Angara v. Electoral Commission GR No.

45081 July 15, 1936

Facts:
Petitioner Jose Angara ask for writ of prohibition to restrain electoral commission
from taking further cognizance of protest raised by Ynsua, another respondent, against
the election of said petitioner as member of the national assembly for the first district of
tayabas.

Jose A Angara and Pedro Ynsua, Miguel Castillo and Dionicio Mayor were both
running as candidates as an Assembly Man for the first district of Tayabas Province.

On Oct 17, 1935 the provincial board of canvassers proclaimed Angara as

member – elect of the national assembly for garnering the most number of votes. Then
he took his oath of office on November 15 of the same year, on December 3, the
National Assembly pas a resolution No 8. Which declare the finality of the victory of
Angara. On December 8 Pedro Ynsua filed before the electoral commission a motion of
protest against the election of angara,

The Electoral Commission made a resolution declaring that December 9, will be

the last day of making petition. On Deceber 20 Angara filed motion to dismiss to
petition/protest of Ynsuan but later denied by the commission due to the petition was
made outside of the period/deadline that the commission prescribed.

Angara filled for writ of prohibition to restrain and prohibit the EC for taking further
cognizance of Ynsua’s petition. He contended that the commission confers exclusive
jurisdiction upon the EC as regard the merits of the contested elections to the national
assembly and supreme court therefore the supreme court has no jurisdiction to hear the
case.

Issue:

Whether or the Supreme court has jurisdiction over the electoral commission and
the subject matter of the controversy.

Whether the EC has acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction.

Ruling:

1. Yes the court has jurisdiction over Electoral Commission and the subject
matters for the purpose of degerming the character, scope of the
constitutional grant to the EC as the sole judge in all contest relating to
election.
2. Yes that the EC was acting within the legitimate exercise of its constitutional
prerogative in assuming to take cognizance to the election protest made by
Ynsuan.

SEC. 4. There shall be an Electoral Commission composed of three Justices of the

Supreme Court designated by the Chief Justice, and of six Members chosen by the
National Assembly, three of whom shall be nominated by the party having... the largest
number of votes, and three by the party having the second largest number of votes therein.
The senior Justice in the Commission shall be its chairman. The Electoral Commission shall
be the sole judge of the election, returns, and qualifications of the Members of the
National Assembly."