digested election law review cases

8/12/2019 Digested Election Law Review Cases

1/66

M o n d a y , O c t o b e r 1 5 , 2 0 1 2

OCCENA VS. COMELECSAMUEL OCCENA VS. COMELECG.R. NO. L-34150APRIL 2, 1981

FACTS:Petitioner Samuel Occena and Ramon A. Gozales instituted a prohibiting proceedingsagainst the validity of three batasang pambansa resolutions (Resolution No. proposing anamendment allo!ing a natural"born citizen of the Philippines naturalized in a foreign country to o!na limited area of land for residential purposes !as approved by the vote of ## to $% Resolution No.# dealing !ith the Presidency& the Prime 'inister and the abinet& and the National Assembly by avote of )* to $ !ith abstention% and Resolution No. + on the amendment to the Article on theommission on ,lections by a vote of )- to # !ith abstention. /he petitioners contends that suchresolution is against the constitutions in proposing amendments0

ISSUE:1hether the resolutions are unconstitutional2

HELD:3n dismissing the petition for lac4 of merit& the court ruled the follo!ing0

. /he po!er of the 3nterim 5atasang Pambansa to propose its amendments and ho! it may bee6ercised !as validly obtained. /he 7*+ onstitution in its /ransitory Provisions vested the 3nterimNational Assembly !ith the po!er to propose amendments upon special call by the Prime 'inisterby a vote of the ma8ority of its members to be ratified in accordance !ith the Article on Amendmentssimilar !ith the interim and regular national assembly. $ 1hen& therefore& the 3nterim 5atasangPambansa& upon the call of the President and Prime 'inister 9erdinand ,. 'arcos& met as aconstituent body it acted by virtue of such impotence.

#. Petitioners assailed that the resolutions !here so e6tensive in character as to amount to arevision rather than amendments. /o dispose this contention& the court held that !hether theonstitutional onvention !ill only propose amendments to the onstitution or entirely overhaul the

present onstitution and propose an entirely ne! onstitution based on an ideology foreign to thedemocratic system& is of no moment& because the same !ill be submitted to the people forratification. Once ratified by the sovereign people& there can be no debate about the validity of thene! onstitution. /he fact that the present onstitution may be revised and replaced !ith a ne! one... is no argument against the validity of the la! because :amendment: includes the :revision: or totaloverhaul of the entire onstitution. At any rate& !hether the onstitution is merely amended in partor revised or totally changed !ould become immaterial the moment the same is ratified by thesovereign people.;

+. /hat leaves only the


2/66

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

'anila

,N 5AN

G.R. N. L-5!350 A"#$% 2, 1981

SAMUEL C. OCCENA, petitioner&

vs.THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT, THE NATIONALTREASURER, THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING, respondents.

G.R. N. L-5!404 A"#$% 2, 1981

RAMON A. GON&ALES, MANUEL '. IM'ONG, (O AUREA MARCOS-IM'ONG, RA) ALLAN T.DRILON, NELSON '. MALANA *+ GIL M. TA'IOS, petitioners&vs.THE NATIONAL TREASURER *+ / COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondents.

FERNANDO, C.J.:

/he challenge in these t!o prohibition proceedings against the validity of three 5atasang Pambansa

Resolutions 1proposing constitutional amendments& goes further than merely assailing their allegedconstitutional infirmity. Petitioners Samuel Occena and Ramon A. Gonzales& both members of thePhilippine 5ar and former delegates to the 7* onstitutional onvention that framed the presentonstitution& are suing as ta6payers. /he rather unorthodo6 aspect of these petitions is the assertionthat the 7*+ onstitution is not the fundamental la!& the >avellana 2ruling to the contrarynot!ithstanding. /o put it at its mildest& such an approach has the arresting charm of novelty ? butnothing else. 3t is in fact self defeating& for if such !ere indeed the case& petitioners have come to the!rong forum. 1e sit as a ourt duty"bound to uphold and apply that onstitution. /o contendother!ise as !as done here !ould be&


3/66

/hat is the meaning of the concluding statement in >avellana. Since then& this ourt has invariablyapplied the present onstitution. /he latest case in point is People v. Sola, 12promulgated barely t!o!ee4s ago. uring the first year alone of the effectivity of the present onstitution& at least ten casesmay be cited. 13

#. 1e come to the crucial issue& the po!er of the Interim 5atasang Pambansa to proposeamendments and ho! it may be e6ercised. 'ore specifically as to the latter& the e6tent of the

changes that may be introduced& the number of votes necessary for the validity of a proposal& andthe standard re


4/66

to assert that the three"fourth votes re


5/66

G.R. N. L-491 M*# 11, 198

'. ASUNCION 'UENAFE, petitioner&vs.COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent.

G.R. N. L-482 M*# 11, 198

RE)NALDO T. FA(ARDO, petitioner&

vs.COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, (AIME LA)A, * / 'UDGET COMMISSIONER, GREGORIO G.MENDO&A, * / NATIONAL TREASURER, ILUSANG 'AGONG LIPUNAN, *+ LAAS NG'A)AN, respondents.

Pedro . Peralta in his o!n "ehal#.

$emesio C. arcia, Jr., Rodri%o &. 'elchor, Dante, S. David, Julie David()eliciano * Juan T. David#or petitioner Juan T. David.

Raul '. on+ale+ * ssociates #or petitioners -outh Democractic 'ovement, et al.

ual"erto J. de la lana in his o!n "ehal#.

/. suncion /uena#e in his o!n "ehal#

/inay Cueva, )ernande+ * ssociates #or petitioner Reynaldo T. )a0ardo.

Tolentino a! O##ice #or respondent 1ilusan% /a%on% ipunan.

Solicitor eneral Estelito P. 'endo+a, ssistant Solicitor eneral 2icente 2. 'endo+a and ssistantSolicitor eneral Reynato S. Puno #or Commission o# Elections 3CO'EEC4.

ANTONIO, J.:

/hese si6 (@ consolidated petitions pose for the determination of this ourt the constitutionality ofspecific provisions of the 7*- ,lection ode (Presidential ecree No. #@7.

3

/he first issue posed for resolution is0 5hether or not the votin% system provided #or in Sections 678and 699, su"para%raphs :; to :< Election Code, %rantin% to the voter the option to voteeither #or individual candidates "y #illin% in the proper spaces in the "allot the names o# candidateshe desires to elect, or to vote #or all the candidates o# a political party, %roup or a%%rupation "ysimply !aitin% in the space provided #or in the "allot the name o# the political party, %roup ora%%rupation, violates Section 6 o# rticle I2 and Section =364 o# article ?II(C o# the Constitution.

/he specific provisions of the 7*- ,lection ode !hich are assailed as being in violation of thee


6/66

of such candidates !hich spaces are to be filled by the voter !ho does not desire tovote for a straight tic4et0 Provided, #inally& /hat a candidate may be in the tic4et ofonly one political party& group or aggrupation% if he is included in the tic4et of morethan one political party& group or aggrupation presenting different sets of candidates&he shall immediately inform the ommission as to !hich tic4et he chooses to beincluded& and if he fails to do so& he shall cease to be considered to belong to any

tic4et. /he follo!ing notice shall be printed on the ballot0 ;3f you !ant to vote for allthe official candidates of a political party& group or aggrupation to the e6clusion of allother candidates& !rite the name of such political party& group or aggrupation in thespace indicated. 3t shag then be unnecessary for you to !rite the names ofandidates you vote for. On the other hand& if you !ant to vote for candidatesbelonging to different parties& groups or aggrupations andEor for individualcandidates& !rite in the respective blan4 spaces the names of the candidates youvote for and the names !ritten by you in the respective blan4 spaces in the ballotshall then be considered as validly voted for.

666 666 666

S,. $$. Rules #or the appreciation o# "allots. F 3n the reading and appreciation ofballots& the committee shall observe the follo!ing rules0

666 666 666#@. 3f a voter has !ritten in the proper space of the ballot the name of a political party&group or aggrupation !hich has nominated official candidates& a vote shall becounted for each of the official candidates of such party& group or aggrupation.

#*. 3f a voter has !ritten in the proper space of the ballot the name of a political party&group or aggrupation !hich has nominated official candidates and the names ofindividual candidates belonging to the tic4et of the same political party& group oraggrupation in the spaces provided therefor& a vote shall be counted for each of theofficial candidates of such party& group or aggrupation and the votes for the individualcandidates !ritten on the ballot shall be considered as stray votes.

#-. 3f a voter has !ritten in the proper space of his ballot the name of a political party&group or aggrupation !hich has nominated official candidates and the names ofindividual candidates not belonging to the tic4et of the same political party& group or

aggrupation in the spaces provided therefor& an of the votes indicated in the ballotshall be considered as stray votes and shall not be counted. Provided, ho!ever, /hatif the number of candidates nominated by the political party& group or aggrupation!ritten by the voter in the ballot is less than the number of seats to be filled in theelection and the voter also !rites the names of individual candidates in the spacesprovided therefor not belonging to the tic4et of the political party& group oraggrupation he has !ritten in the ballot& the ballot shall be counted as votes in favorof the candidates of the political party& group or aggrupation concerned and theindividual candidates !hose names !ere firstly !ritten by the voter in the spacesprovided therefor& until the authorized number of seats is fined.

/he system !hich allo!s straight party voting is not uni


7/66

name of a political party and the names of candidates not members of said party& Republic Act No.-= provided that the individual candidates !hose names !ere !ritten shall be considered votedfor& 4!hereas ommon!ealth Act No. @@@ provided that the vote shall be counted in favor of thepolitical party. 5

Ji4e!ise& it should be noted that in other 8urisdictions& ballots providing for optional straight partyvoting have been accepted as a standard form& in addition to the ;office"bloc4; ballots in !hich all

candidates for each office grouped together. Among the different states of the Inited States& fore6ample& the follo!ing has been observed0

/he party"column ballot& used in about += states& is sometimes called the 3ndiana"type ballot because the 3ndiana la! of --7 has served as a model for other states.3n most states using the party column ballot& it is possible to vote for the candidatesof a single party for all offices by ma4ing a single cross in the circle at the head of thecolumn containing the party:s candidates. 3n some states& the party emblem iscarried at the top of its column& a feature !hich& in less literate days& !as of someutility in guiding the voter to the right column on the ballot. /o vote a split tic4et on aparty"column ballot usually re


8/66

polls. /he head of the largest party is as4ed to form a government. 113n 9rance& on the other hand&under the electoral la! of October $& 7)@& providing for the selection of National Assemblymembers& a list system of proportional representation !as set up& !hereby each electoral areaelected several candidates in proportion to its voting strength. /he voter !as re


9/66

of the validity of every statute is first determined by the legislative department of the governmentitself. 20

/hus& to 8ustify the nullification of a la!& there must be ;a clear and une


10/66

/he onstitution establishes a parliamentary system of government. Such a system implies thee6istence of responsible political parties !ith distinct programmes of government.

/he parliamentary system !or4s best !hen party distinctions are !ell defined by differences inprinciple. As observed by a noted authority on political la!& under a parliamentary system% ;themaintenance and development party system becomes not only necessary but indispensable for theenforcement of the idea and the rule of government responsibility and accountability to the people in

the political management of the country.; 253ndeed& the e6tent to !hich political parties can becomeeffective instruments of self"government depends& in the final analysis& on the degree of the citizens:competence in politics and their !illingness to contribute political resources to the parties.

3t is also contended that the system of optional straight party voting is anathema to free& orderly andhonest elections or that it encourages laziness or political irresponsibility. /hese are ob8ections thatgo to the !isdom of the statute. 3t is !ell to remember that this ourt does not pass upon


11/66

by their respective sectors& and those chosen by the incumbent President from themembers of the abinet.;

S,. #.pportionment o# re%ional representatives. F /here shall be @= regionalrepresentatives to the interim 5atasang Pambansa apportioned among the thirteenregions of the nation in accordance !ith the number of their respective inhabitantsand on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio ... 0

666 666 666/he foregoing apportionment shall be not considered a precedent in connection !iththe re"apportionment of representative districts for the regular National Assemblyunder Section #& Article 333 and Section @& Article B3 3 of the onstitution.

Not!ithstanding the foregoing provisions& the number of regional representative forany region shall not be less than the number of representative districts thereine6isting at the time of the ratification of the onstitution. /here are also allotted t!oadditional seats for regional representatives to Region 3 in vie! of inhabitants& suchas students& in the region not ta4en into account in the 7*$ census.

S,. ). 2otin% "y re%ion. F ,ach region shall be entitled to such number ofregional representatives as are allotted to it in Section # of Article 33 hereof. Allcandidates for region representatives shall be voted upon at large by the registered

voters of their respective regions. /he candidates receiving the highest number ofvotes from the entire region shall be declared elected.

/he constitutional provision relied upon is Section # of Article 333& !hich provides0

S,. #. /he National Assembly shall be composed of as many 'embers as may beprovided by la! to be apportioned among the provinces& representative districts andcities in accordance !ith the number of their respective inhabitants and on the basisof a uniform and progressive ratio. ,ach district shall omprise& as far as practicable&contiguous& compact& and ad8acent territory. Representative districts or provincesalready created or e6isting at the time of the ratification of this onstitution shag haveat least one 'ember each.

3n resolving the issue& the provisions of Amendment No. to the onstitution& !hich too4 effect onOctober #*& 7*@& should be considered and not& as pointed out by petitioner >uan /. avid& those ofSection # of Article 333 of the onstitution& !hich deal !ith the composition of the regular National

Assembly.

3t should be recalled that under the term of the /ransitory Provisions of the onstitution& 28themembership of theinterim National Assembly !ould consists of the 3ncumbent President and ice"President& the Senators and the Representatives of the old ongress and the elegates to theonstitutional onvention !ho have opted to serve therein. /he 9ilipino people re8ected theconvening of the interim National Assembly& and for a perfectly 8ustifiable reason.

5y September of 7*@& the consensus had emerged for a referendum parta4ing of the character of aplebiscite !hich !ould be held to establish the solid foundation for the ne6t step to!ards normalizingthe political process. 5y the !ill of the people& as e6pressed over!helmingly in the plebiscite ofOctober $ and @& 7*@& Amendments Nos. to 7 !ere approved& abolishing the interim National

Assembly and creating in its stead an interim 5atasang Pambansa. / !as intended as a preparatoryand e6perimental step to!ard the establishment of full parliamentary government as provided for in

the onstitution.Amendment No. provides0

. /here shall be& in lieu of the interim National Assembly& an interim 5atasangPambansa& 'embers of the interim 5atasang Pambansa& !hich shall not be morethan #=& unless other!ise provided by la!& shall include the incumbent President ofthe Philippines& representatives elected #rom the di##erent re%ions o# the nation, those!ho shall not be less than eighteen years of age elected by their respective sectors&and those chosen by the incumbent President from the 'embers of theabinet.Re%ional representatives shall "e apportioned amon% the re%ions in


12/66

accordance !ith the num"er o# their respective inha"itants and on the "asis o# auni#orm and pro%ressive ratio, !hile the sectors shall be determined by la!. Thenum"er o# representatives #rom each re%ion or sector and the manner o# theirelection shall "e prescri"ed and re%ulated "y la!. (,mphasis supplied.

/he provisions of the Above Amendment are clear. 3nstead of providing that representation inthe interim5atasang Pambansa shall be by representative districts& it specifically provides that% (

the representatives shall be elected from the different regions of the nation% and (# the ;Regionalrepresentatives shall be apportioned among the regions in accordance !ith the number of theirrespective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio !hile the sector shall bedetermined by la!. ; No mention !hatsoever is made of ) provinces& representative districts andcities;. 1here the intent is to relate to the regular National Assembly& the onstitution made it clearand manifest& as indicated in Amendment No. # of the onstitution. 293t is significant to note thatno!here in the said amendment is it provided that the members of the interim 5atasang Pambansashall be apportioned among the representative districts& in the same manner as the regular National

Assembly. /he clear import and intent of the onstitutional Amendment is& therefore& the election ofthe representatives from the different regions of the nation& and such regional representatives shallbe alloted or distributed among the regions in accordance !ith the number of their respectiveinhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio. Neither does the Amendmentprovide that the members of the interim 5atasang Pambansa ;shall be elected by the


13/66

/he follo!ing t!o issues raised by petitioners are interrelated and must be 8ointly discussed herein./hey are0

(a 5hether or not the 1ilusan% /a%on% ipunan 31/4 and the aAas n% /ayan3/$4 may "e re%istered and accredited as political parties under Section < o#

rticle ?II(C o# the Constitution, so that their respective candidates #or mem"ershipin the interim /atasan% Pam"ansa may "e voted #or as a %roup under the 6=>

HEL#

1.

. COM&&C committed grave a%$se o discretion.eerend$m Committee>@ thedoc$ments "ere called>reerend$m ret$rns>@ the canvassers, >eerend$mBoard o Canvassers> and the %allots

themselves %ore the description>reerend$m>. To repeat, not once "as the "ord

>initiative> $sed in said%od+ o esol$tion o. 28-8. And +et, this eercise is

$n4$estiona%l+ an//T/AT/&.As deined, /nitiative is the po"er o the people to

propose %ills and la"s,and to enact or re5ect them at the polls independent o

the legislativeassem%l+. On the other hand, reerend$m is the right reserved to the

peopleto adopt or re5ect an+ act or meas$re "hich has %een passed %+ a legislative%od+

and "hich in most cases "o$ld "itho$t action on the part o electors%ecome a la"./n

initiative and reerend$m, the Comelec eercises administration ands$pervision o the

process itsel, a*in to its po"ers over the cond$ct o elections.Te-e *+3m+(&' po3er- be*o&' to te peop*e e&)e tere-po&0e&t Comm(--(o&

)+&&ot )o&tro* or )+&'e te -b-t+&)e or te)o&te&t o% *e'(-*+t(o&.

2.

The local initiative is OT $ltra vires %eca$se the m$nicipal resol$tion isstill in the

proposal stage and not +et an approved la".

The m$nicipal resol$tion is still in the proposal stage. /t is not +et anapproved la". #ho$ld

the people re5ect it, then there "o$ld %e nothing tocontest and to ad5$dicate. /t is onl+

"hen the people have voted or it and ithas %ecome an approved ordinance or resol$tion

that rights and o%ligationscan %e enorced or implemented there$nder. At this point, it is

merel+ aproposal and the "rit or prohi%ition cannot iss$e $pon a mere con5ect$re

orpossi%ilit+. Constit$tionall+ spea*ing, co$rts ma+ decide onl+ act$alcontroversies, not

h+pothetical 4$estions or cases./n the present case, it is 4$ite clear that the Co$rt

has a$thorit+ to revie"Comelec esol$tion o. 28-8 to determine the commission o grave

a%$se o discretion. o"ever, it does not have the same a$thorit+ in regard to

theproposed initiative since it has not %een prom$lgated or approved, or passed$pon %+ an+


21/66

>%ranch or instr$mentalit+> or lo"er co$rt, or that matter. TheCommission on &lections

itsel has made no revie"a%le prono$ncementsa%o$t the iss$es %ro$ght %+ the pleadings.

The Comelec simpl+ incl$dedver%atim the proposal in its 4$estioned esol$tion o. 28-8.

ence, there isreall+ no decision or action made %+ a %ranch, instr$mentalit+ or co$rt

"hichthis Co$rt co$ld ta*e cogniEance o and ac4$ire 5$risdiction over, in theeercise o

its revie" po"ers

,N 5AN

;G.R. N. 12541!. S/"/6


22/66

#unicipality of Subic$ Pro(ince of Zambales$ the lands occupied by the Subic )a(al

ase and its contiguous e*tensions as embraced$ co(ered and defined by the 1+,-

#ilitary ases greement bet/een the Philippines and the nited States of merica

as amended$ and /ithin the territorial jurisdiction of the #unicipalities of #orong and

%ermosa$ Pro(ince of ataan$ hereinafter referred to as the Subic Special Economic

Zone /hose metes and bounds shall be delineated in a proclamation to be issued by

the President of the Philippines. ithin thirty 304 days after the appro(al of this ct$

each local go(ernment unit shall submit its resolution of concurrence to join the Subic

Special Economic Zone to the !ffice of the President. hereafter$ the President of

the Philippines shall issue a proclamation defining the metes and bounds of the 6one

as pro(ided herein." nderscoring supplied4

RA *##* li4e!ise created petitioner to implement the declared nationalpolicy of converting the Subic military reservation into alternative productiveuses.C#DPetitioner !as organized !ith an authorized capital stoc4 of P#= billion

!hich !as fully subscribed and fully paid up by the Republic of the Philippines!ith& among other assets& ;(all lands embraced& covered and defined inSection # hereof& as !ell as permanent improvements and fi6tures uponproper inventory not other!ise alienated& conveyed& or transferred to anothergovernment agency.MC+D

On November #)& 77#& the American navy turned over the Subic militaryreservation to the Philippine government. 3mmediately& petitioner commencedthe implementation of its tas4& particularly the preservation of the seaports&airports& buildings& houses and other installations left by the American navy.

3n April 77+& the San%%unian% /ayan of 'orong& 5ataan passed

a Pam"ayan%1apasyahan /ilan% 68, Serye 6==H, e6pressing therein itsabsolute concurrence& as re


23/66

4 7hi/alay ang =rande 7sland sa SSE&Z at ibali8 ito sa ataan.

94 7sama ang mga lupain ng ataan na na8apaloob sa S# sa pag8u8uenta ng

salaping ipinag8aloob ng pamahalaang national o ;7nternal >e(enue llotment; 7>4

sa #orong$ %ermosa at sa ?ala/igan.

@4 Payagang magtatag rin ng sariling ;special economic 6ones; ang ba/at bayan ng

#orong$ %ermosa at @inalupihan.

E4 7base sa la8i ng 8anya'8anyang lupa ang pamamahagi ng 8i8itain ng S#.

=4 7base rin ang alo8asyon ng pagbibigay ng trabaho sa la8i ng nasabing mga lupa.

%4 Pabayaang bu8as ang pinto ng S# na nasa #orong ng 2, na oras at bu8od

dito sa magbu8as pa ng pinto sa hangganan naman ng #orong at %ermosa upang

mag8aroon ng pag8a8ataong umunlad rin ang mga nasabing bayan$ pati na rin ng iba

pang bayan ng ataan.

74 apusin ang pag8o8on8reto ng mga daang #orong'ala'!rani at #orong'asig'

@inalupihan para sa 8abutihan ng mga taga'ataan at tuloy ma8atulong sa

pangangalaga ng mga 8abundu8an.A4 #ag8a8aroon ng sapat na representasyon sa pamunuan ng S# ang #orong$

%ermosa at ataan."

The San%%unian% /ayan of 'orong acted upon the petition ofrespondents Garcia& alimbas& et al. by promulgating Pam"ayan%1apasyahan /l%. 6uly @& 77+& respondent ommission En /anc in omelec ResolutionNo. 7+"@#+ denied the petition for local initiative by herein privaterespondents on the ground that the sub8ect thereof !as merely aresolution 3pam"ayan% Aapasyahan4 and not an ordinance. On >uly +& 77+&public respondent omelec En /anc (thru omelec Resolution no. 7+"@*@
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn4


24/66

further directed its Provincial ,lection Supervisor to hold action on theauthentication of signatures being solicited by private respondents.

On August $& 77+& private respondents instituted a petitionfor certiorari and mandamusC$Dbefore this ourt against the ommission on,lections and theSan%%unian% /ayan of 'orong& 5ataan& to set asideomelec Resolution No. 7+"@#+ insofar as it disallo!ed the conduct of alocal initiative to annul Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /ilan% 68, Serye 6==H, andomelec Resolution No. 7+"@*@ insofar as it prevented the Provincial,lection Supervisor of 5ataan from proceeding !ith the authentication of thereune -& 77@& respondent omelec issued Resolution No. #-)$&adopting therein a ;alendar of Activities for local referendum on certainmunicipal ordinance passed by the Sangguniang 5ayan of 'orong& 5ataan;&and !hich indicated& among others& the scheduled referendum ay (>uly #*&77@& Saturday. On >une #*& 77@& the omelec promulgated the assailedResolution No. #-)- providing for ;the rules and guidelines to govern theconduct of the referendum proposing to annul or repeal 1apasyahan /l%. 68,

Serye 6==H of theSan%%unian% /ayanof 'orong& 5ataan;.On >uly =& 77@& petitioner instituted the present petition for certiorariand

prohibition contesting the validity of Resolution No. #-)- and alleging& interalia& that public respondent ;is intent on proceeding !ith a local initiative thatproposes an amendment of a national la!. 6 6 6;

T/ I/

/he petitionC@Dpresents the follo!ing ;argument;0

">espondent ommission on Elections committed gra(e abuse of discretion

amounting to lac8 of jurisdiction in scheduling a local initiati(e /hich see8s the

amendment of a national la/."

3n his omment& private respondent Garcia claims that ( petitioner hasfailed to sho! the e6istence of an actual case or controversy% (# 6 6 6petitioner see4s to overturn a decisionE8udgment !hich has long become finaland e6ecutory% (+ 6 6 6 public respondent has not abused its discretion andhas in fact acted !ithin its 8urisdiction% (and () 6 6 6 the concurrence of local
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn6


25/66

government units is reuly #+& 77@& the ourt heard oral argument by the parties& after!hich& it issued the follo!ing resolution0

"he ourt >esol(ed to 14 =>) the #otion to dmit the ttached omment filed

by counsel for pri(ate respondent EnriCue . =arcia$ dated Auly 22$ 1++D and 24

)!E the: a4 >eply should be comment4 to the petition for certiorari and

prohibition /ith prayer for temporary restraining order andBor /rit of preliminary

injunctiom$ filed by counsel for respondent atalino alimbas$ dated Auly 22$ 1++D

b4 Separate omments on the petition$ filed by: b'14 the Solicitor =eneral for

respondent ommission on Elections dated Auly 1+$ 1++D and b'24 counsel for

pri(ate respondent EnriCue . =arcia$ dated Auly 22$ 1++D and c4 #anifestation filed

by counsel for petitioner dated Auly 22$ 1++D.t the hearing of this case this morning$ tty. >odolfo !. >eyes appeared and argued

for petitioner Subic ay #etropolitan uthority S#4 /hile tty. Si*to rillantes

for pri(ate respondent EnriCue . =arcia$ and tty. !scar ?. 9araan for respondent

atalino alimbas. Solicitor =eneral >aul =oco$ ssistant Solicitor =eneral ecilio

!. Estoesta and Solicitor Zenaida %ernande6'Pere6 appeared for respondent

ommission on Elections /ith Solicitor =eneral =oco arguing.

efore the ourt adjourned$ the ourt directed the counsel for both parties to

7)&!># this ourt by &riday$ Auly 2D$ 1++D$ /hether or not ommission on

Elections /ould push through /ith the initiati(eBreferendum this Saturday$ Auly 2-$1++D.

hereafter$ the case shall be considered S#7E@ for resolution.

t 2:50 p.m. Auly 23$ 1++D$ the ourt recei(ed by facsimile transmission an !rder

dated also on Auly 23$ 1++D from the respondent ommission on Elections En

anc inter alia ;to hold in abeyance the scheduled referendum initiati(e4 on Auly 2-$

1++D pending resolution of =.>. )o. 125,1D.; 7n (ie/ of this !rder$ the petitioner;s
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn7


26/66

application for a temporary restraining order andBor /rit of preliminary injunction has

become moot and academic and /ill thus not be passed upon by this ourt at this

time. Puno$ A.$ no part due to relationship. ellosillo$ A.$ is on lea(e."

After careful study of and 8udicious deliberation on the submissions andarguments of the parties& the ourt believes that the issues may be restatedas follo!s0

14 hether this petition "see8s to o(erturn a decisionBjudgment /hich has long

become final and e*ecutory" namely =.>. )o. 111230$ EnriCue =arcia$ et al. (s.

ommission on Elections$ et al.

24 hether the respondent omelec committed gra(e abuse of discretion in

promulgating and implementing its >esolution )o. 2F,F /hich "go(erns4 the

conduct of the referendum proposing to annul or repealPambayang Kapasyahan Blg.

10, Serye 1993 of theSangguniang Bayanof #orong$ ataan" and

34 hether the Cuestioned local initiati(e co(ers a subject /ithin the po/ers of the

people of #orong to enact i.e.$ /hether such initiati(e "see8s the amendment of anational la/."

F$# I/: Bar by Final Judgment

Respondent Garcia contends that this ourt had already ruled !ith finalityin ,nriespondents ta8e the negati(e

stance as they contend that under the ?ocal =o(ernment ode of 1++1 only an

ordinance can be the subject of initiati(e. hey rely on Section 120$ hapter 2$ itle

G7$ oo8 7 of the ?ocal =o(ernment ode of 1++1 /hich pro(ides: ;?ocal 7nitiati(e

@efined. '' ?ocal initiati(e is the legal process /hereby the registered (oters of a localgo(ernment unit may directly propose$ enact$ or amend any ordinance.;

e reject respondent;s narro/ and literal reading of the abo(e pro(ision for it /ill

collide /ith the onstitution and /ill sub(ert the intent of the la/ma8ers in enacting

the pro(isions of the ?ocal =o(ernment of 1++1 on initiati(e and referendum.

he onstitution clearly includes not only ordinances but resolutions as appropriate

subjects of a local initiati(e. Section 32 of rticle


27/66

language: ;he ongress shall$ as early as possible$ pro(ide for a system of initiati(e

and referendum$ and the e*ceptions therefrom$ /hereby the people can directly

propose and enact la/s or appro(e or reject any actor la/ or part thereof passed by

the ongress$ or local legislati(e body * * *;. n actincludes a resolution. lac8

defines an acts ;an e*pression of /ill or purpose . . . it may denote something done . . .

as a legislature$ including not merely physical acts$ but also decrees$ edicts$ la/s$

judgement$ resolves$ a/ards and determination * * *.; 7t is basic that a la/ should be

construed in harmony /ith and not in (iolation of the onstitution. 7n line /ith this

postulates$ /e held in 7n >e =uarina that if there is doubt or uncertainly as to the

meaning of the legislati(e$ if the /ords or pro(isions are obscure$ or if the enactment

is fairly susceptible of t/o or more construction$ that interpretations /ill be adopted

/hich /ill a(oid the effect of unconstitutionality$ e(en though it may be necessary$ for

this purpose$ to disregard the more usual or apparent import of the language used.; "

'oreover& !e revie!ed our rollo in said G.R. No. #+= and !e found

that the sole issue presented by the pleadings !as the


28/66

/here are statutory and conceptual demarcations bet!een a referendumand an initiative. 3n enacting the ;3nitiative and Referendum Act&C#Dongressdifferentiated one term from the other& thus0

a4 "7nitiati(e" is the po/er of the people to propose amendments to the onstitution

or to propose and enact legislations through an election called for the purpose.

here are three 34 systems of initiati(e$ namely:a.. 3nitiative on the onstitution !hich refers to a petition proposing amendments to

the onstitution%

a.#. 3nitiative on statutes !hich refers to a petition proposing to enact a nationallegislation% and

a.+. 3nitiative on local legislation !hich refers to a petition proposing to enact aregional& provincial& city& municipal& or barangay la!& resolution or ordinance.

b4 "7ndirect initiati(e" is e*ercise of initiati(e by the people through a proposition

sent to ongress or the local legislati(e body for action.

c4 ">eferendum" is the po/er of the electorate to appro(e or reject a legislation

through an election called for the purpose. 7t may be of t/o classes$ namely:c.. Referendum on statutes !hich refers to a petition to approve or re8ect an act or

la!& or part thereof& passed by ongress% and

c.#. Referendum on local la! !hich refers to a petition to approve or re8ect a la!&resolution or ordinance enacted by regional assemblies and local legislative bodies.

Along these statutory definitions& >ustice 3sagani A. ruzC+Ddefinesinitiative as the ;po!er of the people to propose bills and la!s& and to enact orre8ect them at the polls independent of the legislative assembly.; On the otherhand& he e6plains that referendum ;is the right reserved to the people to adoptor re8ect any act or measure !hich has been passed by a legislative body and

!hich in most cases !ould !ithout action on the part of electors become ala!.; /he foregoing definitions& !hich are based on 5lac4:sC)Dand otherleading American authorities& are echoed in the Jocal Government ode (RA*@= substantially as follo!s0

"SE. 120. ?ocal 7nitiati(e @efined. '' ?ocal 7nitiati(e is the legal process /hereby

the registered (oters of a local go(ernment unit may directly propose$ enact$ or amend

any ordinance.

"SE. 12D. ?ocal >eferendum @efined. '' ?ocal referendum is the legal process

/hereby the registered (oters of the local go(ernment units may appro(e$ amend or

reject any ordinance enacted by the sanggunian.

he local referendum shall be held under the control and direction of the omelec/ithin si*ty D04 days in case of pro(inces and cities$ forty'fi(e ,54 days in case of

municipalities and thirty 304 days in case of barangays.

he omelec shall certify and proclaim the results of the said referendum."

Prescinding from these definitions& !e gather that initiative is resorted to(or initiated by the people directly either because the la!"ma4ing body fails orrefuses to enact the la!& ordinance& resolution or act that they desire or
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn14


29/66

because they !ant to amend or modify one already e6isting. Inder Sec. +of R.A. @*+$& the local legislative body is given the opportunity to enact theproposal. 3f its refusesEneglects to do so !ithin thirty (+= days from itspresentation& the proponents through their duly"authorized and registeredrepresentatives may invo4e their po!er of initiative& giving notice thereof tothe local legislative body concerned. Should the proponents be able to collectthe number of signed conformities !ithin the period granted by said statute&the ommission on ,lections ;shall then set a date for the initiative (notreferendum at !hich the proposition shall be submitted to the registeredvoters in the local government unit concerned 6 6 6;.

On the other hand& in a local referendum& the la!"ma4ing body submits tothe registered voters of its territorial 8urisdiction& for approval or re8ection& anyordinance or resolution !hich is duly enacted or approved by such la!"ma4ingauthority. Said referendum shall be conducted also under the control and

direction of the ommission on ,lections.

C$D

3n other !ords& !hile initiative is entirely the !or4 of the electorate&referendum is begun and consented to by the la!"ma4ing body. 3nitiative is aprocess of la!"ma4ing by the people themselves !ithout the participation andagainst the !ishes of their elected representatives& !hile referendum consistsmerely of the electorate approving or re8ecting !hat has been dra!n up orenacted by a legislative body. Hence& the process and the voting in aninitiative are understandably more comple6 than in a referendum !heree6pectedly the voters !ill simply !rite either ;es; or ;No; in the ballot.

CNote0 1hile the above ustice ruz terms them& or ;concepts;& or ;the proposal; itself (in the case ofinitiative being referred to in this ecision.D

9rom the above differentiation& it follo!s that there is need for the omelecto supervise an initiative more closely& its authority thereon e6tending not onlyto the counting and canvassing of votes but also to seeing to it that the matteror act submitted to the people is in the proper form and language so it may beeasily understood and voted upon by the electorate. /his is especially true!here the proposed legislation is lengthy and complicated& and should thus bebro4en do!n into several autonomous parts& each such part to be voted upon

separately. are must also be e6ercised that ;(no petition embracing morethan one sub8ect shall be submitted to the electorate&;C@Dalthough ;t!o or morepropositions may be submitted in an initiative;.C*D

3t should be noted that under Sec. + (c of RA @*+$& the ;Secretary ofJocal Government or his designated representative shall e6tend assistance inthe formulation of the proposition.;
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn17


30/66

3n initiative and referendum& the omelec e6ercises administration andsupervision of the process itself& a4in to its po!ers over the conduct ofelections. /hese la!"ma4ing po!ers belong to the people& hence therespondent ommission cannot control or change the substance or thecontent of legislation. 3n the e6ercise of its authority& it may (in fact it shouldhave done so already issue relevant and ade

Petitioner maintains that the proposition sought to be submitted in theplebiscite& namely& Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /l%. 68, Serye 6==H& is ultraviresor beyond the po!ers of the Sangguniang 5ayan to enact& C-Dstressingthat under Sec. #) (b of RA *@= (the Jocal Government ode& ;localinitiative shall cover only such sub8ects or matters as are !ithin the legal

po!ers of the sanggunians to enact.; ,lse!ise stated& a local initiative mayenact only such ordinances or resolutions as the municipal council itself could&if it decided to so enact.C7DAfter the Sangguniang 5ayan of 'orong and theother municipalities concerned (Olongapo& Subic and Hermosa gave theirresolutions of concurrence& and by reason of !hich the SS, had beencreated& !hose metes and bounds had already been delineated byProclamation No. $+# issued on 9ebruary & 77$ in accordance !ith Section# of R.A. No. *##*& the po!er to !ithdra! such concurrence andEor tosubstitute therefor a conditional concurrence is no longer !ithin the authorityand competence of the 'unicipal ouncil of 'orong to

legislate. 9urthermore& petitioner adds& the specific conditionalities included inthe


31/66

contest and to ad8udicate. 3t is only !hen the people have voted for it and ithas become an approved ordinance or resolution that rights and obligationscan be enforced or implemented thereunder. At this point& it is merely aproposal and the !rit of prohibition cannot issue upon a mere con8ecture orpossibility. onstitutionally spea4ing& courts may decide only actualcontroversies& not hypothetical


32/66

1hile on the sub8ect of capacity of the local la!ma4ing body& it !ould befruitful for the parties and the omelec to plead and ad8udicate& respectively&the


33/66

aspirations for the actualization of effective direct sovereignty. 3ndeed !erecognize that ;(provisions for initiative and referendum are liberallyconstrued to effectuate their purposes& to facilitate and not to hamper thee6ercise by the voters of the rights granted thereby.; C#)D3n his authoritativetreatise on the onstitution& 9r. >oa. treasures these;instruments !hich can be used should the legislature sho! itself indifferent tothe needs of the people.;C#$D3mpelled by a sense of urgency& ongress enactedRepublic Act No. @*+$ to give life and form to the constitutionalmandate. ongress also interphased initiative and referendum into the!or4ings of local governments by including a chapter on this sub8ect in thelocal Government ode of 77.C#@DAnd the ommission on ,lections can dono less by seasonably and 8udiciously promulgating guidelines and rules& forboth national and local use& in implementation of these la!s. 9or its part& thisourt early on e6pressly recognized the revolutionary import of reservingpeople po!er in the process of la!"ma4ing.C#*D

Ji4e elections& initiative and referendum are po!erful and valuable modesof e6pressing popular sovereignty. And this ourt as a matter of policy anddoctrine !ill e6ert every effort to nurture& protect and promote their legitimatee6ercise. 9or it is but sound public policy to enable the electorate to e6presstheir free and untrammeled !ill& not only in the election of their anointedla!ma4ers and e6ecutives& but also in the formulation of the very rules andla!s by !hich our society shall be governed and managed.

@HEREFORE the petition is R$TED. Resolution No. #-)-is$$EDand SET SIDE. /he initiative on Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan

/l%. 68, Serye 6==His RE'$DEDto the ommission on ,lections forfurther proceedings consistent !ith the foregoing discussion. No costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

$arvasa, C.J., Padilla, Re%alado, Davide, Jr., /ellosillo, 'elo, 2itu%,1apunan, )rancisco, and&ermosisima, Jr., JJ.&concur.

Romero, and'endo+a, JJ., on official leave.

Puno, J., no part due to relationship.Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT'anila

,N 5AN

G.R. N. 11310 (%? 20, 1994

@ILMAR P. LUCERO, petitioner&vs.COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS *+ (OSE L. ONG, (R., respondents.

G.R. N. 113509 (%? 20, 1994
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/125416.htm#_edn27


34/66

(OSE L. ONG, (R., petitioner&vs.COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS *+ @ILMAR P. LUCERO, respondents.

Cesar . Sevilla * ssociates #or 5ilmar ucero.

$apolean . Rama and Remollo 'elocoton * ssociates #or Jose . On%, Jr.

DAVIDE, (R., J.:

After the issues had been 8oined in these consolidated cases& the ourt resolved to give due courseto the petitions therein and to decide the cases on the merits. 3t can no longer allo! the parties todelay these cases. /heir legal s4irmishes& !hich have unduly magnified uncomplicated issues& haveeffectively deprived the people of the Second Jegislative istrict of Northern Samar ofrepresentation in the House of Representatives for more than t!o years no!.

/hese cases are seose J. Ong& >r. vs. ommission on,lections and 1ilmar P. Jucero&; !hich !e finally resolved on ## April 77+. 1/he petitioners !eret!o of the five candidates 2for the Second Jegislative istrict of Northern Samar in the synchronizednational and local elections held on 'ay 77#.

/he canvass of the Provincial 5oard of anvassers (P5 of Northern Samar credited >ose J. Ong&>r. !ith #)*# votes and 1ilmar P. Jucero !ith #)&=@- votes& or a lead by Ong of #=) votes.

Ho!ever& this tally did not include the results of Precinct No. * of the municipality of Silvino Jobos&!here the submitted election returns had not been canvassed because they !ere illegible% ofPrecinct No. + of Silvino Jobos& !here the ballot bo6es !ere snatched and no election !as held%and of Precinct No. @& also of Silvino Jobos& !here all copies of the election returns !ere missing.

On ## 'ay 77#& Jucero as4ed the ommission on ,lections (O',J,& in SPA No. 7#"#-#& to0

. 9orth!ith order Respondent Provincial 5oard of anvassers for Northern Samar tosuspend the proclamation of Private Respondent >ose J. Ong& >r.%

#. irect Respondent Provincial 5oard of anvassers for Northern Samar to correctthe ertificate of anvass (,9 #= for Jas Navas and& accordingly& to correct thetotal votes so far counted by it for Petitioner from #)&=@- to #)&=--& thus reducing themargin it found in favor of Private Respondent >ose J. Ong& >r. from #=) to -) votesonly%

+. Order a special election in Precinct +& 5arangay Gusaran& Silvino Jobos&pursuant to Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection ode%

). Order a recount of the votes for Representative of the Second istrict of NorthernSamar in Precinct @& 5arangay /ubgon& and Precinct *& 5arangay amayaan& bothof Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+) of the Omnibus ,lection ode%

$. Order a recount of the votes for Representative in the $# precincts herein aboveenumerated in order to correct ;manifest errors; pursuant to Section $ of Republic Act*@@ and for this purpose order the impounding and safe4eeping of the ballot bo6es of allsaid precincts in order to preserve the integrity of the ballots and other electionparaphernalia contained therein. 3

On # >une 77#& the O',J,& acting on Jucero:s urgent manifestation& directed the P5 to desistfrom reconvening until further orders.

On - >une 77#& Ong moved to lift the suspension of the proceedings by the P5& !hich Juceroopposed on = >une 77# on the ground that the canvass could not be completed even if the P5!ere to reconvene because no election !as held in Precinct No. + (5arangay Gusaran of SilvinoJobos and there !as no canvassing of the votes in Precinct No. * (5arangay amayaan andPrecinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon both of Silvino Jobos.

On + >une 77+& the O',J,en "ancpromulgated a resolution& the dispositive portion of !hichreads0

Accordingly& the ommission hereby orders the Provincial ,lectionSupervisor of Northern Samar to bring to the ommission !ithin three (+


35/66


36/66

3N 3,1 O9 AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG& the dispositive portion of the ecember #+&77# ecision is hereby 'O393, to read as follo!s%

;1H,R,9OR,& /H, P,/3/3ON 3S GRAN/,. /H, >IN, #& 77#OR,R O9 R,SPON,N/ O''3SS3ON ON ,J,/3ONS 3N SPANO. 7#"#-# 3S H,R,5 ANNIJJ, AN S,/ AS3,. 3/S >IN, +&77# R,SOJI/3ON /H,R,3N 3S J3K,13S, ANNIJJ, AN S,/

AS3, 3NSO9AR AS 3/ A99,/S PR,3N/ NO. * O9 S3J3NOJO5OS& /H, R,OIN/ O9 O/,S 3N /H, $# O/H,RPR,3N/S AN /H, ORR,/3ON O9 /H, ,R/393A/, O9ANASS O9 JAS NAAS& 5I/ 3S A993R', 13/H R,SP,/ /O/H, 3SSI, O9 HOJ3NG A SP,3AJ ,J,/3ON 3N PR,3N/NO. + AN /H, R,OIN/ O9 /H, 5AJJO/S 3N PR,3N/NO. @.

/H, R,SPON,N/ O''3SS3ON ON ,J,/3ONS 3S H,R,53R,/, /O ASS3GN SPA NO. 7#"#-# /O AN O9 3/S33S3ONS PIRSIAN/ /O 3/S RIJ, ON RA99J, O9 AS,S 9OR3/ /O R,SOJ, /H, PR,"PROJA'A/3ON 3SSI,S /H,R,3N&/AK3NG 3N/O AOIN/ /H, A5O, PRONOIN,',N/S AN/H, ,B,P/3ONS PRO3, 9OR 3N S,/3ON $ O9 R. A. NO.*@@.

1H,N,,R 1ARRAN/, 5 /H, 3RI'S/AN,S& /H,O''3SS3ON 'A (A AJJ A SP,3AJ ,J,/3ON 3N PR,3N/NO. + O9 S3J3NO JO5OS& NOR/H,RN SA'AR& AN (5R,ON,N, /H, SP,3AJ 'IN33PAJ 5OAR O9ANASS,RS AN /H, SP,3AJ PRO3N3AJ 5OAR O9ANASS,RS 3/ HA ,ARJ3,R ONS/3/I/, OR R,A/,N,1 ON,S.

AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG SHOIJ 5, ON, 13/H PIRPOS,9IJ3SPA/H /O /H, ,N /HA/ /H, 13NN3NG AN3A/, 9ORONGR,SS'AN R,PR,S,N/3NG /H, S,ON ONGR,SS3ONAJ3S/R3/ O9 NOR/H,RN SA'AR 'A 5, PROJA3', AS SOON

AS POSS35J,.;10

As to the certificate of canvass of the municipality of Jas Navas& this ourt e6plicitly stated%

/he correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas is li4e!ise in order. ,ven thougha pre"proclamation issue is involved& the correction of the manifest error is allo!ed underSection $ of R. A. No. *@@. 11

onformably !ith the aforesaid modified 8udgment in G. R. No. =$**& SPA No. 7#"#-# !as raffledto the 9irst ivision of the O',J, !hich conducted hearings thereon and received thearguments and evidence of both parties !ho then submitted their respective memoranda on #$ >une77). Ho!ever& during the consultations on the case by the 'embers of the 9irst ivision& theconcurrence of at least t!o of them could not be obtained% accordingly& pursuant to the O',J,Rules& the case !as elevated for proper disposition to the O',J, en "ancto !hich the partiessubmitted their respective memoranda on 7 November 77+. 12

On * >anuary 77)& the O',J, en "ancpromulgated a resolution 13!hose dispositive portionreads as follo!s0

. /o direct the special Provincial 5oard of anvassers for Northern Samar (a toinclude in the municipal certificate of canvass of Silvino Jobos the forty"three ()+votes of petitioner Jucero and the t!o (# votes of private respondent Ong asreflected in the election returns of Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon prepared bythe special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors constituted by the ommission to recountthe votes (ballots in said precinct& as canvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard ofanvassers for Silvino Jobos% (b to include in the municipal certificate of canvass of


37/66

Silvino Jobos& the si6ty"one (@ votes of private respondent Ong and #7& +=& or +votes of petitioner Jucero as reflected in the election returns ('5 opy submittedas ;omelec opy; of Precinct No. * (5arangay amaya"an& as canvassed by thespecial 'unicipal 5oard of anvassers for Silvino Jobos% (c to retabulate the totalnumber of votes of petitioner Jucero for the 'unicipality of Jas Navas and to enter inthe provincial certificate of canvass the correct total !hich is t!o thousand five

hundred thirty"seven (#&$+* as reflected in the Statement of otes (. ,. 9orm #="Aprepared and submitted by the 'unicipal 5oard of anvassers for Jas Navas% and(d to submit to the ommission a computation of the votes of the contending partiesincluding therein all the votes of petitioner Jucero (!ith alternative totals and privaterespondent Ong& in Precinct Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos and the total votes ofpetitioner Jucero in the 'unicipality of Jas Navas as corrected. Ho!ever& under nocircumstances should the 5oard proclaim any !inning candidate until instructed to doso by the ommission%

#. /o issue an Order calling for a special election in the last remaining Precinct No.+ (5arangay Gusaran of the 'unicipality of Silvino Jobos if 8ustified by the result ofthe canvass by the Provincial 5oard of anvassers for Northern Samar& and to notifythe parties of the schedule of election activities for that precinct% and

+. After including in the tabulation the results of the special election of Precinct No.+& to decide the issue of the recount of the votes (ballots of Precinct No. * of SilvinoJobos& pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection ode& to resolve thediscrepancy of the votes of petitioner Jucero in the same return& if such discrepancyof votes of the candidates concerned !ould affect the over"all results of the electionafter the totality of the votes of the contending parties shall have been determined.

5oth Jucero and Ong have come to this ourt by !ay of separate special civil actions for certioraritochallenge the Resolution.

3n G. R. No. +=*& Jucero maintains that ( the count of the ballots in Precinct No. * of SilvinoJobos must be unconditional because the election returns therefrom are invalid% and (# his chancesin the special election in Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos !ould be spoiled if the returns for PrecinctNo. * !ere to be included beforehand in the canvass.

3n G. R. No. +$=7& Ong


38/66

1e find the O',J,:s disposition regarding Precinct No. * to be unclear. 3n the first paragraph ofthe dispositive portion of the challenged resolution& it directs the Provincial 5oard of anvassers ;toinclude in the municipal certificate of canvas of Silvino Jobos the si6ty"one (@ votes of privaterespondent Ong and #7& +=& or + votes of petitioner Jucero as reflected in the election returns('5 copy submitted as ;O',J, opy; of Precinct No. * (5arangay amaya"an& ascanvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard of anvassers for Silvino Jobos&; and ;to submit to the

ommission a computation of the votes of the contending parties including therein all the votes ofpetitioner Jucero (!ith alternative totals and private respondent Ong& in Precinct Nos. * and @ ofSilvino Jobos. . . .; On the other hand& in the fourth paragraph of the said dispositive portion& itorders the Provincial 5oard of anvassers& after ;including in the tabulation the results of the specialelection of Precinct No. +&; to ;decide the issue of the recount of the votes (ballots of Precinct No.* of Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection ode CandD to resolve thediscrepancy of the votes of petitioner Jucero in the same return& if such discrepancy of votes of thecandidate concerned !ould affect the over"all results of the election after the totality of the votes ofthe contending parties shall have been determined.;

Obviously& instead of ordering an outright recount of the ballots of Precinct No. *& the O',J,!ould first give full faith and credit to the


39/66

and laravall there is a reference to ,6hibit ;,&; the >oint Affidavit of Sabina >arito and 'evilyn Surio!herein they declare that after the voting the 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors unanimously approved totransfer the counting of votes to the 'unicipal 5uilding in the Poblacion of Silvino Jobos& !hich !asallegedly concurred in by all the !atchers of political parties and the candidates present& the alleged;counting; at the municipal building !as denied by no less than the 'unicipal ,lection Officer ofSilvino Jobos& Antonio /epace& and the 'unicipal /reasurer thereof& 'r. Gabriel 5asarte& in their

affidavits mar4ed as ,6hibit ;9; and ,6hibit ;G&;respectively. 1

Since there !as no counting of the votes of Precinct No. *& no valid election returns could be madeand any copy of election returns purporting to come therefrom is a fabrication. Arecountthereof&!hich presupposes aprior count& !ould obviously be un!arranted.

Only a count then of the votes of Precinct No. + !ould heretofore be in order. Sections #+)& #+$&and #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection ode are thus still inapplicable. And& in the light of !hat !e statedbefore in relation to the holding of a special election& such a count of the votes of Precinct No. *must& perforce& precede the special election in Precinct No. +.

33.

Ong:s first grievance in G. R. No. +$=7 is !ithout merit.

/he order of the O',J, for the correction of the manifest error in the municipal certificate of

canvass of Jas Navas !as made pursuant to the declaration made by this ourt in G. R. No. =$**(On% vs. CO'EEC 18that0

/he correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas is li4e!ise inorder. ,ven though a pre"proclamation issue is involved& thecorrection of the manifest error is allo!ed under Sec. $ of R. A. No.*@@.

Since no motion for reconsideration !as filed in that case& the decision therein became final andentry of 8udgment !as made on ) August 77+. onse


40/66


41/66

3n case a permanent vacancy shall occur in the Senate or House ofRepresentatives at least one ( year before the e6piration of theterm& the ommission shall call and hold a special election to fill thevacancy not earlier than si6ty (@= days nor longer than ninety (7=days after the occurrence of the vacancy. Ho!ever& in case of suchvacancy in the Senate& the special election shall be held

simultaneously !ith the ne6t succeeding regular election.A vie! !as e6pressed that !e should not hold the special election because the underlyingphilosophy for the prohibition to hold the special election if the vacancy occurred !ithin acertain period before the ne6t presidential election or the ne6t regular election& as the casemay be& is obviously the avoidance of the e6pense to be incurred in the holding of a specialelection !hen a regular election is& after all& less than a year a!ay. /he ourt ultimatelyresolved that the aforesaid constitutional and statutory proscriptions are inapplicable tospecial elections !hich may be called under Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection ode. 9irst&the special election in the former is to fill permanent vacancies in the Office of the President&ice President& and 'embers of ongress occurring after the election& !hile the specialelection under the latter is due to or by reason of a failure of election. Second& a specialelection under Section @ !ould entail minimal costs because it is limited to only the precinctsinvolved and to the candidates !ho& by the result of the election in a particular constituency&!ould be affected by the failure of election. On the other hand& the special election for theOffices of the President& ice President& and Senators !ould be nation"!ide& and that of aRepresentative& district"!ide. /hird& Section @& !hen specifically applied to the instant case&presupposes that no candidate had been proclaimed and therefore the people of the SecondJegislative istrict of Northern Samar !ould be unrepresented in the House ofRepresentatives until the special election shall ultimately determine the !inning candidate&such that if none is held& they !ould have no representation until the end of the term. underthe aforesaid constitutional and statutory provisions& the elected officials have already servedtheir constituencies for more than one"half of their terms of office. 9ourth& if the la! hadfound it fit to provide a specific and determinate time"frame for the holding of a specialelection under Section @& then it could have easily done so in Section ) of R. A. No. *@@.

Another serious obstacle to Ong:s proposition is that& considering the O',J,:s disposition of

Precinct No. * in the challenged Resolution& he !ould then be declared and proclaimed the dulyelected Representative of the Second Jegislative istrict of Northern Samar despite the fact that asearlier observed& there !as no counting of the votes of Precinct No. *& and the results of the districtelections for Representative !ould be affected by the failure of the election in Precinct No. +. /oaccept the proposition is to allo! a proclamation based on an incomplete canvass !here the finalresult !ould have been affected by the uncanvassed result of Precinct No. * and by the failure of theelection in Precinct No. + and to impose upon the people of the Second Jegislative istrict ofNorthern Samar a Representative !hose mandate is& at the very least& uncertain& and at the most&ine6istent.

3N 3,1 O9 AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG& 8udgment is hereby rendered0

3. 3S'3SS3NG& for lac4 of merit& the petition in G. R. No. +$=7% and

33. 3n G. R. No. +=*& 3R,/3NG the respondent ommission on ,lections to0

( Reconvene& in its main office of 'anila& !ithin five ($ days from notice hereof&the Special 5oard of anvassers of the municipality of Silvino Jobos& NorthernSamar& !hich shall then& as a special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors of Precinct No. *of said municipality& !ithin forty"eight ()- hours from its reconvening& count theballots of said Precinct No. *& and deliver to the special Provincial 5oard ofanvassers of the said Province a copy of the election returns%

(# Reconvene& in its main office in 'anila& !ithin the same period as aforestated& thespecial Provincial 5oard of anvassers of Northern Samar !hich shall then& !ithinseventy"t!o (*# hours from its reconvening0


42/66

(a 3nclude in the 'unicipal ertificate of anvass of Silvino Jobos (the total number of votes for petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero and forpetitioner >ose J. Ong& >r.& respectively& in Precinct No. * of SilvinoJobos as recorded in the election returns submitted by theaforementioned special 'unicipal 5oard of anvassers& and (# theforty"three ()+ votes for petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero and the t!o (#

votes for petitioner >ose J. Ong& >r. as reflected in the election returnsof Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon prepared& after a recount ofthe ballots& by the special 5oard of anvassers% and after suchinclusions to enter the ne! totals of the votes for the petitioners in theertificate of Provincial anvass%

(b Retabulate the total number of votes for 1ilmar P. Jucero for the'unicipality of Jas Navas& Northern Samar& !hich shall be t!othousand and five hundred thirty"seven (#&$+* as reflected in theStatement of otes (.,. 9orm #="A prepared and submitted by the'unicipal 5oard of anvassers of Jas Navas& and to enter the samein the ertificate of Provincial anvass%

(c After the accomplishment of all the foregoing& to sum up ane! inthe ertificate of Provincial anvass the canvassed municipalcertificates of canvass of all the municipalities of the SecondJegislative istrict of Northern Samar and if the same !ould establishthat the difference in votes bet!een petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero andpetitioner >ose J. Ong& >r. is less than t!o hundred and thirteen(#+& hence the failure of the election in Precinct No. + !ouldunavoidably and inevitably affect then the result of the election& toreport to the ommission on ,lections such fact and to furnish thelatter !ith a certified photocopy of the ertificate of Provincialanvass%

(+ 1ithin three (+ days after receipt of the aforesaid report from the specialProvincial 5oard of anvassers& to AJJ a special election in Precinct No. + ofSilvino Jobos& !hich shall be held not later than thirty (+= days from such call% a

copy of the election returns of said special election shall forth!ith be transmitted tothe Special Provincial 5oard of anvassers of Northern Samar& !hich shall thenenter the results thereof in its canvass and ma4e a final summation of the results inthe ertificate of Provincial anvass& and thereafter& pursuant to the Omnibus,lection ode& pertinent election la!s and rules and resolutions of the ommission&proclaim the !inning candidate for Representative of the Second Jegislative istrictof Northern Samar.

3f for any reason !hatsoever it !ould not be possible to immediately reconvene theSpecial 'unicipal 5oard of anvassers of Silvino Jobos and the Special Provincial5oard of anvassers of Northern Samar& the O',J, may create ne! ones.

No pronouncements as to costs.

SO OR,R,.

$arvasa, C.J., Cru+, )eliciano, Padilla, /idin, Re%alado, Romero, 'elo, uiason, Puno,2itu%, 1apunan and 'endo+a, JJ., concur.

/ellosillo, J., is on leave.

Paras vs. COMELEC (G.R. No. 123169. November4, 1996)


43/66

1!APRDANILO E. PARAS,petitioner&

vs.

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent.

PonenteK )R$CISCOFACTS:

Petitioner !as the incumbent Punong 5arangay !ho !on during the last regular barangay election. A

petition for his recall as Punong 5arangay !as filed by the registered voters of the barangay. At least

#7.+=Q of the registered voters signed the petition& !ell above the #$Q re


44/66

the re


45/66

/he sub8ect provision of the Jocal Government ode provides0

Sec. *). imitations on Recall. F (a Any elective local official may be the sub8ect ofa recall election only once during his term of office for loss of confidence.

(b No recall shall ta4e place !ithin one ( year from the date of the official:sassumption to office or one ( year immediately preceding a re%ular local election.

C,mphasis addedD

3t is a rule in statutory construction that every part of the statute must be interpreted !ith reference tothe conte6t&i.e.& that every part of the statute must be considered together !ith the other parts& and4ept subservient to the general intent of the !hole enactment.4/he evident intent of Section *) is tosub8ect an elective local official to recall election once during his term of office. Paragraph (bconstrued together !ith paragraph (a merely designates the period !hen such elective local officialmay be sub8ect of a recall election& that is& during the second year of his term of office. /hus&subscribing to petitioner:s interpretation of the phrase re%ular local electionto include the SK election!ill unduly circumscribe the novel provision of the Jocal Government ode on recall& a mode ofremoval of public officers by initiation of the people before the end of his term. And if the SK election!hich is set by R.A No. *-=- to be held every three years from 'ay 77@ !ere to be deemed !ithinthe purvie! of the phrase ;re%ular local election;& as erroneously insisted by petitioner& then no recallelection can be conducted rendering inutile the recall provision of the Jocal Government ode.

3n the interpretation of a statute& the ourt should start !ith the assumption that the legislatureintended to enact an effective la!& and the legislature is not presumed to have done a vain thing inthe enactment of a statute.5An interpretation should& if possible& be avoided under !hich a statute orprovision being construed is defeated& or as other!ise e6pressed& nullified& destroyed& emasculated&repealed& e6plained a!ay& or rendered insignificant& meaningless& inoperative or nugatory.!

3t is li4e!ise a basic precept in statutory construction that a statute should be interpreted in harmony!ith the onstitution./hus& the interpretation of Section *) of the Jocal Government ode&specifically paragraph (b thereof& should not be in conflict !ith the onstitutional mandate of Section+ of Article B of the onstitution to ;enact a local government code !hich shall provide for a moreresponsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system ofdecentralization !ith e##ective mechanism o# recall& initiative& and referendum . . . .;

'oreover& petitioner:s too literal interpretation of the la! leads to absurdity !hich !e cannotcountenance. /hus& in a case& the ourt made the follo!ing admonition0

1e admonish against a too"literal reading of the la! as this is apt to constrict rather thanfulfill its purpose and defeat the intention of its authors. /hat intention is usually found notin ;the letter that 4illeth but in the spirit that vivifieth;. . . 8

/he spirit& rather than the letter of a la! determines its construction% hence& a statute& as inthis case& must be read according to its spirit and intent.

9inally& recall election is potentially disruptive of the normal !or4ing of the local government unitnecessitating additional e6penses& hence the prohibition against the conduct of recall election oneyear immediately preceding the re%ular local election. /he proscription is due to the pro6imity of thene6t regular election for the office of the local elective official concerned. /he electorate couldchoose the official:s replacement in the said election !ho certainly has a longer tenure in office thana successor elected through a recall election. 3t !ould& therefore& be more in 4eeping !ith the intentof the recall provision of the ode to construe re%ular local electionas one referring to an election

!here the office held by the local elective official sought to be recalled !ill be contested and be filledby the electorate.

Nevertheless& recall at this time is no longer possible because of the limitation stated under Section*) (b of the ode considering that the ne6t regular election involving the barangay office concernedis barely seven (* months a!ay& the same having been scheduled on 'ay 77*. 9

AOR3NGJ& the petition is hereby dismissed for having become moot and academic. /hetemporary restraining order issued by the ourt on >anuary #& 77@& en8oining the recall electionshould be as it is hereby made permanent.

SO OR,R,.


46/66

$arvasa, C.J., Padilla, Re%alado, Romero, /ellosillo, 'elo, Puno, 2itu%, 1apunan, 'endo+a,&ermosisima, Jr., Pan%ani"an and Torres, Jr., JJ., concur.

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT'anila

,N 5AN

G.R. N. 11310 (%? 20, 1994

@ILMAR P. LUCERO, petitioner&vs.COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS *+ (OSE L. ONG, (R., respondents.

G.R. N. 113509 (%? 20, 1994

(OSE L. ONG, (R., petitioner&vs.COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS *+ @ILMAR P. LUCERO, respondents.

Cesar . Sevilla * ssociates #or 5ilmar ucero.

$apolean . Rama and Remollo 'elocoton * ssociates #or Jose . On%, Jr.

DAVIDE, (R., J.:

After the issues had been 8oined in these consolidated cases& the ourt resolved to give due courseto the petitions therein and to decide the cases on the merits. 3t can no longer allo! the parties todelay these cases. /heir legal s4irmishes& !hich have unduly magnified uncomplicated issues& haveeffectively deprived the people of the Second Jegislative istrict of Northern Samar ofrepresentation in the House of Representatives for more than t!o years no!.

/hese cases are seose J. Ong& >r. vs. ommission on

,lections and 1ilmar P. Jucero&; !hich !e finally resolved on ## April 77+.

1

/he petitioners !eret!o of the five candidates 2for the Second Jegislative istrict of Northern Samar in the synchronizednational and local elections held on 'ay 77#.

/he canvass of the Provincial 5oard of anvassers (P5 of Northern Samar credited >ose J. Ong&>r. !ith #)*# votes and 1ilmar P. Jucero !ith #)&=@- votes& or a lead by Ong of #=) votes.Ho!ever& this tally did not include the results of Precinct No. * of the municipality of Silvino Jobos&!here the submitted election returns had not been canvassed because they !ere illegible% ofPrecinct No. + of Silvino Jobos& !here the ballot bo6es !ere snatched and no election !as held%and of Precinct No. @& also of Silvino Jobos& !here all copies of the election returns !ere missing.

On ## 'ay 77#& Jucero as4ed the ommission on ,lections (O',J,& in SPA No. 7#"#-#& to0

. 9orth!ith order Respondent Provincial 5oard of anvassers for Northern Samar tosuspend the proclamation of Private Respondent >ose J. Ong& >r.%

#. irect Respondent Provincial 5oard of anvassers for Northern Samar to correctthe ertificate of anvass (,9 #= for Jas Navas and& accordingly& to correct thetotal votes so far counted by it for Petitioner from #)&=@- to #)&=--& thus reducing themargin it found in favor of Private Respondent >ose J. Ong& >r. from #=) to -) votesonly%

+. Order a special election in Precinct +& 5arangay Gusaran& Silvino Jobos&pursuant to Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection ode%


47/66

). Order a recount of the votes for Representative of the Second istrict of NorthernSamar in Precinct @& 5arangay /ubgon& and Precinct *& 5arangay amayaan& bothof Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+) of the Omnibus ,lection ode%

$. Order a recount of the votes for Representative in the $# precincts herein aboveenumerated in order to correct ;manifest errors; pursuant to Section $ of Republic Act*@@ and for this purpose order the impounding and safe4eeping of the ballot bo6es of all

said precincts in order to preserve the integrity of the ballots and other electionparaphernalia contained therein. 3

On # >une 77#& the O',J,& acting on Jucero:s urgent manifestation& directed the P5 to desistfrom reconvening until further orders.

On - >une 77#& Ong moved to lift the suspension of the proceedings by the P5& !hich Juceroopposed on = >une 77# on the ground that the canvass could not be completed even if the P5!ere to reconvene because no election !as held in Precinct No. + (5arangay Gusaran of SilvinoJobos and there !as no canvassing of the votes in Precinct No. * (5arangay amayaan andPrecinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon both of Silvino Jobos.

On + >une 77+& the O',J,en "ancpromulgated a resolution& the dispositive portion of !hichreads0

Accordingly& the ommission hereby orders the Provincial ,lection

Supervisor of Northern Samar to bring to the ommission !ithin three (+days from receipt hereof the ballot bo6es from Precinct * and @ of SilvinoJobos& to be escorted by representatives from the petitioner and therespondents as !ell as other parties !ho have an interest to protect& and tonotify said parties hereof. /he 'unicipal /reasurer of said to!n is directed toturn over custody of said ballot bo6es to the Provincial ,lection Supervisor&and the 4eys thereof shall li4e!ise be turned over by the appropriate officialsin custody thereof to the P,S& !ho shall in turn give one 4ey for each ballotbo6 to the duly authorized representatives of the petitioner and therespondent.

/he ommission li4e!ise orders the ,lection Registrar of Silvino Jobos&Northern Samar& and the hairman and members of the 5oards of ,lection3nspectors of Precincts * and @ of said municipality to appear before the

ommission !ithin three (+ days from receipt hereof.5elo! the signatures of the hairman and the si6 ommissioners& ho!ever& hairman hristian S.'onsod and ommissioners Haydee 5. orac& ario . Rama and Regalado ,. 'aambong directedas follo!s0

1e vote in favor of this resolution e6cept that portion !hich denied the correctionof the ertificate of anvass for Jas Navas. orrection of the ertificate ofanvass for Jas Navas is in order in vie! of the testimony of the electionregistrar of Jas Navas to the effect that 1ilmar Jucero garnered #&$+* votes forJas Navas and not #&$*. Petition for correction !as duly filed by Jucero !ith theProvincial 5oard of anvassers of Northern Samar on 'ay 7& 77#. /heProvincial 5oard of anvassers of Northern Samar is therefore directed toretabulate the total number of votes for Jas Navas for Jucero and enter the samein the Provincial ertificate of anvass. 4

On $ >une 77#& Jucero filed an urgent motion to constitute a Special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors(S5,3 to count the votes of Precincts Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos. 5

On #= >une 77#& Ong& in a special civil action for certiorarifiled !ith this ourt and subseune 77# and its Resolution of + >une 77#.


48/66

On #+ ecember 77#& this ourt promulgated its decision in G. R. No. =$**& the dispositiveportion of !hich reads0

1H,R,9OR,& the petition for certiorariis GRAN/, and a !rit ofpreliminary in8unction is hereby 3SSI, directing the O',J, to,AS, and ,S3S/ from implementing its order of >une #& 77#&and its resolution dated >une +& 77#& and the same are hereby

declared NIJJ393,. onse


49/66

/he correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas is li4e!ise in order. ,ven thougha pre"proclamation issue is involved& the correction of the manifest error is allo!ed underSection $ of R. A. No. *@@. 11

onformably !ith the aforesaid modified 8udgment in G. R. No. =$**& SPA No. 7#"#-# !as raffledto the 9irst ivision of the O',J, !hich conducted hearings thereon and received thearguments and evidence of both parties !ho then submitted their respective memoranda on #$ >une

77). Ho!ever& during the consultations on the case by the 'embers of the 9irst ivision& theconcurrence of at least t!o of them could not be obtained% accordingly& pursuant to the O',J,Rules& the case !as elevated for proper disposition to the O',J, en "ancto !hich the partiessubmitted their respective memoranda on 7 November 77+. 12

On * >anuary 77)& the O',J, en "ancpromulgated a resolution 13!hose dispositive portionreads as follo!s0

. /o direct the special Provincial 5oard of anvassers for Northern Samar (a toinclude in the municipal certificate of canvass of Silvino Jobos the forty"three ()+votes of petitioner Jucero and the t!o (# votes of private respondent Ong asreflected in the election returns of Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon prepared bythe special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors constituted by the ommission to recountthe votes (ballots in said precinct& as canvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard ofanvassers for Silvino Jobos% (b to include in the municipal certificate of canvass ofSilvino Jobos& the si6ty"one (@ votes of private respondent Ong and #7& +=& or +votes of petitioner Jucero as reflected in the election returns ('5 opy submittedas ;omelec opy; of Precinct No. * (5arangay amaya"an& as canvassed by thespecial 'unicipal 5oard of anvassers for Silvino Jobos% (c to retabulate the totalnumber of votes of petitioner Jucero for the 'unicipality of Jas Navas and to enter inthe provincial certificate of canvass the correct total !hich is t!o thousand fivehundred thirty"seven (#&$+* as reflected in the Statement of otes (. ,. 9orm #="Aprepared and submitted by the 'unicipal 5oard of anvassers for Jas Navas% and(d to submit to the ommission a computation of the votes of the contending partiesincluding therein all the votes of petitioner Jucero (!ith alternative totals and privaterespondent Ong& in Precinct Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos and the total votes ofpetitioner Jucero in the 'unicipality of Jas Navas as corrected. Ho!ever& under no

circumstances should the 5oard proclaim any !inning candidate until instructed to doso by the ommission%

#. /o issue an Order calling for a special election in the last remaining Precinct No.+ (5arangay Gusaran of the 'unicipality of Silvino Jobos if 8ustified by the result ofthe canvass by the Provincial 5oard of anvassers for Northern Samar& and to notifythe parties of the schedule of election activities for that precinct% and

+. After including in the tabulation the results of the special election of Precinct No.+& to decide the issue of the recount of the votes (ballots of Precinct No. * of SilvinoJobos& pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection ode& to resolve thediscrepancy of the votes of petitioner Jucero in the same return& if such discrepancyof votes of the candidates concerned !ould affect the over"all results of the electionafter the totality of the votes of the contending parties shall have been determined.

5oth Jucero and Ong have come to this ourt by !ay of separate special civil actions for certioraritochallenge the Resolution.

3n G. R. No. +=*& Jucero maintains that ( the count of the ballots in Precinct No. * of SilvinoJobos must be unconditional because the election returns therefrom are invalid% and (# his chancesin the special election in Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos !ould be spoiled if the returns for PrecinctNo. * !ere to be included beforehand in the canvass.

3n G. R. No. +$=7& Ong


50/66

any appeal% and (# the authority of the O',J, to call for a special election in Precinct No. +almost t!o years after the regular election.

As !e see it& the core issues in these consolidated cases are0

( 1hether there should first be a count of the ballotsof Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos before determiningthe necessity of holding a special election in Precinct

No. + of Silvino Jobos0(# 1hether the O',J, acted !ith grave abuse ofdiscretion in ordering the correction of the allegedmanifest error in the 'unicipal ertificate of anvassof Jas Navas% and

(+ 1hether the O',J, acted !ith grave abuse ofdiscretion in calling for a special election in PrecinctNo. + after almost t!o (# years& or more specificallyafter one ( year and ten (= months& follo!ing theday of the synchronized elections.

1e shall ta4e up these issuesseriatim.

3.

/he ans!er to the first issue is in the affirmative.1e find the O',J,:s disposition regarding Precinct No. * to be unclear. 3n the first paragraph ofthe dispositive portion of the challenged resolution& it directs the Provincial 5oard of anvassers ;toinclude in the municipal certificate of canvas of Silvino Jobos the si6ty"one (@ votes of privaterespondent Ong and #7& +=& or + votes of petitioner Jucero as reflected in the election returns('5 copy submitted as ;O',J, opy; of Precinct No. * (5arangay amaya"an& ascanvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard of anvassers for Silvino Jobos&; and ;to submit to theommission a computation of the votes of the contending parties including therein all the votes ofpetitioner Jucero (!ith alternative totals and private respondent Ong& in Precinct Nos. * and @ ofSilvino Jobos. . . .; On the other hand& in the fourth paragraph of the said dispositive portion& itorders the Provincial 5oard of anvassers& after ;including in the tabulation the results of the specialelection of Precinct No. +&; to ;decide the issue of the recount of the votes (ballots of Precinct No.* of Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection ode CandD to resolve thediscrepancy of the votes of petitioner Jucero in the same return& if such discrepancy of votes of thecandidate concerned !ould affect the over"all results of the election after the totality of the votes ofthe contending parties shall have been determined.;

Obviously& instead of ordering an outright recount of the ballots of Precinct No. *& the O',J,!ould first give full faith and credit to the


51/66

a leading candidate over that of his closest rival in the latter precincts is less than the total number ofvotes in the precinct !here there !as failure of election& then such failure !ould certainly affect ;theresult of the election;% hence& a special election must be held. onseoint Affidavit of Sabina >arito and 'evilyn Surio!herein they decla

digested election law review cases

Documents