Grego v.

COMELEC
G.R. No. 125955

FACTS:

In 1981, Basco was removed from his position as Deputy Sheriff for serious misconduct.
Subsequently, he ran as a candidate for councilor in the Second District of the City of
Manila during the 1988, local elections. He won and assumed office. After his term, Basco
sought re-election. Again, he won. However, he found himself facing lawsuits filed by his
opponents who wanted to dislodge him from his position.

Petitioner argues that Basco should be disqualified from running for any elective position
since he had been “removed from office as a result of an administrative case” pursuant
to Section 40 (b) of Republic Act No. 7160. For a third time, Basco was elected councilor
in 1995. Expectedly, his right to office was again contested. In 1995, petitioner Grego filed
with the COMELEC a petition for disqualification. The COMELEC conducted a hearing
and ordered the parties to submit their respective memoranda.

However, the Manila City BOC proclaimed Basco in May 1995, as a duly elected councilor
for the Second District of Manila, placing sixth among several candidates who vied for the
seats. Basco immediately took his oath of office. COMELEC resolved to dismiss the
petition for disqualification. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of said resolution was
later denied by the COMELEC,, hence, this petition.

ISSUE: Whether or not COMELEC acted in with grave abuse of discretion in dismissing
the petition for disqualification.

RULING:

No. The Supreme Court found no grave abuse of discretion on the part of COMELEC in
dismissing the petition for disqualification, however, the Court noted that they do not
agree with its conclusions and reasons in the assailed resolution.

The Court reiterated that being merely an implementing rule, Sec 25 of the COMELEC
Rules of Procedure must not override, but instead remain consistent with and in harmony
with the law it seeks to apply and implement. Administrative rules and regulations are
intended to carry out, neither to supplant nor to modify, the law. The law itself cannot be
extended to amending or expanding the statutory requirements or to embrace matters not
covered by the statute. An administrative agency cannot amend an act of Congress.

In case of discrepancy between the basic law and a rule or regulation issued to implement
said law, the basic law prevails because said rule or regulations cannot go beyond the
terms and provisions of the basic law. Since Section 6 of Rep. Act 6646, the law which
Section 5 of Rule 25 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure seeks to implement, employed
the word “may,” it is, therefore, improper and highly irregular for the COMELEC to have
used instead the word “shall” in its rules.