Election Law Notes
Election Law Notes
Election Law Notes
SUFFRAGE
The right to vote in the election of officers chosen by the people and in the determination
of questions submitted to the people.
Includes within its scope, election, plebiscite, initiative and referendum.
A Right and A Privilege
A right because it is the expression of the sovereign will of the people.
A privilege because its exercise is granted not to everybody but to such persons or class
of persons as are most likely to exercise it for the purpose of the public good.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Theories on Suffrage
Natural Right Theory: Suffrage is a natural and inherent right of every citizen who
is not disqualified by reason of his own reprehensible conduct or unfitness.
Social Expediency: Suffrage is a public office or function conferred upon citizens
who are fit and capable of discharging it.
Tribal Theory: It is a necessary attribute of membership in the State.
Feudal Theory: It is an adjunct of a particular status, generally tenurial in character.
A vested privilege usually accompanying ownership of land.
Ethical Theory: It is a necessary and essential means for the development of society.
Election- the means by which the people choose their officials for a definite and fixed
period and to whom they entrust for the time being the exercise of the powers of
government.
KINDS:
Regular - one provided by law for the elections of officers either nationwide or in
certain subdivisions thereof, after the expiration of the full term of the former officers.
b. Special - one held to fill a vacancy in office before the expiration of the full term for
which the incumbent was elected.
PLEBISCITE is an electoral process by which an initiative on the
constitution is approved or rejected by the people.
a.
VOTERS
I. QUALIFICATIONS FOR SUFFRAGE
Citizenship: Citizen of the Philippines, not otherwise disqualified by law.
Age: At least 18 years of age
Residence
1. He /she should have resided in the Philippines for one year and
2. Resided in the city/municipality wherein he proposes to vote for at least 6 months
immediately preceding the election.
Registered: Must be a duly registered voter and whose name appears in the list of
voters
No literacy, property or other substantive requirements shall be imposed on the exercise
of suffrage.
Transfer of residence due to work or occupation, profession or employment in private or
public service, education, etc., shall not be deemed to have lost his original
residence (B.P. 881, Sec.117).
Q: Y filed a petition for the cancellation of the certificate of candidacy (COC)
of X. Essentially, Y sought the disqualification of X for Mayor of Z
municipality alleging that X was not a registered voter in that municipality
since he failed to sign his application for registration, and that the unsigned
application for registration has no legal effect. X countered that his failure
to sign his application did not affect the validity of his registration since he
possesses the qualifications of a voter set forth in the Omnibus Election
Code as amended by Section 9 of R.A. 8189. Y insists that the signature in
the application for registration is indispensable for its validity as it is an
authentication and affirmation of the data appearing therein. Should X be
disqualified?
A: Yes. R.A. 8189 (The Voters Registration Act) specifically provides that an
application for registration shall contain specimen signatures of the applicant as well as
his/her thumbprints, among others. The evidence shows that X failed to sign very
important parts of the application, which refer to the oath which X should have taken to
validate and swear to the veracity of the contents appearing in the said application.
From the foregoing, the irregularities surrounding Xs application proclaims that he did
not comply with the minimum requirements of R.A. 8189. Thus, not having
demonstrated that he duly accomplished an application for registration, X is not a
registered voter. Hence, he must be disqualified to run for Mayor. (Gunsi, Sr. v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 168792, Feb. 23, 2009).
ABSENTEE VOTING is a process by which qualified citizens of the Philippines
abroad exercise their right to vote pursuant to the constitutional mandate that Congress
shall provide a system for absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad (Sec. 2, Art. V,
1987 Constitution).
ABSENTEE VOTING (EXCEPTION TO RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT): It is in
pursuance of that intention that the Commission provided for Section 2 immediately
after the residency requirement of Section 1. By the doctrine of necessary implication in
statutory construction, which may be applied in construing constitutional
provisions (Marcelino v. Cruz, 121 SCRA 51, 56), the strategic location of Section 2
indicates that the Constitutional Commission provided for an exception to the actual
residency requirement of Section 1 with respect to qualified Filipinos abroad. The same
Commission has in effect declared that qualified Filipinos who are not in
the Philippines may be allowed to vote though they do not satisfy the residency
requirement in Section 1, Article V of the Constitution.
That Section 2 of Article V of the Constitution is an exception to the residency
requirement found in Section 1 of the same Article was in fact the subject of debate
when Senate Bill No. 2104, which became R.A. No. 9189, was deliberated upon on the
Senate floor x x x (Makalintal v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 157013, July 10, 2003).
WHO ARE QUALIFIED (SEC. 4, R.A. 9189)
1. All citizens of the Philippines abroad
2. Not otherwise disqualified by law
3. At least eighteen (18) years of age
may vote for the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
President
Vice president
Senators
Party-list representatives
1.
2.
Those who have lost their Filipino citizenship in accordance with Philippine laws;
Those who have expressly renounced their Philippine citizenship and who have
pledged allegiance to a foreign country;
3. Those who have committed and are convicted in a final judgment by a court or tribunal
of an offense punishable by imprisonment of not less than one (1) year, including those
who have committed and found guilty of Disloyalty as defined under Art. 137 of the
Revised Penal Code (RPC); such disability not having been removed by plenary pardon
or amnesty.
Provided, however, that any person disqualified to vote under this subsection shall
automatically acquire the right to vote upon expiration of five (5) years after service of
sentence;
Provided, further, That the Commission may take cognizance of final judgments issued
by foreign courts or tribunals only on the basis of reciprocity and subject to the
formalities and processes prescribed by the Rules of Court on execution of judgments;
4.
5.
Registration does not confer the right to vote. It is but a condition precedent to the
exercise of the right to vote (Yra vs. Abao, 52 Phil. 380 [1929]).
- It is the system of regulation of an individuals right to suffrage as conferred by the
inherent police power of the Government.
d. Illiterate or disabled voters Any illiterate person may register with the
assistance of the Election Officer or any member of an accredited citizens arms. The
application for registration of a physicallydisabled person may be prepared by any
relative within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity or by the Election
Officer or any member of an accredited citizens arm using the data supplied by the
applicant. (R.A. 8189, Sec. 14).
e.
Election Registration Board (ERB) There shall be in each city and municipality
as many Election Registration Boards as there are election officers therein. The Board
shall be composed of the Election Officer as chairman, and as members, the public
school official most senior in rank and the local civil registrar, or in his absence, the city
or municipal treasurer. (R.A. 8189, Sec. 15).
f.
g. Preparation and Posting of the Certified List of Voters The Board shall
prepare and post a certified list of voters 90 days before a regular election and 60 days
before a special election and furnish copies thereof to the provincial, regional, and
national central files. Copies of the certified list, along with a list of deactivated voters
categorized by precinct per barangay shall also be posted in the office of the Election
Officer and in the bulletin board of each city/municipal hall.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
REACTIVATION OF REGISTRATION
(Sec. 28, R.A. 8189)
Who may file?
Any voter whose registration has been deactivated.
How?
Sworn application for reactivation of his registration in the form of an affidavit stating
that the ground for the deactivation no longer exists.
When?
At any time but not later than 120 days before a regular election and 90 days before a
special election.
INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION PROCEEDINGS
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Directly to the proper Regional Trial Court within 5 days from receipt of notice.
The RTC shall decide the appeal within 10 days from receipt.
ANNULMENT OF BOOK OF VOTERS
How?
Upon verified petition of any voter or election officer or duly registered political party,
and after notice and hearing.
a.
b.
c.
Annulment of the list of voters shall not constitute a ground for a pre-proclamation
contest(Ututalum v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos. 84843-44, January 22, 1990.).
POLITICAL PARTIES
Party means either a political party or a sectoral party or a coalition of parties.
SECTORAL PARTY - an organized group of citizens belonging to any of the sectors
enumerated in Sec. 5 hereof whose principal advocacy pertains to the special interest
and concerns of their sector (Sec. 3, RA 7941).
COALITION - an aggrupation of duly registered national, regional, sectoral parties or
organizations for political and/or election purposes.
SECTORAL ORGANIZATION - a group of citizens or a coalition of groups of citizens
who share similar physical attributes or characteristics, employment, interests, or
concerns.
POLITICAL PARTY - Organized group of citizens advocating an ideology or platform,
principles and policies for the general conduct of government and which, as the most
immediate means of securing their adoption, regularly nominates certain of its leaders
and members as candidates for public office.
MUST first be duly registered with the COMELEC before it can acquire juridical
personality.
Kinds of Political Parties:
National party constituency is spread over the geographical territory of at least a
majority of the regions.
b. Regional party constituency is spread over the geographical territory of at least a
majority of the cities and provinces comprising the region.
a.
2. Non-registered parties
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
No votes cast in favor of political party, organization or coalition shall be valid except
for those registered under the party-list system. (Sec. 7, Art. IX-C, 1987 Constitution).
2. Purposes:
To acquire juridical personality;
To entitle it to rights and privileges granted to political parties; and
To participate in the party-list system.
3. Groups which cannot be registered as political parties (Sec. 3, R.A. 7941):
a. Religious denominations or sects;
b. Those who seek to achieve their goals through violence or unlawful means;
c. Those who refuse to uphold and adhere to the Constitution; and
d. Those supported by foreign governments.
4. Grounds for cancellation of registration (Sec. 6, R.A. 7941):
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
5.
a bona fide member of the party or organization which he seeks to represent for at least
ninety (90) days preceding the day of the election;
6. at least twenty (25) years of age on the day of the election; in case of a nominee of the
youth sector, he must at least be twenty (25) but not more than thirty (30) years of age
on the day of the election. Any youth sectoral representative who attains the age of thirty
(30) during his term shall be allowed to continue in office until the expiration of his
term.(Section 9, R.A. 7941).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Qualifications prescribed by law are continuing requirements and must be possessed for
the duration of the officers active tenure. Once any of the required qualifications is lost,
his title to the office may be seasonably challenged. (Frivaldo v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
87193, June 23, 1989]; (Labo, Jr. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 86564, August 1, 1989)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Section 4(a) of Resolution 8678, Section 66 of the Omnibus Election Code, and the
second proviso in the third paragraph of Section 13 of RA 9369 are not violative of the
equal protection clause of the Constitution and does not suffer from overbreadth.
(Quinto v.. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 189698, February 22, 2010)
This includes employees of GOCCs without original charter.
Formal defects in certificate of candidacy, such as lack of the required oath does not
annul the election of a candidate (De Guzman v. Board of Canvassers, 48 Phil 211,
[1926])
Failures to indicate in his certificate of candidacy his precinct number and particular
barangay where he is a registered voter is not a sufficient ground to disqualify a
candidate. It is enough that he is a registered voter in the precinct where he intends to
vote which should be within the district where he is running for office (Jurilla v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 105435, June 2, 1994).
SUBSTITUTION OF CANDIDACY
The concept of substitution of candidacy states that if after the last day for the filing of
certificates of candidacy, an official candidate of a political party (1) dies, (2) withdraws,
or is (3) disqualified for any cause a person belonging to, and certified by, the same
political party may file a certificate of candidacy (COC) not later than mid-day of
election day to replace the candidate who died, withdrew, or was disqualified.
As to DEATH, a deceased candidate is required to have duly filed valid COC, otherwise
his political party will not be allowed to file a substitute candidate in his stead.
As to WITHDRAWAL OF CANDIDACY, the withdrawing candidate is required to have
duly filed a valid COC in order to allow his political party to file a substitute candidate in
his stead.
The withdrawal of the withdrawal, for the purpose of reviving the certificate of candidacy,
must be made within the period provided by law for the filing of certificates of
candidacy.
There is nothing in Sec. 73, B.P. 881, which mandates that the affidavit of withdrawal
must be filed with the same office where the certificate of candidacy to be withdrawn
was filed. Thus, it can be filed directly with the:
1. main office of the COMELEC;
2. the office of the regional election director concerned;
3. the office of the municipal election supervisor of the province to which the
municipality belongs; or
4. the office of the municipal election officer of the municipality.(Loreto-Go v. COMELEC,
G.R. No. 147741, May 10, 2001)
EFFECT OF FILING TWO (2) CERTIFICATES OF CANDIDACY
Renders a candidate ineligible for either position.
Withdrawal of one of the certificates at any time before election renders him eligible for
election to the office sought in the remaining certificate of candidacy.
Sec.73, B.P. 881 requires that the withdrawal of one of the certificates must be made
through a sworn declaration filed with the Commission before the deadline for the
filing of certificates of candidacy.
Effect if the winning candidate is not qualified and cannot qualify for the office to which
he was elected: a permanent vacancy is created.
As to DISQUALIFICATION, it does not include those cases where the COC of the person
to be substituted has been denied due course and canceled under Section 78 of the
Omnibus Election Code. While the law enumerated the occasion where a candidate may
validly be substituted, there is no mention of the case where a candidate is excluded not
only by disqualification but also by denial and cancellation of his COC.
Convicted by final judgment for violating the oath of allegiance to the Republic;
f.
Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who have acquired the right to reside
abroad and continue to avail of the same right;
Note: Green Card is ample evidence to show that the person is an immigrant to, or a
permanent resident of, the United States of America. (Caasi v. CA, G.R. No. 88831, Nov.
8, 1990).
g. Insane or feeble-minded.
4.
5.
6.
Nuisance candidate;
Violation of Sec. 73 of OEC with regard to certificate of candidacy; and
Violation of Sec. 78 which is material misrepresentation of requirements under Sec.
74.
DIFFERENT TYPES OF ELECTION DISPUTES
a.
a.
Pre-election disputes
Petition for Disqualification
b. Petition to Deny Due Course or to Cancel a Certificate of Candidacy
c.
Note that the COMELEC can suspend proclamation only when evidence of the winning
candidates guilt is strong (Codilla, Sr. v. De Venecia, et. al., G.R. No. 150605, Dec. 10,
2002).
The use of the word may indicates that the suspension of the proclamation is merely
permissive. If the COMELEC does not find any sufficient ground to suspend
proclamation, then a proclamation may be made. (Grego v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
125955, June 19, 1997)
It is incorrect to say that since a candidate has been disqualified, the votes intended for
the disqualified candidate should in effect, be null and void. This would amount to
disenfranchising the electorate in whom sovereignty reside. (Ortega v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 105111, July 3, 1992).
The ineligibility of a candidate receiving majority votes does not entitle the eligible
candidate receiving the next highest number of votes to be declared elected (Labo, Jr. v.
COMELEC, G.R. Nos. 105111 and 105384, July 3, 1992).
Exceptions:
1. The one who obtained the highest number of votes is disqualified; AND
2. The electorate is fully aware in fact and in law of the candidates disqualification so as
to bring such awareness within the realm of notoriety but would nonetheless cast their
votes in favor of the ineligible candidate. (Grego v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 125955, June
19, 1997)
Jurisdiction: While the COMELEC is vested with the power to declare valid or invalid
a certificate of candidacy, its refusal to exercise that power following the proclamation
and assumption of the position by Farinas is recognition of the jurisdictional boundaries
separating the COMELEC and the Electoral Tribunal of the House of Representatives
(HRET). Under Article VI, Section 17 of the Constitution, the HRET has sole and
exclusive jurisdiction over all contests relative to the election, returns, and qualifications
of members of the House of Representatives. Thus, once a winning candidate has been
proclaimed, taken his oath, and assumed office as a member of the House of
Representatives, COMELECs jurisdiction over election contests relating to his election,
returns, and qualifications ends, and the HRETs own jurisdiction begins. Thus, the
COMELECs decision to discontinue exercising jurisdiction over the case is justifiable, in
deference to the HRETs own jurisdiction and functions (Guerrero v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 137004,[July 26, 2000).
COMELEC Resolution No. 2050
If a complaint is filed with the COMELEC against a candidate who has already been
proclaimed winner, charging an election offense under Sec. 261 of the Omnibus Election
Code, as amended by Republic Act nos. 6646 and 8436 and praying for the
disqualification of the said candidate, the COMELEC shall determine the existence of
probable cause for the filing of an Information against the candidate for the election
offense charged.
3.
By other circumstances or acts clearly demonstrating that the candidate has no bona
fide intention to run and thus prevent a faithful determination of the true will of the
electorate.
The proclamation of the winning candidate renders moot and academic a motion for
reconsideration filed by a candidate who had been earlier declared by the COMELEC to
be a nuisance candidate (Garcia v. COMELEC, G.R. 121139, July 12, 1996)
PRE-PROCLAMATION CONTROVERSIES
Refers any question pertaining to or affecting the proceedings of the Board which may be
raised by any candidate or by any registered political party or coalition of parties before
the board or directly with the COMELEC.
Also refers to any matter raised under Secs. 233, 234, 235 and 236 relating to the
preparation, transmission, receipt, custody and appreciation of the election
returns (Sec. 241, B.P. 881).
1.
2.
3.
4.
Exceptions:
Determination of the authenticity and due execution of certificates of canvass as
provided in Sec. 30, R.A. 7166, as amended by R.A. 9369;
2. Correction of manifest errors in the certificate of canvass or election return; and
3. Matters relating to the composition or proceedings of the Board of Canvassers
1.
COMELEC Jurisdiction: The COMELEC has exclusive jurisdiction over preproclamation cases.
Note: COMELEC is with authority to annul any canvass and proclamation illegally
made. The fact that a candidate illegally proclaimed has assumed office is not a bar to
the exercise of such power. It is also true that as a general rule, the proper remedy after
the proclamation of the winning candidate for the position contested would be to file a
regular election protest or quo warranto. This rule, however, admits of exceptions and
one of those is where the proclamation was null and void. In such a case, the proclaimed
candidates assumption of office cannot deprive the COMELEC of the power to declare
such proclamation a nullity. (Raymond P. Espidol v. COMELEC, et. al., G.R. No.
164922, Oct. 11, 2005).
Issues Which May Be Raised in Pre-Proclamation Controversies:
Illegal composition or proceedings of the Board of Canvassers;
By participating in the proceedings, the petitioner is deemed to have acquiesced in the
composition of the board of canvassers. A petition based on illegal composition of the
board of canvassers should be filed immediately when the Board begins to act. A
petition filed 5 days after proclamation is filed out of time (Laodenio v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 122391, August 7, 1997).
The canvassed election returns are incomplete, contain material defects, appear to be
tampered with or falsified, or contain discrepancies in the same returns or in other
authentic copies thereof as mentioned in Sections 233, 234, 235 and 236 of this Code;
While the duty of the Board of Canvassers is ministerial and, as a general rule, it may not
inquire into the issues beyond the election return, the situation contemplated in Secs.
234, 235 and 236 allow the Board of Canvassers to order the opening of the ballot box
and recount the votes of the candidates affected.
The election returns were prepared under duress, threats, coercion, or intimidation,
or they are obviously manufactured or not authentic; and
When substitute or fraudulent returns in controverted polling places were canvassed,
the results of which materially affected the standing of the aggrieved candidate or
candidates.
When Pre-Proclamation Cases are deemed TERMINATED (under RA 7166)
General Rule: All pre-proclamation cases pending before the COMELEC shall be
deemed terminated at the beginning of the term of the officer involved and the rulings of
the boards of canvassers concerned deemed affirmed.
This is without prejudice to the filing of a regular election protest by the aggrieved party.
Exceptions:
1. The COMELEC determines that the petition is meritorious and issues an order for the
proceedings to continue; or
2. The Supreme Court issues an order for the proceedings to continue in a petition
for certiorari.
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Its decision shall be executory after the lapse of 5 days from receipt by the losing party
of the decision, unless restrained by the SC.
PROCEDURE:
Commencement of pre-proclamation controversy - questions affecting the
composition or proceedings of the board of canvassers may be initiated in the board or
directly with the Commission. However, matters raised under Sections 233, 234, 235
and 236 of the Omnibus Election Code in relation to the preparation, transmission,
receipt, custody and appreciation of the election returns, and the certificates of canvass
shall be brought in the first instance before the board of canvassers only. (Sec. 17, R.A.
7166).
Summary disposition of pre-proclamation controversies - All preproclamation controversies on election returns or certificates of canvass shall, on the
basis of the records and evidence elevated to it by the board of canvassers, be disposed
of summarily by the Commission within seven (7) days from receipt thereof. Its
decisions shall be executory after the lapse of seven (7) days for receipts by the losing
party of the decision of the Commission. (Sec. 18, R.A. 7166).
Disposition of contested election return. (Sec. 20, R.A. 7166).
Partial proclamation - Notwithstanding the pendency of any pre-proclamation
controversy, the Commission may summarily order the proclamation of other winning
candidates whose election will not be affected by the outcome of the controversy. (Sec.
21, R.A. 7166).
Doctrine of Statistical Improbability It appearing therein that contrary to all statistical probabilities in the first set, in
each precinct the number of registered voters equalled the number of ballots and the
number of votes reportedly cast and tallied for each and every candidate of the Liberal
Party, the party in power; whereas, all the candidates of the Nacionalista Party got
exactly zero; and in the second set, again contrary to all statistical probabilities all the
reported votes were for candidates of the Liberal Party, all of whom were credited with
exactly the same number of votes in each precinct, ranging from 240 in one precinct to
650 in another precinct; whereas, all the candidates of the Nacionalista Party were given
exactly zero in all said precincts.
We opined that the election result to said precincts as reported was utterly
improbable and clearly incredible. x x x These returns were obviously false or fabricated.
x x x that the returns show "prima facie" that they do not reflect true and valid reports of
regular voting (Lagumbay v. COMELEC, L-25444, January 31, 1966).
Where the objections to the inclusion of the election returns are directed primarily at the
ballots reflected in the returns, the issue involves appreciation of ballots and cannot be
raised in a pre-proclamation controversy. (Patoray v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 120823,
October 24, 1995).
The technical examination of the signatures and thumb marks of the voters runs counter
to the nature and scope of a pre-proclamation contest; the remedy is to raise these
issues in an election contest. (Balindong v. COMELEC G.R. Nos. 153991-92, October 16,
2003).
Padding of the Registry List of Voters of a municipality is not a listed ground for a preproclamation controversy (Ututalum v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 84843-44, January 22,
1990).
Because the petitioner had already been proclaimed, had taken his oath and had assumed
his duties as Member, House of Representatives, the issue of invalidity of his
proclamation and irregularities connected therewith, is a matter properly addressed to
the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal(Lazatin v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 80007,
January 25, 1988).
The filing with the COMELEC of a petition to annul or to suspend proclamation shall
suspend the running of the period to file an election protest (Tan v. COMELEC, G.R.
Nos. 166143-47. November 20, 2006).
POST ELECTION DISPUTES OR ELECTION CONTESTS
Any matter involving title or claim of title to an elective office, made before or after the
proclamation of the winner, whether or not contestant is claiming office in dispute.
Election contests involve public interest, and technicalities and procedural barriers must
yield if they constitute an obstacle to the determination of the true will of the electorate
in the choice of their elective officials. The Court frowns upon any interpretation of the
law that would hinder in any way not only the free and intelligent casting of the votes in
an election but also the correct ascertainment of the results(OHara v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 139008. March 13, 2002).
Jurisdiction over Election Contests
1. Original and Exclusive
a. President/Vice-President Supreme Court en banc
b. Senator Senate Electoral Tribunal
c. Representatives House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal
d. Regional/Provincial/City COMELEC
e. Municipality Regional Trial Court
f. Barangay/SK Municipal Trial Court
2.
a.
Appellate Jurisdiction
From decisions of the RTC and MTC appeal exclusively to COMELEC, decisions
shall be final and executory.
b. From decisions of COMELEC petition for review by certiorari filed with the
Supreme Court within 30 days on the ground of grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack of or in excess of jurisdiction or violation of due process.
c. From decisions of the Electoral Tribunal petition for review by certiorari filed with
Supreme Court on the ground of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of or in
excess of jurisdiction or violation of due process.
In the exercise of its exclusive appellate jurisdiction, the COMELEC has the power to issue
writs of prohibition, mandamus, or certiorari, because of the last paragraph of Sec. 50,
B.P. 881 (Relampagos v. Cumba, G.R. No. 118861, April 27, 1995).
Distinctions between Pre-Proclamation Controversy and Election Contest
Dividing line: Proclamation of a candidate
Jurisdiction
Pre-Proclamation Controversy
Elect
ion
Cont
est
Gover
ned
by the
requir
emen
ts of
judici
al due
proce
ss.
In some cases, even if the case (involving municipal officials) began with the COMELEC
before proclamation but a proclamation is made before the controversy is resolved, it
ceases to be a pre-proclamation controversy and becomes an election contest cognizable
by the RTC.
However, in some cases, the Supreme Court recognized the jurisdiction of COMELEC
over municipal cases even after proclamation.
Relate to the provision in RA 7166 allowing pre-proclamation controversy proceedings to
continue even after a proclamation has been made.
ACTIONS THAT MAY BE FILED
a. Election Protest
Can only be filed by a candidate who has filed a certificate of candidacy and has
been voted for.
1.
2.
a.
b.
c.
d.
Requisites:
Filed by any candidate who has filed a certificate of candidacy and voted for the same
office.
On grounds of
fraud
terrorism
irregularities or
illegal acts committed before, during or after casting and counting of votes.
Time to file: within 10 days from proclamation of results of election.
An order regarding the revision of ballots is an interlocutory order because it still requires
a party to perform certain acts leading to the final adjudication of the case (Bulaong v.
COMELEC G.R. No. 107987, March 31, 1993).
As a general rule, the filing of an election protest or quo warranto precludes the
subsequent filing of a pre-proclamation controversy or amounts to an abandonment of
one earlier filed(Samad v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 107854, July 16, 1993).
b. Quo Warranto
Quo Warranto
Refers to questions
of disloyalty or
ineligibility of the
winning candidate.
It is a proceeding to
unseat the
ineligible person
from office, but not
to install the
protestant in his
place.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
General Rule: The filing of an election protest or quo warranto PRECLUDES the
subsequent filing of a pre-proclamation controversy or amounts to an abandonment of
one earlier filed, thus depriving the COMELEC of the authority to inquire into and pass
upon the title of the protestee or the validity of his proclamation.
Exceptions:
The Board of Canvassers was improperly constituted.
Quo warranto is not the proper remedy.
What was filed was not really a petition for quo warranto or an election protest but a
petition to annul a proclamation.
The filing of an election contest was expressly made without prejudice to the preproclamation controversy, or was made ad cautelam.
The proclamation was null and void (Dumayas, Jr. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 141952-53,
April 20, 2001).
The death of the protestant does not extinguish an election protest. Election protest is
imbued with public interest which raises it onto a plane over and above ordinary civil
actions, because it involves only the adjudication of the private interest of the rival
candidates but also the paramount need of dispelling once and for all the uncertainty
that beclouds the real choice of the electorate with respect to who shall discharge the
prerogatives of the office within their gift (De Castro v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 125249,
February 7, 1997).
The widow of the protestant has no status of real party in interest to substitute or
intervene for the latter who died during the pendency of the election protest. (Poe v.
Arroyo, P.E.T. Case No. 002, March 29, 2005).
ELECTION CAMPAIGN / PARTISAN POLITICAL ACTIVITY
The term "election campaign" or "partisan political activity" refers to an act
designed to promote the election or defeat of a particular candidate or candidates to a
public office which shall include:
1. Forming organizations, associations, clubs, committees or other groups of persons for
the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign for or against a
candidate;
2. Holding political caucuses, conferences, meetings, rallies, parades, or other similar
assemblies, for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign or
propaganda for or against a candidate;
3. Making speeches, announcements or commentaries, or holding interviews for or
against the election of any candidate for public office;
4. Publishing or distributing campaign literature or materials designed to support or
oppose the election of any candidate; or
5. Directly or indirectly soliciting votes, pledges or support for or against a
candidate (Sec. 79[b], B.P. 881)
Any person, including officers and employees in civil service, which shall be understood
to include officers and employees of GOCCs, are not prevented from expressing his
views on current political problems or issues or, from mentioning names of candidates
for public office, which he supports.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
a.
b.
c.
2.
ELECTION EXPENSES
Limitations
For candidates:
President and Vice-President = P10/voter;
Other candidates, if with party = P3/voter;
Other candidates, if without party = P5/voter.
For political parties = P5/voter.
Statement of Contribution and Expenses
Every candidate and treasurer of political party shall, within 30 days after the day of
election, file with the COMELEC the full, true and itemized statement of all
contributions connected with election (R.A. 7166, Sec. 14).
BOARD OF ELECTION INSPECTORS
Composition of Board of Election Inspectors (BEI)
a. Chairman
b. 2 members
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Qualifications
All must be public school teachers.
Must be of good moral character and irreproachable reputation.
Registered voters of the city or municipality.
Have never been convicted of election offense or crime punishable by more that 6
months imprisonment.
No pending information for an election offense.
Must be able to speak and write English or the local dialect.
Disqualification of BEI
1. Must not be related within the 4th civil degree of consanguinity or affinity to any
member of the BEI or to any candidate to be voted for in the polling place.
2. Must not engage in any partisan political activity.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Proceedings of BEI
1. Meetings of the BEI shall be public and held only in the authorized polling place.
2. BEI has authority to maintain order within the polling place and its premises, to keep
access thereto open and unobstructed and to enforce obedience to its lawful orders.
WATCHERS
(Sec. 178 of B.P. 881 as amended by Sec. 26 of RA 7166)
Qualifications
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
KINDS OF BALLOTS
1. Official Ballots
2. Emergency Ballots - used when official ballots were not received on time or not
sufficient for all registered voters or destroyed at such time as shall render it impossible
to replace them, in which cases, the city/municipal treasurer concerned shall procure
from any available source which shall be similar to official ones.
3. Excess Ballots found in ballot box which exceed number of registered voters who cast
their votes.
4. Marked ballots contain signs or marks intended to identify ballot.
Kinds:
a. Containing impertinent expressions;
b. Containing drawings, identical features and characteristics;
c. Containing names of important personages; and
d. Containing common and qualifying expressions, which are patently irrelevant.
5. Submarine Ballots those prepared, under a system of election frauds, by persons
other than the real voters.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Appreciation of ballots is a function of the BEI, not of the Board of Canvassers (Sanchez
v. COMELEC, 153 SCRA 67 [1987])
In appreciating a ballot, the object should be to ascertain and carry into effect the
intention of the voter if it can be determined with reasonable certainty. Thus, the name
of the candidate preceded by the words Bo. Barangay should be interpreted to mean
Po. (or Punong) Barangay, and should be counted for the candidate. (Bautista v.
Castro, 206 SCRA 305 [1992]).
The ineligibility of a candidate receiving majority votes does not entitle the eligible
candidate receiving the next highest number of votes to be declared elected. The votes
intended for the disqualified candidate should not be considered null and void, as it
would amount to disenfranchising the electorate in whom sovereignty resides. (Albana,
et al., v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 163302, July 23, 2004)
There must be a final judgment before the election in order that the votes of a disqualified
candidate can be considered stray, the obvious rationale behind the foregoing ruling
is the people voted for him bona fide, without any intention to misapply their
franchise, and in the honest belief that the candidate was then qualified to be the person
to whom they would entrust the exercise of the powers of government (Pablo Ocampo v.
HRET, G.R. No. 158466. June 15, 2004).
CANVASS AND PROCLAMATION
a.
b.
c.
d.
Principal and one representative from each ruling party and the dominant opposition
political party as members.
Powers & Duty of Board of Canvassers
a. To meet immediately after the election and to count the votes cast for the candidate
from the election returns submitted to it.
b. It is empowered to accept as correct those returns which are in due form and to
ascertain and declare the result as it appears therefrom.
c. The Board of Canvassers is a ministerial body. Its powers are limited generally to the
mechanical or mathematical function of ascertaining and declaring the apparent result
of the election by adding or compiling the votes cast for each candidate and then
declaring or certifying the result so ascertained.
d. Prepares the Statement of Votes, which I.D. tabulation per precinct of the votes
obtained by the candidates as reflected in the election returns.
It is the Statement of Votes which form the basis of the Certificate of Canvass and of
proclamation.
The COMELEC shall have direct control and supervision over the board of canvassers.
By conducting such unofficial tabulation of the results of the election, the COMELEC
descends to the level of a private organization, spending public funds for the purpose.
Besides, it is absurd for the COMELEC to conduct two kinds of electoral counts a slow
but official count, and an alleged quicker but unofficial count, the results of each
may substantially differ. This not only violates the exclusive prerogative of NAMFREL to
conduct an unofficial count, but also taints the integrity of the envelopes containing
the election returns, as well as the returns themselves, by creating a gap in its chain of
custody from the Board of Election Inspectors to the COMELEC. Thus, if the COMELEC
is proscribed from conducting an official canvass of the votes cast for the President and
Vice-President, the COMELEC is, with more reason, prohibited from making an
unofficial canvass of said votes (Brillantes v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 163193, June 15,
2004).
Nature of Proceedings: Canvass of Proceedings is administrative and summary in
nature.
A majority vote of all the members of the board shall be necessary to render
decision (B.P. 881, Sec.225).
PROCLAMATION
Canvassing completed ONLY after the completion of the canvass, separate statements of
all the votes received AND the proclamation of winners. After the proclamation, the
existence of the Board is terminated.
Incomplete canvass of votes is illegal and cannot be made the basis of proclamation.
A canvas cannot be reflective of the true vote unless all returns are considered and none
are omitted.
Where a proclamation is null and void, the proclaimed candidates assumption of office
cannot deprive the COMELEC of the power to declare such a proclamation a
nullity (Utto v. COMELEC G.R. No. 150111, January 31, 2002).
No law provides for a reglementary period within which to file a petition for annulment of
election if there is, as yet, no proclamation. (Loong v. COMELEC, 257 SCRA 1 [1996]).
COMELEC Jurisdiction
EXCLUSIVE Jurisdiction on ALL pre-proclamation controversies
RECOUNT OF VOTES
Upon proper petition, the COMELEC may order the recount of votes in the specific
precincts when the following requisites are present:
1. Grounds for recount:
a. Omission of the name of a candidate and/or his votes in the election returns which
cannot be ascertained by any other means under Sec 234 of the OEC.
b. All copies of the election returns are tampered with or falsified under Sec 235 of the
OEC
c. Material discrepancies in all of the election returns in the votes of a candidate in words
and figures, under Sec 236.
2. The election returns involved will affect the result of the election
3. The integrity of the ballot has been preserved.
A proceeding for recount is summary in character and merely consists in mathematical
counting of the votes received by each candidate. It does not involve any appreciation of
the ballots or the determination of their validity as required in an election contest.
ELECTION OFFENSES
Prohibited Acts (BP 881 and RA 6646)
1. Vote-buying or vote selling.
2.
Wagering of results.
Note: Any money or thing of value put up as a bet or wager shall be forfeited in favor of
the Government.
3.
4.
5.
Appointment of new employees (except in case of urgent need, with notice given to the
COMELEC within three days from the appointment), creation of new positions,
promotion or giving salary increases 45 days before a regular election and 30 days
before a special election EXCEPTwhen so authorized.
Carrying of deadly weapons within a radius of 100 meters from the precincts.
Note: It is not necessary that the deadly weapon be seized from the accused while he
was in the precinct or within a radius of 100 meters therefrom; it is enough that the
accused carried a deadly weapon within the prohibited radius during any of the days
and hours specified in the law. (Mappala v. Judge Nunez, A.M. No. RTJ-94-1208, Jan.
26, 1995).
6. Transfer or detail of government officials/employees without COMELEC approval.
Note: To prove violation, two elements must concur:
a. The fact of transfer or detail within the election period as fixed by COMELEC; and
b. The transfer or detail was made without prior approval of the COMELEC in accordance
with its implementing rules and regulations. (People v. Reyes, G.R. No. 115022, Aug. 14,
1995).
Note: The transfer or detail of government officer or employee will not be penalized if
done to promote efficiency in the government service. (People v. Reyes, supra).
7.
Printing of official ballots and election returns by any printing establishment which is
not under contract with the COMELEC.
8.
Any member of the BEI or BOC who tampers, increases, or decreases the votes
received by a candidate in any election or any member of the board who refuses, after
proper verification and hearing, to credit the correct votes or deduct such tampered
votes.
9.
1.
To induce any one or the public in general to vote for or against any candidate or
withhold his vote in the election.
2. To vote for or against any aspirant for the nomination or choice of a candidate in a
convention or similar selection.
C. Under RA 6646 (Prosecution of Vote-Buying/Selling)
1.
Presentation of a complaint supported by affidavits of complaining
witnesses attesting to the offer or promise by or the voters acceptance of money
or other consideration from the relatives, leaders or sympathizers of a candidate
is sufficient basis for an investigation by the COMELEC, directly or through its
duly authorized legal officers.
2. Disputable presumption of conspiracy: Proof that at least one voter in different
precincts representing at least 20% of the total precincts in any municipality, city or
province has been offered, promised or given money, valuable consideration or other
expenditure by a candidate, relatives, leaders and/or sympathizers for the purpose of
promoting the election of such candidate.
3. Disputable presumption of involvement: Proof affects at least 20% of the precincts
of the municipality, city or province to which the public office aspired for by the favored
candidate relate. This will constitute a disputable presumption of the involvement of
such candidate and of his principal campaign managers in each of the municipalities
concerned in the conspiracy.
COERCION OF A SUBORDINATE
A. Who are liable?
1.
Public officer
2.
Officer of a public/private corporation/association
3.
Heads/superior/administrator of any religious organization
4.
Employer/landowner
B. Prohibited Acts
1. Coercing, intimidating or compelling or influencing, in any manner, any subordinates,
members, parishioners or employees or house helpers, tenants, overseers, farm helpers,
tillers or lease holders to aid, campaign or vote for or against a candidate or aspirant for
the nomination or selection of candidates.
2. Dismissing or threatening to dismiss, punishing or threatening to punish by reducing
salary, wage or compensation or by demotion, transfer, suspension etc.
Prohibited Acts:
Appointing or hiring a new employee (provisional, temporary or casual);
Creating or filling any new position;
Promoting/giving an increase in salary, remuneration or privilege to any government
official or employee.
5.
Ongoing public work projects commenced before the campaign period or similar
projects under foreign agreements.
SUSPENSION OF ELECTIVE, PROVINCIAL, CITY, MUNICIPAL OR
BARANGAY OFFICER
General Rule: Public official CANNOT suspend any of the officers enumerated above
during the election period.
Exceptions:
1. With prior approval of COMELEC.
2. Suspension is for the purpose of applying the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
a. Violations In relation to registration of voters/voting
Unjustifiable refusal to register and vote.
Voting more than once in the same election/voting when not a registered voter.
Voting in substitution for another with or without the latters knowledge and/or consent
etc.
b.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
way of exception, exercises jurisdiction only over offenses as a matter of exception to the
general provisions on jurisdiction over criminal cases found under B.P. 129 as
amended (Naldoza v. Lavilles, 254 SCRA 286 [1996]).
Preferential disposition of election offenses The COMELEC shall investigate
without delay election offenses and resolve them within 5 days from submission. The
courts shall likewise give preference to these offenses over all other cases EXCEPT
petitions for writ of habeas corpus.
Prescriptive Period for Election Offenses
5 years from date of commission.
If the discovery of the offense is made in an election contest proceeding, the period of
prescription commences on the date on which judgment becomes final and executory.
GENERAL POWERS OF THE COMELEC
1. Executive enforcement and administration of election laws.
2. Legislative issuance of rules and regulations to implement the election laws and
other legislative functions as may be expressly delegated by Congress.
A draft resolution does not operate as a final resolution of a case until the proper
resolution is duly signed and promulgated (Calingin v. Court of Appeals, Et. Al., G.R.
No. 154616, July 12, 2004).
3.
causes; (c) after the voting and during the preparation and transmission of the election
returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect an
account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous
causes. In all instances there must have been failure to elect; this is obvious in the first
scenario where the election was not held and the second where the election was
suspended. As to the third scenario, the preparation and transmission of the election
returns which give rise to the consequence of failure to elect must as aforesaid be
literally interpreted to mean that nobody emerged as a winner.(Typoco, Jr. vs.
COMELECen banc;
G.R. No. 136191 November 29, 1999)
Who has the power to declare?
The COMELEC en banc has the original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide
petitions for declaration of failure of election or for annulment of election results (Sec.4,
R.A. 7166).
The proclamation of the winning candidate does not divest the COMELEC of such
jurisdiction, where the proclamation is null and void or is claimed to be so. (Ampatuan
v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 149803, Jan. 31, 2002).
What are the conditions before COMELEC can act on the petition?
1.
No voting took place in the precinct/s on the date fixed by law, or even if
there was voting, the election resulted in failure to elect; AND
2.
The votes not cast would have affected the result of the election.(Tan v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 148575-76, Dec. 10, 2003).
The cause of such failure may arise before or after the casting of votes or on the day of the
election.(Batabor v. Commission on Elections, et al., G.R. No. 160428, July 21, 2004)
COMELEC Rules of Procedure
Where the COMELEC, in division, allegedly committed grave abuse of discretion or
acted without or in excess of jurisdiction in issuing an interlocutory order, Sec. 5(c),
Rule 3 of the 1993 COMELEC Rules of Procedure applies.
Only final orders of the COMELEC in Division may be raised before the COMELEC en
banc. Sec. 3, Art. IX-C of the 1987 Constitution mandates that only motions for
reconsideration of final decisions shall be decided by the COMELEC en banc. Under this
constitutional provision, the COMELEC en banc shall decide motion for reconsideration
only of decisions of a Division, meaning those acts having a final character. Clearly,
the assailed status quo ante Order, being interlocutory, should first be resolved by the
COMELEC First Division via a motion for reconsideration (Repol v. COMELEC, et al.,
G.R. No. 161418, April 28, 2004).
The provision of the Constitution is clear that it should be the majority vote of all the
members of the COMELEC en banc and not only those who participated and took part
in the deliberations. Under the rules of statutory construction, it is to be assumed that
the words in which constitutional provisions are couched express the objective sought to
be attained. (Estrella v. Commission on Elections, et al., G.R. No. 160465, May 27,
2004)
POSTPONEMENT OF ELECTION
An election may be postponed motu propio or upon verified petition by any
interested party when there is violence, terrorism, loss or destruction of election
paraphernalia or records, force majeure or other analogous causes of such a nature that
the holding of a free. orderly and honest election becomes impossible in any political
subdivision (Sec. 5. B.P. 881)
(we) clarified that, "Under the pertinent codal provision of the Omnibus Election Code,
there are only three (3) instances where a failure of elections may be declared, namely:
(a) the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed on account of
force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes; (b) the election in
any polling place had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the
voting on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous
causes; or (c) after the voting and during the preparation and transmission of the
election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to
elect on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous
causes." (Sison v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 134096, March 3, 1999)