Sie sind auf Seite 1von 21

ELECTION

CONTESTS
Election Contests
• - any adversary proceeding by which
matters involving title or claim of title
to an elective office, made before or
after the proclamation of the winner,
is settled whether or not contestant is
claiming office in dispute.
Jurisdiction over Election
Contest
Original and Exclusive:
• President and Vice- President - Supreme Court
en banc/PET
• Senator- Senate Electoral Tribunal
• Representatives- House of Representative
Electoral Tribunal
• Regional/Provincial/City- COMELEC
• Municipal- Regional Trial Court
• Barangay/SK- Municipal Trial Court
• Sanggunian Kabataan- DILG
Appellate Jurisdiction
1. For decision of RTC and MTC
a. Appeal exclusively to the COMELEC
b. COMELEC decision shall be final and executory

2. For decisions of COMELEC


a. Petition for certiorari with the SC within 30
days from receipt of decision on the ground of
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction or violation of due process.
• 3. For decisions of Electoral Tribunal
a. Petition for review on certiorari with the
SC on the ground of ground of grave abuse
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction or violation of due process.
Election Protest
• refers to an election contest relating to the
election and returns of elective officials,
grounded on frauds or irregularities in the
conduct of the elections, the casting and
counting of the ballots and the
preparation and canvassing of returns. The
issue is who obtained the plurality of valid
votes cast.
Requisites:
• 1. Must be filed by a candidate who has
filed a certificate of candidacy and has
been voted upon for the same office.
• 2. On grounds of fraud, terrorism,
irregularities, or illegal acts committed
before, during and after the casting and
counting of votes.
• 3. Must be filed within 10 days from
proclamation of the results of the election.
Rosal vs COMELEC
Facts:
• Rosal and Imperial were candidates for mayor
of Legaspi City on May 10,2004. Petitioner was
proclaimed the winner.

• On May 24, 2004, respondent instituted a


petition to annul the proclamation. On July 6,
2004, it was superseded by the filing of an
election protest by the respondent with the
COMELEC on grounds of irregularities in the
election.
Issue:

Whether or not the requisites of


election protest are present in the
case.
Ruling:
• Yes. On the first requisite, Imperial was a candidate
who has filed a certificate of candidacy in the mayoralty
position of Legaspi City and has been voted upon for the same
office.
• On the second requisite, the irregularities are based on
miscounting, misreading, misappreciation of votes, sbstitue
voting, disenfranchisement of voters,substitution and padding
of votes and other alleged irregularities committed during and
after the casting and counting of votes.
• On the third requisite, the respondent filed the protest
within the allowable time from the proclamation of the results
of the election since the period for filing an election protest is
suspended by the pendency of a pre-proclamation contest.
Vinzons-Chato vs HRET
• Facts:
• Vinzons- Chato ran for the position of a
representative of the second Legislative District
of Camarines Norte in the May 10, 2010
elections.
• She lost to Elmer Panotes who was
proclaimed the winner on May 12, 2010.
She filed an electoral protest before the
HRET on May 24, 2010 assailing the results in all
the 160 clustered precincts in four municipalities.
Issue:

Whether or not the requisites


of election protest are present
in the case.
Ruling:
• Yes. The 2011 Rules of HRET provides that:

• RULE 16. Election Protest. – A verified petition contesting the


election or returns of any Member of the House of
Representatives shall be filed by any candidate who has duly
filed a certificate of candidacy and has been voted for the
same office, within fifteen (15) days after the proclamation of
the winner. The party filing the protest shall be designated as
the protestant while the adverse party shall be known as the
protestee.

• Hence, the filing of the protest by Chato on May 24, 2010


sufficed this requisite.
Further, Rule 16 under the 2011 HRET Rules states that an
election protest shall state:
• 1. The date of proclamation of the winner and the number of
votes obtained by the parties per proclamation;
• 2. The total number of contested individual and clustered
precincts per municipality or city;
• 3. The individual and clustered precinct numbers and location
of the contested precincts; and
• 4. The specific acts or omissions complained of constituting
the electoral frauds, anomalies or irregularities in the
contested precincts.
• In the present case, Chato explicitly assailed the results in all
the 160 clustered precincts in four (4) municipalities, namely:
Daet, Vinzons, Basud and Mercedes.

• Pursuant to Rule 37 of the 2011 Rules of the HRET, Chato


validly designated forty (40) pilot clustered precincts,
equivalent to 25% of the total number of protested clustered
precincts, in which revision of ballots shall be conducted. The
initial revision of ballots, conducted on March 21 - 24, 2011,
showed a substantial discrepancy between the votes of the
parties per physical count vis-a-vis their votes per election
returns in the following precincts of the Municipalities of
Basud and Daet.
Maliksi vs COMELEC
• Facts:

During the 2010 Elections, the Municipal Board of


Canvassers proclaimed Saquilayan the winner for the
position of Mayor of Imus, Cavite. Maliksi, the candidate
who garnered the second highest number of votes,
brought an election protest in the Regional Trial Court
(RTC) in Imus, Cavite alleging that there were irregularities
in the counting of votes in 209 clustered precincts.
Issue:

• Whether or not the requisites of


election protest are present.
Ruling:
• Yes. On the first requisite, Maliksi was a candidate
who has filed a certificate of candidacy in the mayoralty
position of the Municipality of Imus, Cavite and has been
voted upon for the same office.
• On the second requisite, the protestant alleged
that there is an irregularity in the counting of votes.
• On the third requisite, the respondent filed the
protest within the allowable time from the results of the
election.
Payment of Fees
• The rules on timely perfection of an
appeal in an election case requires two
different appeal fees; one to be paid in the
trial court together with the filing of the
notice of appeal; and the other to be paid
to the COMELEC Cash division within the
15-day period from the filing of the notice
of appeal.
Certification of Absence of
Forum Shopping
• The requirement under Supreme
Court Circular No. 04-94 for a
Certification of Absence of Forum-
Shopping applies to election
cases. ( Loyola vs CA, 245 SCRA
477)