SC: Second placers can’t replace disqualified poll winners

MANILA, Philippines — Candidates who garnered the second highest number of votes, or the “second placers” in elections, cannot be proclaimed when the winning candidate has been disqualified or declared ineligible, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled.

In a 37-page ruling promulgated on April 22, the SC said there is no legal basis for proclaiming the second placer in elections since there is no law authorizing the proclamation of the second placer.

The rule on succession under Republic Act No. 7160 or the Local Government Code should apply instead.

“The second placer rule undermines the people’s choice in every election and is repugnant to the people’s constitutional right to suffrage. The Court cannot impose upon the electorate to accept as their representative the candidate whom they did not choose in the elections,” the ruling, penned by Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan, read.

“In fine, the Court hereby abandons the second placer rule and declares that the rules on succession under the LGC shall apply in all cases where a permanent vacancy results from a local elective official’s disqualification from office regardless of the proceedings involved,” it added.

The SC issued the ruling as it affirmed the Commission on Elections’ cancellation of candidacy of Datu Pax Ali Mangudadatu as Sultan Kudarat governor for not meeting the residency requirement.

The Comelec declared he committed material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy, saying he was still the incumbent mayor of Datu Abdullah Sangki of Maguindanao province when he filed his certificate in October 2021.

With the cancellation of Mangudadatu’s COC, the SC deemed it necessary to revisit the second placer rule, noting that as early as 1929, the high tribunal had rejected the second placer rule in Nuval vs. Guray because it was not supported by law and public policy.

In 2012, however, in the case Jalosjos Jr. vs Comelec, the court declared that if the COC of the first place was declared void ab initio (from the beginning), he or she was never a candidate therefore can never be the first-placer.

In its latest ruling, the SC abandoned the second placer rule, saying that regardless of the nature of proceedings, whether disqualification, denial or cancellation of a certificate of candidacy or quo warranto, the second placer cannot be proclaimed as winner in lieu of the disqualified first-placer.

It noted that its earlier effort to make a distinction between the effect of a denial or cancellation of a COC from the other remedies only resulted in conflicting decisions.

Comelec seeks reversal

The Commission on Elections (Comelec) is seeking the reversal of the SC’s “second placer” ruling.

Comelec Chairman George Garcia saying that they intend to file a motion for reconsideration on the SC decision. “Since the decision is not yet final, we will reserve, in the meantime, our comment. But we are now studying the possibility of filing an MR,” he said.

Garcia issued the statement in reaction to the SC decision released on Friday. Under the Local Government Code, the SC said the rules on succession shall apply in all cases where a permanent vacancy results from a local elective official’s disqualification from office. — Mayen Jaymalin