Dojillo v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: In the synchronized elections for Punong Barangay of Nibaliw Vidal, San Fabian, Pangasinan, respondent Rodrigo N. Vidal obtained 374 votes, while petitioner Nilo L. Dojillo received 371 votes. The Board of Election Tellers (BET) proclaimed Vidal as the winner by a plurality of three votes. Procedural History: Petitioner filed an election protest before the trial court, questioning election results in specific precincts due to alleged misappreciation of ballots and incorrect tallying. Respondent filed an answer with counter-protest, which was dismissed for failure to pay the required filing fee. The trial court, in its decision dated August 8, 2002, declared petitioner Dojillo as the winner by nine votes, nullifying Vidal's proclamation. Respondent appealed to the COMELEC Second Division. The Petition: The COMELEC Second Division reversed the trial court's decision, declaring respondent Vidal as the duly elected Punong Barangay. The COMELEC En Banc, in a Resolution dated January 3, 2005, affirmed with modification the COMELEC Second Division's findings, denying petitioner's motion for reconsideration. The COMELEC En Banc had previously issued a Status Quo Ante Order on April 29, 2003, reinstating respondent Vidal to the position of Punong Barangay pending resolution of the motion for reconsideration. Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court, alleging grave abuse of discretion by the COMELEC.
Issue(s)
Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in its appreciation of ballots, specifically in counting certain ballots for respondent Vidal that should have been considered marked or stray, including the addition of declared stray ballots to his votes. Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing the Status Quo Ante Order, which reinstated respondent Vidal to a position he never occupied.
Ruling
The Supreme Court partially granted the petition, affirming the Resolution of the Commission on Elections En Banc dated January 3, 2005. It proclaimed respondent Rodrigo N. Vidal as the duly elected Punong Barangay of Nibaliw Vidal, San Fabian, Pangasinan, with a total of 374 votes against petitioner Nilo L. Dojillo's 372 votes, a winning margin of two votes. The Court set aside the Order of the Commission on Elections En Banc dated April 29, 2003.
Ratio Decidendi
On the appreciation of ballots and the addition of stray ballots: The Court found no reason to overturn the COMELEC's decision regarding the appreciation of ballots. Applying Section 211 of the Omnibus Election Code and relevant jurisprudence, the Court affirmed the COMELEC's findings on specific ballots. For Exhibit "1-J", the Court agreed with the COMELEC that the distinctive use of blue ink identified the ballot, thus invalidating it as a marked ballot. Regarding Exhibit "A-5", the Court applied the rule on desistance, holding that the "X" mark indicated the voter's intent not to vote further, thus validating the ballot. For Exhibit "B-1", the Court applied the idem sonans rule, stating that the illegible writing "VIONI, VIOBI" sounded similar to "Vidal" and thus validated the vote. The Court also applied the intent rule for Exhibit "B-2", considering "Vedal Jing" and "Vic Pedeglorio" as a valid vote for Vidal, as Vic Pedeglorio was not a candidate for Punong Barangay. For Exhibit "C", the Court applied the rule on two kinds of writing and correction of votes, validating the ballot where "Vidal" was superimposed over "Pedeglorio." Similarly, for Exhibit "C-1", the Court applied the rule on two kinds of writing and emphasis, validating the bold writing of "JING-VIDAL." For Exhibits "C-3" to "C-5", the Court applied jurisprudence on marks made after the ballot was cast, ruling that subsequent changes by persons other than the voter should not invalidate the ballot. Regarding stray ballots, for Exhibit "2-F", the Court applied the rule that any vote not sufficiently identifying the candidate is a stray vote, thus affirming its invalidity. For Exhibits "A", "A-1", "A-3", "B-3", and "C-10", the Court applied the ruling in Gonzaga v. Seno and Moya v. Del Fierro, holding that the initial of a nickname used with the surname is sufficient to identify the candidate, thus validating these votes for respondent Vidal. On the propriety of the Status Quo Ante Order: The Court agreed with the petitioner that the Status Quo Ante Order, as issued, raised more questions than it solved. It noted that the order had the nature of a temporary restraining order and automatically ceased to have effect after 20 days in line with Repol v. Commission on Elections, as no writ of preliminary injunction was issued. However, the Court clarified that in this case, no execution pending appeal was issued. The Court acknowledged that the BET's proclamation of respondent Vidal on July 15, 2002, represented the condition prevailing before the trial court's decision. While the trial court's decision should prevail over the Board of Canvassers' proclamation, the COMELEC's subsequent ruling in favor of respondent and the Supreme Court's affirmation of that ruling ultimately determined that respondent Vidal is the duly elected Punong Barangay. Therefore, the Court set aside the Status Quo Ante Order as it was superseded by the final determination of the election outcome.
Main Doctrine
The Supreme Court affirmed the COMELEC's ruling declaring Rodrigo N. Vidal as the duly elected Punong Barangay, modifying the COMELEC Second Division's findings and ultimately proclaiming Vidal with 374 votes against Dojillo's 372 votes. The Court also set aside the COMELEC En Banc's Status Quo Ante Order.