico and Rimas group. Señeres v. COMELEC, o The Court applied by analogy the default rule in corporation law to the effect that officers and directors of a corporation holdover after the expiration of their terms until such time as their successors are elected or appointed. Señeres ruled that the holdover principle applies in the absence of a provision in the constitution or bylaws of the party-list organization prohibiting its application.

C2023(BINAG) - CONSTI, GATMAYTAN

DISPOSITIVE: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition is GRANTED. The COMELEC En Banc Resolution dated 31 January 2013 and the COMELEC Second Division Resolution dated 18 July 2012 in E.M. No. 12-039 are hereby ANNULLED and SET ASIDE insofar as it declares valid the expulsion of Congressman Lico from Ating Koop and it upholds the ATING KOOP Party-list Group represented by its President, Amparo T. Rimas, as the legitimate Party-list Group. A new one is entered DECLARING that the legitimate Central Committee and set of officers legitimately representing Ating Koop are the Interim Central Committee and set of officers prior to the split of Ating Koop.

C2023(BINAG) - CONSTI, GATMAYTAN