Supreme Court rules against Comelec's year-long delay in Bohol case

Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!

Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.

Visit Suniway.ph to learn

December 19, 2025 | 11:28am

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court has ruled that delays by the Commission on Elections (Comelec) in investigating election cases violate the constitutional right to the speedy disposition of cases.

In a 22-page decision dated Aug. 19, 2025, the Supreme Court En Banc nullified a Comelec resolution finding probable cause to charge Petronilo Solomon Sarigumba for violating the Omnibus Election Code.

The case

Sarigumba lost the mayoral race in Loboc, Bohol, during the 2010 elections. A month after the polls, he filed his Statement of Election Contributions and Expenditures, or SOCE.

Four years later, the Comelec’s Campaign Finance Unit asked Sarigumba to explain alleged overspending reflected in his SOCE. After he submitted his explanation, the Comelec unit filed a complaint against him in 2014.

Citing illness, Sarigumba secured several postponements of his scheduled investigation on April 14, 2015.

However, he failed to submit a counter-affidavit by the July 11, 2015, deadline set by the Comelec Law Department.

Six years after the lapse of the deadline, the Comelec en banc issued a resolution to charge Sarigumba, arguing that he had waived his right to a speedy trial by failing to participate in the proceedings or raise the issue earlier.

The ruling

The Supreme Court rejected the Comelec’s argument that Sarigumba waived his right by inaction.

It cited Article III, Section 16 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to the speedy disposition of cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, and administrative bodies.

“Article III, Section 16 of the 1987 Constitution guarantees the right of all persons to speedy disposition of cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies,” the ruling read.

Comelec rules violated. The Court also pointed out that under the Comelec Rules of Procedure, a preliminary investigation must be completed within 20 days after the filing of a counter-affidavit, with a resolution issued within the next five days.

“The Court ruled that the Comelec cannot justify the conduct of preliminary investigation for more than six years, as the case did not involve a complex issue or require voluminous records or evidence,” the ruling read.

Duty lies with the state. The high court emphasized that it is the responsibility of the state, not the respondent, to ensure the prompt resolution of cases.

It said respondents in criminal investigations are not required to follow up on their own cases.

“It is the duty of the prosecutor to speedily resolve the complaint... regardless of whether the petitioner did not object to the delay,” the decision read.