Villalon v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Ernesto Villalon sought to annul a resolution of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) that declared an election return for Precinct 20 of Kibawe, Bukidnon, as "obviously manufactured" and unfit for canvassing. The return pertained to the election for Mayor in November 1967. Procedural History: The COMELEC, in a previous case involving the same parties and precinct (Villalon v. Comelec, L-29394, Sept. 30, 1969, 29 SCRA 671), conducted hearings to determine the genuineness of the election return. The COMELEC found that while most copies of the return credited Villalon with 525 votes and respondent Arturo Seriña with 76 votes, the provincial treasurer's copy showed Villalon with 225 votes, with the word 'two' appearing retraced. The COMELEC concluded that the returns, as prepared by the board of inspectors before tampering, credited Villalon with 525 votes, Seriña with 76, Inghog with 41, and Sunico with zero. However, the COMELEC found the COMELEC copy, municipal treasurer's copy, and ballot box copy to be "obviously manufactured" due to statistical improbabilities and discrepancies with the number of ballots used and received. The provincial treasurer's copy was found to have been tampered with. The Petition: Villalon filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus to annul the COMELEC resolution, enjoin its enforcement, and compel the use of the COMELEC copy of the return (crediting him with 525 votes) as the basis for the canvass, leading to his proclamation as Mayor.
Issue(s)
Whether the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion or acted in excess of jurisdiction in holding that the election return for Precinct 20 of Kibawe, Bukidnon, was obviously manufactured and should be rejected from the canvass. Whether statistical improbability, based on data appearing on the face of the return and evidence aliunde, is a sufficient ground for rejecting an election return.
Ruling
The petition is granted. The COMELEC's Resolution No. RR-704 dated May 21, 1970, is annulled and set aside. The COMELEC is ordered to direct the Municipal Board of Canvassers of Kibawe, Bukidnon, to include the COMELEC copy of the election return for Precinct 20, showing petitioner Villalon with 525 votes and respondent Seriña with 76 votes, in the canvass for the position of Mayor. The Municipal Board of Canvassers is ordered to act in accordance with this decision.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion or acted in excess of jurisdiction in holding the return as manufactured: The Court ruled that the decisive issue was whether the COMELEC's findings and conclusions, based on the data on the face of the return, justified its determination that the return was "obviously manufactured." The Court referenced Tagoranao v. Comelec and Demafiles v. Comelec, emphasizing that the case must rise or fall on inferences drawn from the data on the face of the return, and evidence aliunde cannot be used to establish statistical improbability. The Court found that the COMELEC's conclusion of statistical improbability was based on factors such as the unusually high number of votes for Villalon (525) compared to other candidates (highest at 315), the total votes for other positions being significantly lower than the votes for Mayor, and discrepancies between the votes credited and the number of ballots used and received. These factors, appearing on the face of the return, were deemed sufficient to support the COMELEC's finding of manufactured returns. On the issue of whether statistical improbability is a sufficient ground for rejection: The Court clarified that while statistical improbability, evident from the face of the return, can be a basis for rejection, the evidence aliunde cannot be used to establish such improbability. Evidence aliunde may only be used to overcome a finding of statistical improbability. The Court noted that the Lagumbay doctrine of statistical improbability, relied upon by respondents, has not been consistently followed and should not be unduly expanded beyond its precise factual setting. The Court distinguished cases involving excess votes, stating that such excess must be a mathematical impossibility, not merely a statistical improbability, to warrant rejection. In this case, the Court found that the discrepancies noted by the COMELEC, such as the omission of data on voters and ballots and the difference in pencil strokes, when considered together with the statistical improbability, provided a basis for the COMELEC's conclusion. However, the Court also considered the tally sheet, which showed Villalon receiving fewer votes, and concluded that while this raised questions, it did not constitute "clear and indubitable evidence" of tampering sufficient to disregard the return at the canvassing stage. The Court ultimately found that the COMELEC's rejection of the return was justified based on the inherent improbabilities appearing on its face, particularly the excessive votes credited to Villalon, which exceeded the number of ballots used and received, and the omission of crucial data.
Main Doctrine
A canvassing board may reject an election return if it is obviously manufactured and statistically improbable, but this determination must be based primarily on data appearing on the face of the return itself. Evidence aliunde may be used to overcome a finding of statistical improbability, but not to establish it.