EN BANC
[G.R. No. 204884. July 2, 2013.]
DANTE TINGA, petitioner, vs. MARIA LAARNI CAYETANO AND COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court en banc issued a Resolution dated JULY 2, 2013, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 204884(Dante Tinga, petitioner v. Maria Laarni Cayetano and Commission on Elections, respondents).
RESOLUTION
For the resolution of the Court is the special civil action for certiorari and mandamus filed by petitioner Dante O. Tinga, assailing the Orders dated 4 October 2012 and 7 December 2012 of public respondent Commission on Elections (COMELEC) in EPC No. 2010-44. The COMELEC effectively dismissed the election protest of herein petitioner.
Petitioner and respondent Maria Laarni Cayetano were candidates for Mayor of Taguig in the 2010 elections. After the canvassing of votes, respondent emerged as the winner with a margin of 2,420 votes over petitioner. Thereafter, petitioner filed an Election Protest claiming poll irregularities such as the use of pre-programmed compact flash (CF) cards with padded election results benefitting respondent, and the rejection of hundreds of ballots in favor of petitioner by the PCOS machines.
The COMELEC ordered a recount of the ballots. After a physical count of the ballots constituting 20% of the total number of protested clustered precincts, respondent was still leading with a margin of 580 votes. At that point, respondent had 12,497 votes in her favor while petitioner had 11,917 votes. The COMELEC then computed that even if the 94 claimed ballots of petitioner were added to his 11,917 votes, the sum would be 12,011 which is still smaller than the 12,497 votes of respondent. Hence, the COMELEC First Division ruled that there was no more need to continue with the recount, and consequently dismissed petitioner's election protest for lack of merit. DcAEIS
Acting on petitioner's motion for reconsideration, the COMELEC En Banc dismissed said motion for failure to obtain the necessary majority vote. Hence, the present petition for certiorari and mandamus.
We dismiss the petition for its mootness.
With the conduct of the 2013 National and Local Elections, as well as the assumption to office of the newly-elected officials, the term of office for the contested position had expired, rendering the present petition moot and academic and warranting its dismissal.
A case becomes moot when there is no more actual controversy between the parties or no useful purpose can be served in passing upon the merits. Courts will not determine a moot question in a case in which no practical relief can be granted. It is unnecessary to indulge in academic discussion of a case presenting a moot question, as a judgment thereon cannot have any practical legal effect or, in the nature of things, cannot be enforced. 1
In Baldo, Jr. v. COMELEC, et al., 2 the Court dismissed the petition before it due to the expiration of the challenged term of office, to wit:
While the instant Petition is pending before this Court, national and local elections were held on 14 May 2007, and the winners therein assumed office by 1 July 2007. In said elections, petitioner Baldo won and is now serving as the municipal mayor of Camalig, Albay. Therefore, the term of office for the seat of municipal mayor of Camalig, Albay, being contested herein, had already expired on 30 June 2007, rendering the instant Petition moot.
In Malaluan v. COMELEC, this Court pronounced that the expiration of the challenged term of office renders the corresponding petition moot, to wit: ScTCIE
It is significant to note that the term of office of the local officials elected in the May, 1992 elections expired on 30 June 1995. This petition, thus, has become moot and academic insofar as it concerns petitioner's right to the mayoralty seat in his municipality because expiration of the term of office contested in the election protest has the effect of rendering the same moot and academic. (Emphasis, citations and underlined omitted)
Moreover, in Mendoza v. COMELEC and Familara, 3 the Court clarified that when the contested term of office expires, the petitioner loses his legal standing to further pursue the election case, to wit:
With the conduct of the 2010 barangay elections, a supervening event has transpired that has rendered this case moot and academic and subject to dismissal. This is because, as stated in Fernandez v. Commission on Elections, "whatever judgment is reached, the same can no longer have any practical legal effect or, in the nature of things, can no longer be enforced." Mendoza's term of office has expired with the conduct of last year's local elections. As such, Special Civil Action No. 08-10, where the assailed Orders were issued, can no longer prosper. Mendoza no longer has any legal standing to further pursue the case, rendering the instant petition moot and academic. (Emphasis omitted)
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court Resolves to DISMISS the petition for being moot and academic." (adv57) ESCTaA
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) ENRIQUETA E. VIDALClerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Baldo, Jr. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176135, 16 June 2009, 589 SCRA 306, 310-311.
2.Id. at 30.
3.G.R. No. 191017, 15 November 2011, 660 SCRA 70, 81.