MUTILAN VS.

COMELEC GR NO 171248

FACTS:

Petitioner Mutilan and Respondent Ampatuan were candidates for ARMM Governor. Petitioner
says, there were many parts of ARMM wherein no voting actually happened, substitute voting occurred,
etc. Petitioners counsel admitted that the case is not an election protest but an annulment of elections
and prayed that it be elevated to the COMELEC en banc and not the Second Division where it was
originally in. Petitioner argued that jurisdiction of this case may be heard by both division and en banc so
the second division can legally elevate the case to the Commission En Banc pursuant to its rules of
procedure to expedite disposition of election case. The COMELEC Second Division ruled that jurisdiction
over petitions for annulment of elections is vested in the COMELEC En Banc. However, the elevation of
the case to the COMELEC En Banc is not sanctioned by the rules or by jurisprudence. Thus, the
COMELEC Second Division dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

ISSUES:

1. WON the COMELEC Second Division acted with GAD amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction in dismissing the petition to annul elections and in not elevating the petition to the
COMELEC En Banc.
2. WON the COMELEC En Banc acted in the same way in denying petitioner as motion for
reconsideration for lack of verification.

HELD:

The petition is partly meritorious

1. Division can elevate. While automatic elevation of a case erroneously filed with the Division
to En Banc is not provided in the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, such action is not prohibited.
2. MFR must be verified before it may be acted by the COMELEC en banc.