Virgilio Robles vs.

House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal

G.R. No. 86647
February 5, 1990

Facts: Virgilio Robles filed a petition for certiorari with prayer for a temporary restraining order
assailing the resolutions of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) for granting
herein private respondent Romeo Santos’ Urgent Motion to Recall and Disregard Withdrawal of
Protest, and denying petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration where Robles was proclaimed
winner as Congressman of the 1st district of Caloocan City.

Issue: WON HRET retain the jurisdiction to grant or deny Santos’ Motion to Disregard
Withdrawal Protest after Santos already filed a Motion to Withdraw Protest beforehand.

Held: Yes. The mere filing of the Motion to Withdraw Protest on the remaining uncontested
precincts, without any action on the part of HRET did not divest the latter of jurisdiction if only to
insure that the Tribunal retains sufficient authority to see to it that the will of the electorate is
ascertained. Jurisdiction, once acquired, is not lost upon instance of the parties, and continues
until the case is terminated. To hold otherwise would permit a party to deprive the Tribunal of
jurisdiction already acquired. Where the Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter, its orders
upon all questions pertaining to the cause are orders within its jurisdiction however erroneous
they may be; they cannot be corrected by certiorari. In the case of Lazatin v. The House of
Representatives Electoral Tribunal and Timbo, this rule more appropriately applies to HRET
whose independence as a constitutional body, pursuant to Sec 17 of Art. VI 1987 Constitution
has time and again been upheld in many cases.