MANILA— The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the disqualification of two candidates for the Sangguniang Bayan of Candijay, Bohol, in the 2025 elections over vote-buying allegations, while dismissing a court employee and suspending another over missing court funds.

In separate rulings during its October 28, 2026 session, the SC En Banc denied the petitions for certiorari filed by Charina C. Bagor and Erlinda Curativo, affirming the Commission on Elections’ (COMELEC) decision to disqualify them under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code.

Candijay Chief of Police Capt. Marvin A. Chin sought the disqualification of both candidates over alleged vote-buying before the elections.

Bagor was accused of distributing food packs to several people in the municipality days before the polls and asking them to remember her as a candidate. Curativo, meanwhile, was accused of giving PHP 60,000 to a barangay kagawad with instructions to distribute PHP 100 to each voter before election day.

The COMELEC found substantial evidence of vote-buying in both cases, prompting the disqualifications that the high court subsequently affirmed.

The SC ruled that Bagor distributed valuable items in exchange for votes, while Curativo gave money to influence voters to support her. Their proclamations as winning candidates were consequently voided.

The high court emphasized that vote-buying threatens the integrity of elections and must be “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and [its practitioners] prevented from entering into public office.”

It added that the practice exploits voters’ economic circumstances, fosters dependence on money offered in exchange for votes, and substitutes financial inducements for the electorate’s free choice.

Court employee dismissed over missing funds

In a separate administrative case, the SC dismissed Rose Ann R. Marzonia, Clerk II of the Municipal Trial Court in Romblon, Romblon, for serious dishonesty and gross misconduct after finding that she misappropriated court funds.

The court also suspended Wina M. Cometa, Clerk of Court II of the same tribunal, for gross neglect of duty. Both employees were ordered to pay jointly and severally PHP 598,444.20 to cover the missing funds.

The case stemmed from a financial audit conducted by the Office of the Court Administrator covering February 2008 to March 2023. The audit uncovered shortages in eight funds, including the Fiduciary Fund, Sheriff’s Trust Fund, Judiciary Development Fund, Special Allowance for the Judiciary Fund, Mediation Fund, General Fund-New, Legal Research Fund, and Victim’s Compensation Fund.

Investigators found that Marzonia repeatedly withdrew court funds without authorization and failed to deposit collections. She also admitted tampering with the passbooks for the Fiduciary Fund and Sheriff’s Trust Fund with the assistance of individuals in Recto, Manila, and forging the signatures of the presiding judge and Cometa on withdrawal slips.

The SC found that Marzonia’s repeated falsification of financial documents, unauthorized withdrawals, and misuse of court funds demonstrated a deliberate scheme to defraud the Judiciary and conceal her actions.

Aside from dismissal, the court ordered the forfeiture of all her benefits and disqualified her from reinstatement or appointment to any public office. The Bureau of Immigration was also directed to issue a hold departure order against her.

Eight-month suspension for court clerk

Cometa was held liable for failing to properly supervise her subordinate and enforce safeguards in handling court finances.

The SC found that she allowed Marzonia to conduct financial transactions without written authority or proper supervision. She also failed to regularly reconcile bank records, secure passbooks, and submit required monthly financial reports.

The court stressed that clerks of court, as accountable officers, cannot evade responsibility by relying on the apparent regularity of documents or blaming subordinates.

However, the SC found no evidence that Cometa directly participated in the misappropriation, falsified financial records, or benefited from the irregularities.

Considering that it was her first offense and that she had served in the Judiciary for about 30 years without any prior penalty, the court imposed an eight-month suspension without pay and benefits.

The SC further ordered that the leave credits and other benefits earned by both employees be applied toward covering the fund shortages.

The court reiterated that public office is a public trust, stressing that court officials and personnel must maintain the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and accountability. It warned that conduct undermining public confidence in the administration of justice would not be tolerated.