Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Date of Elections
National, District, Local elective officials
2nd Monday of May 1992 and Every
3 years after
Regional elective local officials o
Held:
These grounds do not warrant failure of
election as none of them fall under the 3
instances where failure of election may be
declared.
Missing names in voters list remedy is
inclusion or exclusion or annulment of
book of voters.
More than half failed to vote because
others already voted for themremedy is
challenge identity of voter during voting
inside the polling place.
Less votesshould have been raised
before the BEI that counted the votes.
Control data of election returns were not
filled should have been raised before the
Board of Canvassers that canvassed the
election returns.
Unsecured ballot boxes a mere formal
defect that does not affect their integrity.
B.
If the President, VP, Senate
President and House of Speaker die,
resign, or a re permanently disabled at the
start of term
o Congress legislates the manner in
which one who is to act as
President shall be selected.
Nature of barangay elections
Non-partisan and conducted in an
expeditious and inexpensive manner
Romualdez v. RTC
Members:
o Public school official most senior in
rank
o Local Civil Registrar
Disqualification:
Relationship within the fourth civil degree
to each other and to any incumbent
elective official of the city or municipality.
Powers:
Acts on all applications for registration,
transfer, reactivation, correction of entry
Deactivated registration
Cancels registration
Decides challenges on the right to register
When: quarterly
Challenges to right to register
Grounds: not specified
Who can challenge:
Any voter, candidate
Or representative of a registered political
party
Common rules for inclusion and exclusion
proceedings and correction of names:
Petition refers to 1 precinct, impleads the
ERB
Any voter, candidate or party may
intervene
Decision is based on evidence within 10
days from filing
Heard and decided within 10 days from
filing
Appeal is decided within 10 days from
receipt
Not later than 15 days before electionday
Decision is final and executor
If the question is whether the voter is real,
non-appearance on the day set for hearing
is prima facie evidence the voter is
fictitious.
Grounds for inclusions:
a. Disapproval of application for registration
by the ERB
b. Removal of name from list of voters
Grounds for exclusion: not specified
Who can file for inclusion?
Any person whose application was
disapproved or name was removed.
Who can file for exclusion?
a. Any registered voter
b. Representative of a political party
c. Election officer
Where to file inclusion and exclusion: MTC
When to include? Anytime except:
a. 105 days prior to regular election
b. 75 days prior to special election
When to exclude? Anytime except:
a. 100 days prior to regular election
b.
What
a.
b.
Who annuls?
The Commission upon verified petition of:
- Any voter
- Election officer
- Duly registered political party
Limitations:
No ruling, order, or decision annulling the
book of voters shall be executed within 90
days before an election.
Facts:
In a special election for district representative,
there were 39, 801 registered voters in one
municipality. One candidate obtained 482 votes
while the other got 35,581 votes. During
canvassing, he objected to the returns of that
municipality on the ground that they appeared to
be tampered with or falsified. Owing to the great
excess of votes. In that municipality, there were
only 42 polling places, which if multiplied by 300
results in 12,600 voters only, way below the
36,663 who cast their votes, or a difference of
23,947 ghost voters. In his petition however, he
admitted that there was an error because the
municipality had 148 polling places. But he said
that if the returns from the municipality are
excluded, he will win by 5,301 votes. But the
objections were denied for being filed out of time.
The other candidate was proclaimed.
He petitioned to annul the proclamation and
prayed for his proclamation. While these were
pending however, a candidate for governor
petitioned to annul the list of coters of the
municipality. It was opposed by the proclaimed
congressional candidate. The Comelec annulled
the list of voters in the ground that of massive
irregularities committed in its preparation and for
being statistically improbable. Another list was
prepared yielding only 12,555 names.
He then filed a supplemental pleasing to entreat
the annulment in his pending petitions to annul
proclamation of the other candidate and for his
proclamation. But the Comelec dismissed it on
the ground that while there may he padding of
the list of voters, it cannot annul the elections
otherwise it disenfranchises the good or valid
votes.
Padding of voters list, like fraud and terrorism, is
not a proper issue to be raised in a preproclamation controversy, but in an election
protest.
Held:
There is no great excess of votes since
only 36,000 voted out of 39,000 registered
voters.
The Lagumbay case, heavily relied in by
petitioner, deals with the preparation of
manufactured returns while this case
deals with the preparation of the list of
voters, a matter which is not reflected in
the face of the returns.
Padding of list of voters is not a proper
ground in a pre-proclamation controversy.
The new list of voters cannot be applied to
determine the number of cotes in a
previous election. The Comelec is not
empowered to annul a previous election
on the bases of a subsequent annulment
of voters list. It has no retroactive effect.
In Bashier vs. Comelec, it was held that
the subsequent annulment of voters list in
a separate proceedings where the
protagonists are not parties, cannot
retroactively and without due proves annul
the previous election.
The voters list in the previous elections is
valid and unquestioned prior to and on the
day of election.
It was the only legitimate roster used a
basis for voting.
In the absence of prior petition to set it
aside, it is considered conclusive evidence
of persons who could vote in that
particular election.
Since the winning candidate was already
proclaimed, the pre-proclamation case
dies, the next remedy is an election
protest before a proper forum, which is the
House of Representatives Electoral
Tribunal. (Ututalum v. Comelec)
Sarangani v. Comelec
Facts:
Way back in the 1950s and during the martial law
era, the dead, the birds and the bees voted in
Lanao. Several precincts and their books of voters
were sought to be annulled on the ground that
they contained ghost voters. It was opposed by
the incumbent mayor and 23 punong barangays
on the ground that the move is merely intended
to diminish his bailiwicks. The Comelec
Held:
It is erroneous for Comelec to rule that
Padian Torogan is a ghost precinct because
it is a barangay which should have at least
1 precinct. But since it is a factual matter
to be determined by Comelec in the
exercise of its administrative power, the
Court refuses to review.
It is not impossible for barangay not to
have actual inhabitants because people
migrate.
A barangay may officially exist on the
record and the fact that nobody resides
there does not result in its automatic
cessation as a unity of local government.
Under the LGC, abolition of a local
government unit may be done by
Congress if it involves a province, city or
municipality.
If it involves a barangay, it may be done
by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan or
Sangguniang Panlungsod concerned
subject to plebiscite, except in Metro
Manila areas and cultural communities.
The findings of Comelec, being an
administrative agency, cannot be reversed
on appeal or certiorari especially when no
significant facts and circumstances are
shown to have been overlooked or
disregarded which when considered would
have substantially affected the outcome of
the case.
No voter is disenfranchised because no
such voter exists.
Suffrage is not tampered with when a list
of fictitious voters is excluded from
election.
Suffrage is conferred by the Constitution
only on citizens who are qualified to vote
and who are not otherwise disqualified by
law.
The exclusion of non-existent voters all
the more protects the validity and
credibility of the electoral process as well