In an en banc ruling, the declared that the SET possesses the sole authority to handle disqualification cases against a winning senatorial candidate who has been proclaimed, taken the oath and assumed office, as in the case of Tulfo.

In case number G.R. No. 266053, the High Court decided on April 3 (Wednesday) to uphold the dismissal by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) of a disqualification case against Tulfo.

Tulfo ran for office in the May 2022 general elections.

Prior to the elections, Julie Licup Pearson, who claimed to be his wife, filed a petition to disqualify him, alleging that he had been convicted of libel, a crime involving moral turpitude, and had committed an election offense by unlawfully promoting his candidacy on his show, "Raffy Tulfo in Action."

The COMELEC First Division dismissed the petition due to a lack of attached proof of service.

Despite this challenge, Tulfo received the third-highest number of votes, was declared a senator-elect, took his oath, and assumed his duties. Pearson filed a motion for reconsideration, which the COMELEC denied citing a lack of jurisdiction.

She then attempted to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court through a petition for certiorari.

The Supreme Court, referring to Section 17, Article VI of the Constitution and existing legal precedents, clarified the distribution of powers in election disputes.

It emphasized that once a winning candidate has been proclaimed, taken the oath, and assumed office, the COMELEC's authority over election contests regarding their election, returns, and qualifications ends, and the SET's jurisdiction begins.

Pearson's failure to file the appropriate case before the SET in a timely manner cannot be rectified by invoking the Court's certiorari powers.