The Supreme Court in a unanimous en banc decision upheld the six-month imprisonment and a P1,000 fine imposed by the Commission on Elections on controversial Maguindanao election supervisor lawyer Lintang Bedol after he was found guilty of contempt.

The contempt charge stemmed from Bedol’s failure as Provincial Election Supervisor of Maguindanao to attend the canvass of provincial votes for Maguindanao on May 22, 2007, eight days after the May 14, 2007 midterm elections.

He was also cited for his unlawful custody of certificates of canvass of all municipalities of Maguindanao instead of submitting it to the Comelec’s main office, only to declare later that the election documents were stolen without a written explanation to the poll body.

The Comelec in its en banc resolution on August 7, 2007 found Bedol guilty of contempt. It said he violated election rules when he failed to appear before a Task Force created by the Commission to investigate complaints of fraud during the May 2007 elections.

However, he granted media interviews showing a gun tucked on his waist “in a combative mood”, flaunting disrespect for the commission by challenging its jurisdiction over him when threatened to be disciplined for not performing his function as election officer.

Bedol’s acts, the Commission said, constitute an “exhibition of contumacious acts showing disrespect for the institution of which the respondent (Bedol) is a ranking official which is clearly contemptuous… he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of six months and to pay a fine of P1,000.”

Bedol appealed the decision of the Comelec but the High Court, in a full court decision written by Associate Justice Teresita J. Leonardo-de Castro, dismissed Bedol’s petition for certiorari questioning Comelec’s authority to initiate contempt proceedings against him.

The Court upheld the power of Comelec to conduct investigations as an adjunct to its constitutional duty to enforce and administer all election laws by virtue of explicit provisions of the Constitution.

“To withhold from the Comelec the power to punish individuals who refuse to appear during a fact-finding investigation, despite a previous notice and order to attend, would render nugatory the Comelec’s investigative power, which is an essential incident to its constitutional mandate to secure the conduct of honest and credible elections,” the Court stressed.

Bedol, the court said, derailed the purpose of the investigation of Task Force Maguindanao by his obstinate refusal to appear during the scheduled hearings of which he was duly notified to answer questions with regards to the election documents which he claims were “stolen” from his possession.

“Undoubtedly, the Comelec could punish petitioner (Bedol) for such contumacious refusal to attend Task Force hearings,” the Court added.

The Court said Bedol brought the predicament upon himself when he opted to dispense with the presentation of his evidence during the scheduled hearings to explain his non-appearance at the hearing of Task Force Maguindanao and the loss of the certificates of canvass and other election documents.

Those who concurred in the decision were Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno and Associate Justices Antonio T. Carpio, Conchita Carpio Morales, Arturo D. Brion, Minita V. Chico-Nazario, Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura, Lucas P. Bersamin, Mariano C. Del Castillo, Roberto A. Abad and Martin S.Villarama, Jr., Associate Justices Renato C. Corona, Diosdado M. Peralta and Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., are on leave.