The Supreme Court (SC) has ordered the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to proclaim Roberto “Pinpin” T. Uy Jr. as winner in the 2022 congressional election for the 1^st District of Zamboanga del Norte.

In a decision during its full court session on Tuesday, Aug. 8, the SC granted the petition filed by Uy as it nullified the Comelec’s proclamation of Romeo M. Jalosjos Jr. as winner.

The decision was written by Justice Mario V. Lopez. While a copy of the decision has not been released publicly as of posting, the salient features of the ruling were released on Wednesday, Aug. 9, by the SC’s public information office (PIO)

Aside from Uy and R. Jalosjos Jr., the other candidates in the 2022 election were Frederico “Kuya Jan” Jalosjos and Richard Amazon.

Uy garnered 69,591 votes compared to Jalosjos Jr.’s 69,109 votes. Uy’s proclamation was stopped by the Comelec pending resolution of Jalosjos Jr.’s petition to declare F. Jalosjos a nuisance candidate.

After the Comelec declared F. Jalosjos a nuisance candidate on June 7, 2022, his votes were credited in favor of R. Jalosjos Jr. that led to the latter’s proclamation as the duty-elected representative for Zamboanga de Norte’s 1^st district.

Uy challenged the Comelec’s ruling before the SC.

On July 12, 2022, the SC granted temporarily the plea of Uy to stop R. Jalosjos Jr. from assuming his post.  The SC also stopped temporarily the Comelec from crediting in favor of R. Jalosjos Jr. the 5,424 votes of F. Jalosjos.

F. Jalosjos also challenged the Comelec’s ruling that declared him a nuisance candidate.  His petition was consolidated with Uy’s case.

In the absence of the copy of the decision, Manila Bulletin decided to quote from the press statement issued by the PIO which said:

“In granting the petitions, the Supreme Court held that public policy dictates that candidates receiving the highest votes should be proclaimed without unnecessary delay. The Court stressed that the board of canvassers is a ministerial body with power generally limited to the mechanical function of adding or compiling the votes cast for each candidate.

“The Court also emphasized that R. Jalosjos had not yet assumed office in view of the status quo ante order it issued, adding that the status quo ante order does not permit any proclamation while the case is pending and, thus, renders any proclamation ineffective.

“The Court further said that the suspension of proclamation of a winning candidate is not a matter which the Comelec can dispose of motu proprio (on one’s initiative).

“In Uy’s case, the Comelec, motu proprio, ordered the suspension of his proclamation even though the PBOC (provincial board of canvassers) had clear basis to proclaim Uy as the winning candidate, having garnered the highest number of votes.

“The Court also noted there were several irregularities in the Comelec En Banc’s suspension order, with the copy sent by electronic mail to the PBOC in advance, undated, and lacking the complete signatures of the Comelec members as well as a certification and a notice signed by the Comelec’s Clerk of Court.

“The Court also found irregular that the Comelec Chairperson intervened in the proclamation by calling directly the PBOC Chairperson to confirm the authenticity of the suspension order.

“The Court further ruled that the Comelec’s power to suspend the proclamation of a winning candidate is not available in proceedings to declare one a nuisance candidate.

“Thus, the Comelec gravely abused its discretion when it suspended Uy’s proclamation in SPA No. 21-224 (DC), a proceeding where Uy is not a party, and was thus denied the opportunity to be heard.

“As to the issue of whether F. Jalosjos is a nuisance candidate, the Court ruled in favor of F. Jalosjos. The Court found that the Comelec solely based its ruling on the alleged erroneous use of a nickname in declaring F. Jalosjos a nuisance without considering his membership in the political party, the importance of a CoC (certificate of candidacy), the preceding campaign period, and the dissimilarities in the names appearing on the ballots.

“The Court held that the automated elections system (AES) ensured sufficient identifiers on the entries appearing on the ballots, with the candidates’ complete names and political parties now printed, as submitted by the candidates.

“Thus, the striking difference in the names of ‘Jalosjos, Kuya Jan (NUP)’ and ‘Jalosjos, Jr., Romeo (NP)’ on the ballots, which refer to F. Jalosjos and R. Jalosjos, respectively, are more than enough to distinguish the entries in the ballots despite the similarity in the surnames.”