Valladolid Barangay Captain Anthony John Apura. | Contributed photo
LAPU-LAPU CITY, Cebu- The Commission on Elections (Comelec) First Division has dismissed the petition for disqualification against Valladolid Barangay Captain Anthony John Apura.
Apura won as barangay captain of Valladolid in Carcar City during the October 30, 2023 Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan Elections (BSKE).
But his opponent, Hene Fernandez, filed a petition asking the Comelec to disqualify Apura from holding office saying that he was charged and convicted for the crime of murder and was sentenced to imprisonment for six years and one day to twelve years and one day.
READ: Comelec disqualifies 39 BSKE candidates
Fernandez said that Apura should be disqualified since he was convicted of a crime of moral turpitude.
But Apura said that his conviction was not yet final because of a pending motion for reconsideration that he filed before the Supreme Court.
READ: 2 residents accuse Bulacao officials of graft and corruption
“Wala pa na siyay finality unya mao na’y iyang gihimong basis sa pagpa-disqualify nako,” Apura said.
Disqualification case
Apura was charged for murder after he was accused of being an accessory to a crime that happened in 2001 involving warring fraternities.
READ: Proclamation of winning candidates suspended in 3 areas in Cebu
Even if he won in the October 2023 BSKE against Fernandez, he was not allowed to assume his post because of his pending disqualification case.
Apura garnered almost 5, 000 votes in last year’s election as against the 1, 000 votes for Fernandez.
Barangay Valladolid has over 7, 000 voters.
The barangay’s first councilor was made to assume as the acting barangay captain after the election.
In a decision promulgated on September 20, 2024, the Comelec First Division said that Apura has sufficiently established that the Supreme Court has not yet decided on his murder case with finality. The decision was signed Lawyer Genesis Gatdula, the clerk of the Commission.
The First Division said that a candidate can only be disqualified by a final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one year or more of imprisonment.
“In this case, however, the Supreme Court Decision in the criminal case has not yet attained finality, and thus, the accessory penalty of disqualification to hold office cannot be imposed upon the Respondent,” read part of the decision.