Comelec junks DQ case against Garganera

Local

THE Commission on Elections (Comelec) First Division has dismissed the disqualification case filed against Cebu City Councilor Joel Garganera.

The ruling, released this week, denied the petition that sought to disqualify Garganera over an alleged violation of the three-term limit rule, saying the complaint was both “an improper remedy and filed out of time.”

“We deny the Petition for Disqualification,” the resolution stated.

The ruling emphasized that the petition should have been filed as a Petition to Deny Due Course or to Cancel a Certificate of Candidacy (COC) under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code, and within 25 days from the filing of Garganera’s COC.

Since the complaint was filed on April 3, 2025, months after the October 2024 deadline, the Comelec ruled it was already beyond the reglementary period.

“Respondent filed his COC on 8 October 2024. Any petition to deny due course or to cancel his COC should have been filed within twenty-five (25) days therefrom, or not later than 4 November 2024,” the decision read.

“The Petition, however, was filed only on 3 April 2025, well beyond the reglementary period. As such, the Petition for Disqualification is dismissible for being an improper remedy and for having been filed out of time.”

However, the Comelec First Division also said it looked into the merits of the case “in the interest of resolving the controversy fully.”

At the center of the complaint was the allegation that Garganera breached the three-term limit for local officials. But the poll body found that he did not fully serve the 2019–2022 term, thus breaking the continuity of service.

The ruling cited the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Lonzanida vs. Comelec, which clarified that an involuntary interruption in service—no matter how short—breaks consecutive terms.

“Applying this doctrine, Respondent cannot be considered as having fully served the 2019–2022 term,” the decision said, noting that Garganera was proclaimed as councilor only on July 16, 2019, and took his oath the following day after another candidate’s COC was later cancelled.

“The fact that the gap was relatively brief does not negate its legal significance,” the Comelec explained.

“The constitutional intent is clear: an interruption ‘for any length of time,’ provided that it is involuntary, suffices to break the continuity of service.”

As a result, the First Division concluded that Garganera’s 2019–2022 term could not be counted as a full term for the purpose of applying the constitutional three-term limit.

“Having failed to satisfy the twin requisites of election to and full service of three (3) consecutive terms, Respondent cannot be deemed ineligible for re-election in the 2025 elections,” the ruling read.

The Comelec thus dismissed the petition “for being an improper remedy and for lack of merit.”

The petition against Garganera was filed in April 2025 by Casmero Mahilum, a resident of Barangay Talamban. It alleged that Garganera’s bid for reelection in 2025 violated the three-term limit for local legislators under Section 8, Article X of the 1987 Constitution.

Mahilum argued that Garganera’s victories in 2016, 2019, and 2022 constituted three uninterrupted terms and that seeking a fourth would be unconstitutional.

Garganera, however, maintained that his term from 2019 to 2022 was interrupted due to a delayed proclamation following the disqualification of two other candidates—Councilors Sisinio Andales and Alvin Arcilla—who were initially declared winners in the 2019 polls.

He was proclaimed as the 8th councilor of Cebu City’s north district on July 16, 2019, and officially assumed office the following day, over two weeks after the start of the term.(TGP)