Submitted by: Julio S. Ursonal Jr. LLB-1 Executive Class ANGARA VS.

ELECTORAL COMMISSION Facts:

This is an original action instituted in this court by the petitioner, Jose A. Angara, for the issuance of a writ of prohibition to restrain and prohibit the Electoral Commission, one of the respondents, from taking further cognizance of the protest filed by Pedro Ynsua, another respondent, against the election of said petitioner as member of the National Assembly for the first assembly district of the Province of Tayabas.

Angara has been elected and proclaimed as member of the national assembly and subsequently affirmed throug a resolution. Pedro Ynsua who lost to Angara in the election filed an election protest before the electoral commission. Petitioner Angara argued that the electoral commission has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the petition on the ground that it is the exclusive power of the legislative department or the national assembly. Issue:
Whether or not the said Electoral Commission acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction in assuming to the cognizance of the protest filed the election of the herein petitioner. Held: The supreme court held that the Electoral Commission was acting within the legitimate exercise of its constitutional prerogative in assuming to take cognizance of the protest filed by the respondent Pedro Ynsua against the election of the herein petitioner Jose A. Angara, and that the resolution of the National Assembly of December 3, 1935 can not in any manner toll the time for filing protests against the elections, returns and qualifications of members of the National Assembly, nor prevent the filing of a protest within such time as the rules of the Electoral Commission might prescribe.

The petition for a writ of prohibition against the Electoral Commission is denied, with costs against the petitioner.