Scribd
Upload
77 views1 page

Lokin, Jr. V COMELEc

This case involved a dispute over the nomination of party-list representatives for the 2007 Philippine elections. Petitioner Luis Lokin Jr. was originally the second nominee for the Citizen's Battle Against Corruption party but was later removed and substituted. The Commission on Elections upheld the substitution based on its resolution allowing withdrawals of nominations by the party. However, the Supreme Court ruled the withdrawal violated the election code and granted Lokin's petition, finding the Commission overstepped by allowing substitutions beyond what the code permitted. The Court declared the portion of the resolution authorizing withdrawals invalid.

Uploaded by

Mike Marquez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
77 views1 page

Lokin, Jr. V COMELEc

This case involved a dispute over the nomination of party-list representatives for the 2007 Philippine elections. Petitioner Luis Lokin Jr. was originally the second nominee for the Citizen's Battle Against Corruption party but was later removed and substituted. The Commission on Elections upheld the substitution based on its resolution allowing withdrawals of nominations by the party. However, the Supreme Court ruled the withdrawal violated the election code and granted Lokin's petition, finding the Commission overstepped by allowing substitutions beyond what the code permitted. The Court declared the portion of the resolution authorizing withdrawals invalid.

Uploaded by

Mike Marquez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Lokin, Jr v.

Commission on Elections
June 22, 2010 | J. Bersamin

Petitioner: Luis Lokin, Jr,


Respondent: Commission on Elections and the House of Representatives

Doctrine: An IRR should remain consistent with the law it intends to carry out not override,
supplant or modify it.

FACTS
 Citizen’s Battle Against Corruption (CIBAC) intended to participate in the 2007
elections. CIBAC’s president, Joel Villanueva, submitted a list of five nominees from
which representatives of the party would be chosen. Among the chosen is petitioner
Luis Lokin Jr.
 May, 7, 2007: The names of Lokin, and two others were withdrawn and substituted.
Lokin was removed as second nominee and was substituted by Cruz-Gonzales.
 Election results showed that CIBAC was entitled to a second seat and that Lokin, as
second nominee on the original list, to a proclamation, which was opposed by
Villanueva and Cruz-Gonzales.
 COMELEC resolved the issue by declaring that the amendment of the list is valid.
 COMELEC En Banc declared Cruz-Gonzales as the official second nominee, and
allowed her to take her oath of office.
 Lokin filed a petition for mandamus to compel respondent COMELEC to proclaim him
as the official second nominee of CIBAC. He also alleges that Sec. 13 of Resolution
No. 7804 expanded R.A. 7941 by allowing CIBAC to change its nominees.

ISSUES + HELD
WON the withdrawal of nominees is violative of Resolution Number 7804.
 Resolution No. 7804 was issued as an IRR in accordance with the provisions of the
Omnibus Election Code and the Party List System Act.
o Sec. 8 of RA 7941 states that:
“Each registered party, organization or coalition shall submit to the
COMELEC not later than forty-five (45) days before the election a list of
names, not less than five (5), from which party-list representatives shall be
chosen…No change of names or alteration of the order of nominees shall be
allowed after the same shall have been submitted to the COMELEC except in
cases where the nominee dies, or withdraws in writing his nomination,
becomes incapacitated…”

Section 13 of Resolution No. 7804 expanded the exceptions under Section 8 of R.A. No.
7941 when it provided four instances by adding “nomination is withdrawn by the party” as
statutory ground for substituting a nominee. The COMELEC erred in issuing an IRR that
extended, expanded, or added anything to the law that it sought to implement. The petitions
for certiorari and mandamus were granted. Section 13 of Resolution No. 7804  was declared
invalid

RULING: WHEREFORE, we grant the petitions for certiorari and mandamus.


We declare Section 13 of Resolution No. 7804 invalid and of no effect to the extent that it
authorizes a party-list organization to withdraw its nomination of a nominee once it has
submitted the nomination to the Commission on Elections.

You might also like