Diaz v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: In the 1970 elections for delegate to the Constitutional Convention for the Mountain Province, petitioner Felix F. Diaz, Sr. and other candidates received specific vote counts in all municipalities except Sagada. However, the election returns from Sagada's 22 precincts showed respondent John K. S. Daoas obtaining a large majority over petitioner Diaz. If Sagada's returns were nullified, Diaz would have a majority. Procedural History: Diaz and Warren Luyaben filed a petition with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) seeking the amendment or exclusion of Sagada's election returns, alleging they were spurious, fabricated, and/or fictitious. Luyaben later withdrew, leaving Diaz as the sole petitioner. The COMELEC ordered the examination of precinct books of voters and CE Form 39 by fingerprint and handwriting experts. The COMELEC found that while elections were held, persons other than registered voters voted, or registered voters voted multiple times. Fingerprint and handwriting analyses indicated a significant number of substitute voters. The COMELEC noted that illegal voting was most glaring in specific precincts, particularly Precinct No. 22. Despite this, the COMELEC sustained the validity of returns from six precincts (4, 11, 12, 14, 17, and 19) where a majority of voters were identified as registered, but still called the inspectors to account. For the other sixteen precincts, the COMELEC deemed it unnecessary to decide on the validity as the overall election result would not be affected. The COMELEC directed the Board of Canvassers to complete the canvass, including Sagada's returns, but to refrain from proclaiming winners until a specified date. The Petition: Diaz appealed to the Supreme Court, which issued a restraining order. The Supreme Court's own analysis of the fingerprint and handwriting reports revealed that out of 2,188 reported voters in Sagada, only 886 were positively identified as registered voters, 1,012 were ascertained as not registered, and 399 remained unidentified. Even considering the unidentified as registered, the total registered voters would be 1,285, far below the 2,046 votes credited to Daoas in the returns. A closer examination of the six precincts initially sustained by the COMELEC also showed inconsistencies, with the number of votes credited to Daoas exceeding the sum of identified registered voters and unidentified individuals. The Supreme Court concluded that the returns from Sagada were untruthful on their face and should be regarded as fictitious or manufactured and excluded from the canvass.
Issue(s)
Whether the election returns from the Municipality of Sagada for the 1970 elections for convention delegates should be excluded from the canvass. Whether the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in sustaining the validity of returns from certain precincts of Sagada despite evidence of widespread illegal voting.
Ruling
The Supreme Court reversed the resolution of the Commission on Elections insofar as it directed the inclusion of the returns from the Municipality of Sagada for the 1970 elections for convention delegates in the computation by the Board of Canvassers. The COMELEC was directed to order the Board to exclude said returns from the canvass.
Ratio Decidendi
On the exclusion of Sagada's election returns: The Court found that the evidence and circumstances pointed to a systematic plan of allowing persons who were not registered voters to cast ballots in all precincts of Sagada. Fingerprint and handwriting analyses revealed that out of 2,188 reported voters, only 886 were positively identified as registered, while 1,012 were ascertained as not registered, and 399 remained unidentified. Even if all unidentified voters were considered registered, the total would be 1,285, significantly less than the 2,046 votes credited to respondent Daoas in the returns. This discrepancy, coupled with the fact that nearly one-half of the ballots cast were by persons definitely identified as not registered, indicated that the returns were untruthful on their face. The Court applied the doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (false in one thing, false in everything), citing Gardiner vs. Romulo, which states that when recording officers are proved to have knowingly made a largely false and fraudulent record, reliance cannot be placed on any part of it. The Court emphasized that such wholesale illegal voting could not have occurred without the connivance of the inspectors, either maliciously or through intimidation, rendering the true results unascertainable. Furthermore, the Court noted that many of the inspectors had a history of tolerating and abetting fraud in previous elections, and Sagada had a notorious reputation for massive and large-scale frauds. The Court concluded that the returns must be deemed manufactured or falsified and excluded from the canvass. On the COMELEC's discretion: The Court found that the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in sustaining the validity of returns from six precincts despite clear evidence of illegal voting. While the COMELEC acknowledged that a number of substitute voters had cast ballots, it proceeded to validate returns where more than 50% of those who voted were identified as registered voters. However, a closer examination of these six precincts revealed parallel inconsistencies and improbabilities. For instance, in Precinct 4, the total votes cast by identified registered voters and unidentified persons amounted to 98, yet the returns credited Daoas with 119 votes. Similar discrepancies were observed in Precincts 11, 12, 14, 17, and 19. The Court reasoned that even if all identified registered voters and unidentified individuals in these six precincts voted for Daoas, the total would still be less than the votes credited to him in the returns. This demonstrated that even the returns deemed valid by the COMELEC were demonstrably untruthful and should have been excluded. The Court reiterated that the purity of the ballot box and the integrity of elections are paramount, and a firm stand against fraudulent elections must be taken to prevent them from growing larger.
Main Doctrine
Election returns found to be spurious, fabricated, or fictitious due to widespread illegal voting, especially by substitute voters, and connivance of election inspectors, must be excluded from the canvass, even if such exclusion may result in the provisional disfranchisement of legitimate voters, as the purity of the ballot box and the integrity of elections must be upheld.