SPOUSES CARLOS S. ROMUALDEZ and ERLINDA R. ROMUALDEZ, petitioners, vs.

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and DENNIS GARAY, respondents

G. R. No. 167011, April 30, 2008
Chico-Nazario, J.;
Facts:
- On July 12, 2000, private respondent Dennis Garay, along with Angelino Apostol, a Complaint-
Affidavit with COMELEC’s Office of the Election Officer in Burauen, Leyte, charging
petitioners with violation of Section 261 (y)(2) and (y)(5) of the Omnibus Election Code.
- He testified that petitioners are of legal ages and residents of 113 Mariposa Loop, Mariposa
Street, Bagong Lipunan ng Crame, Quezon City and that they applied for registration as new
voters in Burauen, Leyte on May 9 and 11, 2000.
- In the registration, they made violated Section 10 of the said Omnibus Election Code because
they claimed to be residents of 935 San Jose Street, Burauen, Leyte when they are still residents
and registered voters of Bagong Lipunan ng Crame.
- The Complaint-Affidavit also contained a prayer for the conduct of a preliminary investigation if
the evidenced Voter Registration Records warrant.
- Petitioners filed a Joint Counter-Affidavit with Motion to Dismiss, in which they contended that
they did not make false statements for they intended to reside in Burauen, Leyte since 1989. They
are leasing the house of the said Leyte address for five years and was even given a Resolution of
Welcome by the Baranggay District III Council of Burauen.
- On November 28, 2003, Atty. Maria Norina S. Tangaro-Casingal, COMELEC Investigating
Officer, recommended the filing of the appropriate information against petitioners in violation of
Section 10 (g) and (j), in relation to Section 45 (j) of the Omnibus Election Code. The Resolution
also authorized the designation of a COMELEC Prosecutor to handle the case. COMELEC En
Banc did not depart from this.
- Petitioners filed a Motion for Reconsideration, which was denied as the arguments were
repetitions of their previous Memorandum.
- On January 12, 2006, separate Informations were filed against the petitioners as their violations
were confirmed
- On May 4, 2006, petitioners filed for Issuance of Writ of Preliminary Injunction and to Cite for
Indirect Contempt as separate Informations were filed against them
Issue: Whether or not COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in terms of the lack or excess of its
jurisdiction when it premised its resolution on a misapprehension of facts and failed to consider certain
relevant facts that would justify a different conclusion (petitioners were charged by private respondent
with charges entirely different from those they are accused of before the RTC by the COMELEC – lack
of due process) (copied verbatim)
Held: The petition is DENIED.
- The Complaint-Affidavit filed by private respondent, with the citation of Section 10 (g) and (j) of
the Omnibus Election Code, support the charges by COMELEC. The petitioners made false
representations in their application as new voters of Burauen, Leyte, when they are still residents
and votes of Bagong Lipunan ng Crame, Quezon City. They also intentionally left the spaces
corresponding to the length of time they have resided in Burauen blank.
- Being residents of both Bagong Lipunan ng Crame and Burauen constitutes Double Registration,
which is an election offense.
- Due process is not denied as the charges in the Complaint-Affidavit and Informations are the
same, as they are based on the same set of facts. They were granted due process when they were
given the opportunity to refute the allegations in the Complaint-Affidavit.
- COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of power in the filing of Informations against petitioners
because they have the constitutional grant of prosecutorial power under Section 265 of Batas
Pambansa Bld. 881, which tasks them to conduct preliminary investigation on offense charges.