Metro Manila, Philippines – Both disqualification cases against Senator-elect Erwin Tulfo have been junked by the Commission on Elections, an order deemed final and executory unless petitioners secure a relief from the Supreme Court.
In a resolution dated June 5, the Comelec en banc affirmed the Second Division’s decision to dismiss the petition filed by the group Graft-Free Philippines Foundation (GFPF), disbarred lawyer Toto Causing – whom the commission had declared a nuisance candidate – and a certain Diosdado Villar Calonge.
The seven-member commission denied the group’s motion for reconsideration, saying it failed to present substantial arguments to warrant the grant of their appeal.
Earlier, the Comelec en banc also dismissed the first disqualification case filed and refiled against Tulfo as well as other family members who ran in the midterm elections. The petitioner has since brought the case to the Supreme Court.
Comelec Chairman George Garcia confirmed to NewsWatch Plus that Tulfo faces no other pending cases before the poll body. However, the petitioners are free to challenge the decision before the high court.
The 2nd disqualification case
In the second disqualification case, the petitioners argued that Tulfo remains ineligible to hold public office due to a prior libel conviction carrying a 20-year disqualification, as well as alleged issues concerning his citizenship and his family’s purported involvement in a political dynasty, among other grounds.
However, the Second Division said the petition failed to meet documentary requirements, making it insufficient in form and meriting outright dismissal. Despite this, the division still addressed the petition’s main argument.
Ultimately, the division ruled in Tulfo’s favor, holding that any disqualification arising from his libel conviction had already been lifted after the lapse of the five-year period following the service of his sentence. It also clarified that questions involving a candidate’s qualifications—such as citizenship— constitute material misrepresentations in the certificate of candidacy (COC). As such, the appropriate legal remedy would have been a petition to cancel the COC, not a disqualification case.
The Comelec en banc said the division “correctly ruled” on the matter.
It added that the petitioners in their motion for reconsideration introduced new grounds for disqualification, including alleged falsification and claims that Tulfo is a permanent resident of the United States.
“It is settled that the purpose of a motion for reconsideration is to point out to the court the error it may have committed and thus give it a chance to correct itself,” the en banc said in its resolution.
