Balindong v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: During the 1967 general elections for the mayoralty of Ganassi, Lanao del Sur, Uso Dan Aguam was proclaimed Mayor-elect. Alim Balindong, a rival candidate, filed a suit for annulment of elections in certain precincts, which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Subsequently, Balindong filed a petition with the Commission on Elections (Comelec) seeking the annulment of the proclamation and the opening of the ballot box for Precinct 8, alleging fraud, irregularities, and tampering of the election return for Precinct 8, which allegedly reduced his votes. Procedural History: The Comelec, in a minute resolution, upheld its power to inquire into the alleged irregularities and to open the ballot box for Precinct 8. This was affirmed by the Supreme Court in a prior instance. The Comelec then investigated Case RR-612. The investigation revealed that the municipal canvassing board was constituted with substitute members recommended by the Liberal Party, despite some substituted members belonging to the Nacionalista Party. Furthermore, the canvassing was transferred from Ganassi to Marawi City without proper notice to all candidates and a member of the canvassing board. The election return for Precinct 8 showed alterations in the votes for Alim Balindong, changing his votes from 13 to 8, which resulted in Uso Dan Aguam being proclaimed Mayor-elect by a margin of 3 votes. The ballot box copy of the election return for Precinct 8, however, showed the original entry of 13 votes for Balindong, though it was signed only by the LP inspector and its preparation was disowned by the members. The Comelec issued a decision annulling the canvass and proclamation, declaring the ballot box copy of the election return invalid, and directing the board of inspectors to file a petition for correction of the election return. The Petition: Alim Balindong filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus seeking to nullify the Comelec's decision regarding the invalidity of the election return for Precinct 8 and the directive to file a petition for correction. Uso Dan Aguam filed an appeal by certiorari seeking to annul the Comelec's decision annulling his proclamation.
Issue(s)
Whether the canvass and proclamation of Uso Dan Aguam as Mayor-elect of Ganassi on November 20, 1967, were valid. Whether the election return for Precinct 8, Ganassi, Lanao del Sur, particularly the entry of votes for Alim Balindong, was validly altered. Whether the Commission on Elections erred in declaring the ballot box copy of the election return for Precinct 8 invalid and in directing the board of inspectors to file a petition for correction.
Ruling
The Supreme Court granted Alim Balindong's petition in L-29610 and denied Uso Dan Aguam's petition in L-29617. The Court declared null and void the Comelec's decision insofar as it pronounced that there was no valid entry of votes for Alim Balindong in the election return for Precinct 8 and insofar as it directed the board of inspectors to file a petition for correction. The Court directed the Comelec to instruct the reconstituted board of canvassers to recanvass the returns for Mayor, count thirteen (13) votes for Alim Balindong in the return for Precinct 8, and thereafter proclaim the winning candidate. The Comelec's decision was affirmed in all other respects.
Ratio Decidendi
On the validity of the canvass and proclamation: The Supreme Court affirmed the Comelec's finding that the canvass and proclamation of Uso Dan Aguam were null and void. The Court cited two primary reasons: (1) The canvassing board was illegally constituted because substitute members were recommended by the Liberal Party, not the Nacionalista Party to which the disqualified members belonged, contrary to Section 167 of the Revised Election Code and the ruling in Ibuna vs. Commission on Elections. (2) There was a lack of proper notice to candidates and a member of the canvassing board regarding the transfer of the canvassing meeting from Ganassi to Marawi City, which contravened Comelec's Resolution RR-544 and prejudiced the candidates' right to be present and observe the proceedings. The Court found the explanation for the transfer and the lack of written notice to be insufficient and indicative of an intent to conduct the canvass without proper oversight. On the tampering of the election return for Precinct 8: The Supreme Court found that the election return for Precinct 8 was indeed tampered with, specifically the alteration of Alim Balindong's votes from "Thirteen" (13) to "Eight" (8). The Court meticulously detailed the evidence supporting this conclusion, including the differing ink colors and handwriting in the altered entries, the violation of Section 154 of the Election Code by making alterations after the announcement of results and issuance of certificates of votes, the lack of initials for the corrections, the unsigned tally sheet, and the fact that the ballot box copy, which remained unaltered, was signed only by the LP inspector. The Court emphasized that the people's will should not be frustrated by the use of false or tampered returns. On the invalidity of the ballot box copy and the directive for correction: The Supreme Court ruled that the Comelec erred in declaring the ballot box copy of the election return for Precinct 8 invalid and in directing the board of inspectors to file a petition for correction. The Court reasoned that while the ballot box copy was irregular, the original entries of "Thirteen" (13) votes for Alim Balindong were corroborated by other evidence, particularly the official certificates of votes of candidates issued to watchers. The Court held that when an election return has been tampered, but the original entries can be salvaged and ascertained, those original entries should be considered for canvassing purposes. The Court cited Pacis vs. Commission on Elections to support the principle that Comelec has the power to ascertain and use the true result of the voting if it can be determined. Therefore, the original entry of 13 votes for Balindong should be counted, and the directive for a judicial correction was unnecessary and inappropriate given the circumstances.
Main Doctrine
Election returns should be maintained inviolate. When an election return has been tampered and it is still possible to salvage and ascertain the original entries of votes prior to such tampering, the votes originally entered should be considered as votes in said return for purposes of canvass.