HRET AND DAN FERNANDEZ'S CASE

July 6, 2007 – Petitioner Jesus L. Vicente filed a petition for quo warranto against Danilo Ramon S.
Fernandez (HRET Case No. 07-034) on the ground that respondent lacked the residency requirement of
one year in the First District of Laguna as provided in Sec. 6, Article VI, of the Constitution.

In all of Fernandez’s previous certificates of candidacy (1998, 2001 and 2004 elections), he declared
under oath that his permanent residence is Pagsanjan. However, it was only in the 2007 elections that
Fernandez claimed to have changed his residence to Sta. Rosa City . The petitioner in the quo warranto
case, Vicente, knew for a fact that Fernandez never resided in Sta. Rosa, being a resident of that place
himself.

Dec. 16, 2008 - The House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) declared Fernandez ineligible for
the office of representative of the first district of Laguna for lack of residence in the district and ordered
him to vacate his office.

April 30, 2009 – The HRET, in Resolution No. 09-080, denied the motion for reconsideration filed by
Fernandez on Dec. 22, 2008 due to the absence of new issues or arguments that have not been resolved
in the 2008 decision. On the same day, the HRET decision became final and executory which was
entered in the book of entries of judgment.

May 11, 2009 – The HRET final decision unseating Fernandez was entered in the body’s book of entries
of judgment. The Secretary of the Tribunal furnished the House of Representatives a copy of the
decision and was received by the Office of the Secretary General on the same day.

May 21, 2009 – The HRET, in denying petitioner’s urgent motion for issuance of a writ of execution, said
such writ from the tribunal is not a required document for enforcement of the Dec. 16, 2008 decision,
and a notice of judgment to the House of Representatives suffices for the House Speaker to order the
Secretary General to execute the decision. In a meeting held on May 21, the tribunal said it has already
sent notice on May 11, 2009 to the Office of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who shall
execute the judgment.

In the same Resolution No. 09-101, the HRET cited Rule 96 of the HRET Rules of Procedure, it is not the
tribunal but the Speaker of the House of Representatives, through the Secretary General, who shall
execute the final and executory decision unless a temporary restraining order is issued by the Supreme
Court.
June 9, 2009 - Atty. Sixto Brilliantes, on behalf of petitioner Vicente, requested the House Speaker and
Secretary General in a letter to “instantly implement and enforce the final and executory decision of the
HRET by disallowing Fernandez from further representing himself as member of the House of
Representatives of the first legislative district of Laguna, be removing and delisting his name from the
Roll of Members of the House of Representatives.” In the same letter, Brilliantes informed the House
that Fernandez filed a petition for certiorari with a prayer for the issuance of a TRO before the Supreme
Court. Fernandez did not furnish the House a copy of the petition.

Since no temporary restraining order, status quo or injunctive order has been issued by the Supreme
Court, the decision of the HRET remains final and executory. HRET decisions are not appealable to the
Supreme Court, the tribunal being the sole judge of all contests relating the election, returns, and
qualifications of House members. Mere filing of a petition for certiorari and prohibition does not stay a
final and executory decision of the HRET.

The only recourse given by the judicial system is to question the HRET decision via a special civil action
of certiorari to the Supreme Court on the ground of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction. A petition for certiorari is not an appeal and its mere filing does not prevent the
HRET decision from becoming final and executory, unless the SC issues a TRO

June 30, 2009 - Brilliantes in his letter to the House leadership, emphasized that for each day that
Fernandez is allowed to misrepresent the people of the first district of Laguna, injustice is being
perpetrated, especially because a person who has been declared ineligible by a tribunal continues to
benefit from the position, monetary or otherwise. Brilliantes simply asks Nograles to recognize the
authority of the HRET bestowed by law and to perform his legal duty and obligation by executing the
judgment and having Fernandez removed from the rolls.

Atty. Brilliantes has sent a total of four letters to the House Speaker and Secretary General, reminding
them of their duty and obligation to enforce the final and executory decision of the HRET. The letters
remain unheeded to date.