Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 334 views

    Lazatin V HRET Digest

    Uploaded by

    Clarisa Natividad
    This case involves a dispute over the election results for a seat in the House of Representatives from Pampanga province. During the canvassing of votes, a candidate objected and filed cases with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) challenging the proclamation of his opponent as winner. The COMELEC initially suspended the proclamation but later allowed it to proceed. The losing candidate then filed a case with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) contesting the election results. The issue is whether the HRET has jurisdiction over the case. The Supreme Court ruled that based on the Constitution, the HRET has sole and exclusive jurisdiction over all election contests involving House seats.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Lazatin V HRET Digest

    Uploaded by

    Clarisa Natividad
    334 views2 pages
    This case involves a dispute over the election results for a seat in the House of Representatives from Pampanga province. During the canvassing of votes, a candidate objected and filed cases with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) challenging the proclamation of his opponent as winner. The COMELEC initially suspended the proclamation but later allowed it to proceed. The losing candidate then filed a case with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) contesting the election results. The issue is whether the HRET has jurisdiction over the case. The Supreme Court ruled that based on the Constitution, the HRET has sole and exclusive jurisdiction over all election contests involving House seats.

    Original Description:

    Consti Law

    Original Title

    Lazatin v HRET Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a dispute over the election results for a seat in the House of Representatives from Pampanga province. During the canvassing of votes, a candidate objected and filed cases with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) challenging the proclamation of his opponent as winner. The COMELEC initially suspended the proclamation but later allowed it to proceed. The losing candidate then filed a case with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) contesting the election results. The issue is whether the HRET has jurisdiction over the case. The Supreme Court ruled that based on the Constitution, the HRET has sole and exclusive jurisdiction over all election contests involving House seats.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    334 views2 pages

    Lazatin V HRET Digest

    Uploaded by

    Clarisa Natividad
    This case involves a dispute over the election results for a seat in the House of Representatives from Pampanga province. During the canvassing of votes, a candidate objected and filed cases with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) challenging the proclamation of his opponent as winner. The COMELEC initially suspended the proclamation but later allowed it to proceed. The losing candidate then filed a case with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) contesting the election results. The issue is whether the HRET has jurisdiction over the case. The Supreme Court ruled that based on the Constitution, the HRET has sole and exclusive jurisdiction over all election contests involving House seats.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    CARMELO F. LAZATIN v.

    HRET,
    G.R. No. 84297

    December 8, 1988

    FACTS:

    Petitioner and private respondent were among the candidates for


    Representative of the first district of Pampanga during the elections of May 11, 1987.
    During the canvassing of the votes, private respondent objected to the inclusion of
    certain election returns. But since the Municipal Board of Canvassers did not rule on
    his objections, he brought his case to the Commission on Elections. On May 19, 1987,
    the COMELEC ordered the Provincial Board of Canvassers to suspend the
    proclamation of the winning candidate for the first district of Pampanga. However,
    on May 26, 1987, the COMELEC ordered the Provincial Board of Canvassers to
    proceed with the canvassing of votes and to proclaim the winner. On May 27, 1987,
    petitioner was proclaimed as Congressman-elect. Private respondent thus filed in
    the COMELEC a petition to declare petitioners proclamation void ab initio. Later,
    private respondent also filed a petition to prohibit petitioner from assuming office.
    The COMELEC failed to act on the second petition so petitioner was able to assume
    office on June 30, 1987. On September 15, 1987, the COMELEC declared petitioner's
    proclamation void ab initio. Petitioner challenged the COMELEC resolution before
    this Court in a petition entitled "Carmelo F. Lazatin v. The Commission on Elections,
    Francisco R. Buan, Jr. and Lorenzo G. Timbol," docketed as G.R. No. 80007. In a
    decision promulgated on January 25, 1988, the Court set aside the COMELEC's
    revocation of petitioner's proclamation. On February 8, 1988, private respondent
    filed in the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal.

    ISSUE:

    Whether or not the House of Representative Electoral Tribunal has jurisdiction


    over the case?

    RULING:

    Yes, the HRET has Jurisdiction over the case.


    SECTION 17. The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an
    Electoral Tribunal, which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the
    election, returns, and qualifications of their respective Members. Each Electoral
    Tribunal shall be composed of nine Members, three of whom shall be Justices of the
    Supreme Court to be designated by the Chief Justice, and the remaining six shall be
    Members of the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case may be, who
    shall be chosen on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties
    and the parties or organizations registered under the party-list system represented
    therein. The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal shall be its Chairman.

    The power of the HRET, as the sole judge of all contests relating to the election,
    returns and qualifications of the Members of the House of Representatives, to
    promulgate rules and regulations relative to matters within its jurisdiction, including
    the period for filing election protests before it, is beyond dispute. Its rule-making
    power necessarily flows from the general power granted it by the Constitution.
    .

    You might also like