Photo credit: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court’s recently published ruling junking the so-called “second placer rule” is already rewriting the rules of political survival in the Philippines.

Nowhere is this more directly felt than in the case of Manila’s 6th District congressional race, where veteran legislator Bienvenido “Benny” Abante finds himself locked out of a seat he once held.

Despite his name literally meaning “to move forward,” Abante cannot move forward, not legally, not politically, and certainly not by default.

In previous elections, a candidate like him, who placed second behind a later disqualified opponent, could have simply waited for the legal dominoes to fall and walked right back into office.

That shortcut is now gone.

The game changer is a landmark ruling dated April 2024, made public only last week, where the Supreme Court, in Mangudadatu v. Comelec, definitively abandoned the second placer doctrine.

The High Court ruled that there is no law, none, that allows a second placer to be proclaimed in case the winning candidate is disqualified.

The justices minced no words, stating that allowing a runner-up to take office amounts to a judicial override of the voters’ will.

This spells the end of the legal fiction that a second placer can inherit a seat vacated due to disqualification. According to the Court, if the winner is disqualified after the election, the proper remedy is not to elevate the second placer.

While the ruling does not explicitly mandate a special election, it impliedly requires it in cases where no lawful successor exists, such as for congressional seats.

With the second placer rule now abandoned and no succession mechanism under the law for Members of the House, the position, should be treated as vacant, leaving a special election as the only constitutionally sound remedy.

We are not legal experts, but in our view, this outcome applies only if the disqualification occurs before proclamation or after assumption of office, but only once a final decision is issued by the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET).

In the case of Congressman-elect Joey Uy, the situation is further complicated by the fact that he has already been proclaimed by the Comelec, taken his oath, and assumed office.

Under well-established jurisprudence, particularly in Reyes v. Comelec once a candidate completes all three acts, proclamation, oath, assumption, Comelec loses jurisdiction and the HRET takes over.

This means that even if the Comelec has ruled to cancel Uy’s Certificate of Candidacy, that decision, regardless of its finality, cannot by itself unseat him.

Only the HRET has the constitutional authority to determine whether he remains qualified to hold office. Until the HRET rules otherwise, Uy can legally sit, perform his functions as Congressman, and enjoy the full powers of his office.

According to legal experts we consulted, the logic behind this transfer of jurisdiction is rooted in the principle of separation of powers and the constitutional mandate given to the HRET.

It ensures that questions about a sitting lawmaker’s qualifications, especially when politically sensitive, are not resolved solely by administrative agencies but by a quasi-judicial electoral body specifically created to resolve such disputes.

For Abante, this narrows his path even further. He cannot be proclaimed, as the second placer rule is no longer valid.

He cannot expect Comelec’s decision to automatically remove Uy because that responsibility now rests with the HRET.

If the HRET upholds Uy’s disqualification, the seat becomes vacant. It still does not go to Abante. A special election would have to be called.

In sum, the combination of the Supreme Court’s doctrinal shift and existing jurisprudence on jurisdiction creates a two-layered wall that Abante cannot scale.

First, the Supreme Court has barred second placers from being proclaimed. Second, any effort to unseat Uy now rests solely with the HRET, where the outcome is uncertain and the timeline unpredictable.

For Benny Abante, this is more than just a legal roadblock. It is a political dead end. His name may mean “to move forward,” but the law has caught up and said otherwise.

The Supreme Court’s abandonment of the second placer rule closed the door on the once familiar shortcut back to power. With Joey Uy already sitting in Congress, the legal terrain has shifted entirely to the jurisdiction of the HRET.

Even if Abante believes that Uy’s disqualification is justified, and even if Comelec has ruled in his favor, the law no longer allows him to benefit from it.

His only remaining option is to pursue a case before the HRET and hope it declares Uy unqualified. Even if that happens, Abante still will not be proclaimed.

The post will not revert to the second placer. It will be declared vacant, and a special election must be held.

We agree with this direction from the Court.

The truth is, people never liked the idea of second placers being proclaimed into office. Why should someone the voters already rejected be allowed to sit simply because their opponent was disqualified?

The second placer doctrine always felt like a legal technicality that overrode the will of the electorate. Now, that loophole is finally closed.

This may be frustrating for candidates who came close, but it is a necessary correction in our democracy.

The Supreme Court has made it clear. Public office is not won through the disqualification of an opponent but through the direct mandate of the people.

No one, not even someone named Abante, gets to move forward by default.

In today’s electoral system, the message is unambiguous, kung hindi ka nanalo, hindi ka aabante. That is exactly how democracy should work, even when it stings.

Ed Javier

Ed Javier is a veteran communicator with over 34 years of professional experience both in the private and public sectors. He is also an entrepreneur, political analyst, newspaper columnist, broadcast and on-line journalist.