Rosal challenges Comelec’s new resolution

By Rhaydz B. Barcia

OUSTED governor Noel Rosal vowed to continue his fight in the gubernatorial race despite political propaganda claiming his candidacy is void. This follows a new ruling from the Commission on Elections (Comelec) that cancels the candidacy of individuals who filed Certificates of Candidacy (COC) with dismissal orders from the Office of the Ombudsman.

Rosal stated that misinformation is being spread across the province to mislead voters into believing that he is no longer a legitimate candidate.

“My fight for Albay continues. Propaganda is spreading across the province to mislead voters and condition their minds that my candidacy is invalid,” Rosal said.

Rosal also contested the new Comelec resolution, which stipulates that candidates with dismissal orders from the Ombudsman are ineligible to run and that their COCs will be cancelled.

“Don’t believe that I am disqualified from running because of the Ombudsman’s decision on the case filed against me by Adrian Loterte. The final decision lies with the Supreme Court, not Comelec,” Rosal emphasized, referring to Comelec Resolution No. 11404-A.

He criticized the resolution as a violation of his rights to run in a free and fair election.

“Comelec’s resolution No. 11404-A is a clear violation of my right to run in what should be a free and fair election. We question why Comelec has introduced this regulation, which prohibits individuals with pending cases on appeal before the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals from running. This resolution contradicts our constitution,” he said.

Rosal argued that the Comelec does not have the authority to enact laws, as this power lies with Congress. He emphasized that the resolution infringes on both his right to run and the voters’ right to choose.

“First, Comelec has no power to enact laws—that authority rests with Congress. Second, this regulation violates my rights to run and be voted upon, and it also violates your right to choose your candidate,” he added.

Rosal vowed to continue the fight alongside his wife, Carmen Geraldine Rosal, stating that they would not allow current officials to undermine democracy. He affirmed that this battle is not just for them but for the people, promising to take the fight to the Supreme Court.

“Our fight continues. We will not let those in power destroy the foundations of our democracy. This is a difficult path, but we will not give up easily. As they say, ‘evil triumphs when good men do nothing.’ We will fight this together, all the way to the High Court,” he declared.

Election lawyer Romulo Macalintal also challenged Comelec’s resolution, arguing that the commission cannot cancel a candidate’s COC if their dismissal case is still under appeal.

In a statement, Macalintal explained that Comelec can only cancel a COC if the case has reached finality. His remarks were in response to Comelec’s amended rule under Resolution No. 11044-A, issued on September 4, 2024, which allows for the denial or cancellation of a COC even if the dismissal by the Ombudsman is still pending appeal.

Macalintal referenced the 2013 Supreme Court case Jalosjos vs. Comelec, which established that Comelec can only cancel a candidate’s COC upon a final judgment of conviction in a criminal case involving perpetual disqualification from public office.

He emphasized that Comelec’s authority to cancel COCs has traditionally applied only to criminal cases with final judgments, not administrative decisions by the Ombudsman under appeal.

“In past elections, Comelec’s power to cancel a COC was never applied to administrative cases decided by the Ombudsman while pending appeal,” Macalintal stated.

He pointed to a recent case involving Alice Guo, the dismissed mayor of Bamban, Tarlac, who intends to run for re-election in 2025. Although Guo was dismissed for grave misconduct, her lawyer asserted that the decision is not yet final and remains under appeal.

Macalintal further argued that neither the Omnibus Election Code nor the Local Government Code mandates the automatic disqualification of candidates dismissed in administrative cases if their appeal is ongoing.

“It is baffling why Comelec has introduced a rule that allows for the cancellation of COCs based on Ombudsman decisions, despite the fact that, in the Jalosjos case, the cancellation of a COC can only occur with a final judgment of conviction in a criminal case,” Macalintal concluded.