Dayag v. Alonzo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Emilio Dayag and private respondent Gloria Guiawan were the sole candidates for Punong Barangay of Gobgob, Tabuk, Kalinga-Apayao in the May 17, 1982 barangay elections. A dispute arose in Voting Center No. 1 concerning the proper appreciation of ballots where candidate names were written in incorrect spaces. The Board of Election Tellers initially considered these votes invalid, leading to a commotion. To prevent further escalation, the ballot box was secured, and the results from both voting centers were taken to the Municipal Building. Initial tallies showed Dayag with 307 votes and Guiawan with 325 votes, though no official return was submitted for Voting Center No. 1. Procedural History: The Municipal Election Registrar advised that votes should be counted for the named candidate if the ballots were not marked. The Provincial Election Supervisor directed the Board of Canvassers to complete the canvassing. The Board of Election Tellers, instead of submitting an election return, conducted a recounting on May 19, 1982, despite Guiawan's protest. This recount resulted in Dayag receiving 355 votes and Guiawan 312 votes, leading to Dayag's proclamation. Guiawan filed an Election Contest with the Municipal Trial Court, which dismissed her protest, upholding Dayag's proclamation. On appeal, the Regional Trial Court reversed the Municipal Trial Court's decision, declaring the recount void and Guiawan the duly elected Punong Barangay. The Petition: Petitioner Emilio Dayag filed an appeal by Certiorari with the Supreme Court, treating it as a special civil action. The principal issue presented is whether the Board of Election Tellers had the authority to conduct a recounting for the re-appreciation of excluded votes after a tally had been made but before the election returns were finalized. Dayag argues that the Board acted within its prerogatives under Section 160 of the 1978 Election Code, as the alteration occurred before the announcement of results. The Supreme Court, in its resolution, set aside the Regional Trial Court's decision and ordered a recount and re-appreciation of votes in Voting Center No. 1 to definitively determine the true will of the electorate.
Issue(s)
Whether the Board of Election Tellers had the authority to conduct a recounting and re-appreciation of votes after a tally had been made but before the accomplishment and submission of the election returns. Whether the Regional Trial Court erred in declaring the recounting on May 19, 1982, void and in reversing the decision of the Municipal Trial Court.
Ruling
The Supreme Court set aside the Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch XXV, Tabuk, Kalinga-Apayao. It ordered the Regional Trial Court to recount and re-appreciate the votes in Voting Center No. 1, Gobgob, Tabuk, Kalinga-Apayao, with deliberate speed, and to render judgment accordingly, in the interest of determining the true will of the electorate.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of the Board of Election Tellers' authority to recount votes: The Supreme Court held that the Board of Election Tellers acted within its prerogatives in conducting a recount and re-appreciation of votes. Section 160 of the 1978 Election Code (P.D. No. 1296) clearly provides that the committee can make alterations and corrections in the election returns before the announcement of the results in the voting center. In this case, the alteration and correction occurred at the tally stage, even before the preparation of the election returns. Therefore, the Board was within its authority to make a recount, especially since the Municipal Election Registrar had advised that votes written in incorrect spaces should be appreciated for the candidate named, absent any marking on the ballots. The Court emphasized that the primary goal is to ascertain the true will of the electorate, and procedural rules should not impede this objective when errors in appreciation are evident and correctable before the final submission of returns. On the issue of the Regional Trial Court's reversal: The Supreme Court found that the Regional Trial Court erred in declaring the recounting on May 19, 1982, void. By setting aside the decision of the Municipal Trial Court, which had upheld the recounting, the Regional Trial Court disregarded the authority of the Board of Election Tellers as established by law. The Supreme Court noted the allegation that a recount before the Regional Trial Court had been agreed upon by the parties but was disregarded, and that there were discrepancies in the vote appreciation by the Board of Election Tellers. Given these circumstances and the need to ensure the integrity of the election results, the Supreme Court deemed it necessary to order a definitive recount and re-appreciation of the votes by the Regional Trial Court itself to definitively determine the true will of the voters.
Main Doctrine
The Board of Election Tellers possesses the authority to make alterations and corrections in election returns prior to the announcement of election results within a voting center. This power includes the re-appreciation of votes that were initially excluded, provided that the ballots themselves are not marked. This principle is suppletorily applicable to Barangay elections as per the Barangay Election Law.