ELECTION LAWS

ATTY. FERDINAND G.S. GUJILDE

PART I
ELECTIVE OFFICIALS

ELECTION, DEFINED.

How do you define election?

It is a means by which people choose their officials for a definite and fixed period and to whom they entrust for
the time being the exercise of the powers of government. De Leon book p.478

What are the “means” to choose officials?

Either manual or automated system

What is the basis for the phrase “people choose their officials”?
It is based on the sovereign will or power of the people.

What does the phrase “for the time being” mean?

It is only temporary.

What does the phrase “definite and fixed period” mean?

It refers to the term of office, which means a fixed period of time which the law describes that an officer may
hold an office.
It is the time during which an officer may claim to hold an office as a matter of right, and fixes the interval after
which the several incumbents shall succeed one another.

How is election defined in its ordinary and common use?

It is voting which includes the act of receiving and casting the ballots, counting them and making the return.

How is election defined in the context of the Constitution?

It refers to the conduct of polls including the registration, campaign, casting, counting, and canvassing of votes.
De Leon p. 479

Election, defined under jurisprudence.

Taule v Santos, 200 SCRA 512 519 (1991)
Facts: The Secretary of the Local Government nullified the election of federation officers on the ground of
irregularity. It was argued that jurisdiction over election contests involving election of federation officers
belongs to COMELEC.

Held: The jurisdiction of the COMELEC is limited to popular election only, which is the embodiment of the
popular will, the expression of the sovereign power of the people.
It involves the choice or selection of candidates to public office by popular vote as opposed to election of
federation officers.
In Constitutional context, it is the conduct of polls. Including registration, campaign, casting, counting, and
canvassing of votes.
None of these characterizes the federation election.

Election, defined within the context of the Constitution.

Javier v COMELEC, GR No. L-68379-81, Sept. 22, 1986
Facts: Javier challenged the proclamation of Pacificador by the COMELEC Second Division on the ground that
it should be done by the en banc pursuant to the Constitution. Pacificador argued that at the time the complaint
was filed, it was still in the nature of a pre-proclamation controversy hence may be resolved by a division in the
exercise of its administrative power to enforce election laws relative to election, return and qualifications.
Held: Under the Constitution, the term “election” should be interpreted in its totality that it refers to the conduct
of polls, registration of voters, campaign, and the casting and counting of votes.
In making the COMELEC the sole judge of all contests involving the election, returns and qualifications of
Members of Congress, the Constitution intended to give it full authority to hear and decide these cases from the
beginning to end and on all related matters, including those arising before the proclamation of winners.

ELECTION, PURPOSE.
​
Lino Luna v Rodriguez, 39 Phil. 208, 1918
The purpose of elections in a democratic society is to give the voters a direct participation in the affairs of
their government, either in determining who shall be their public officials or in deciding some question of
public interest; and for that purpose all of the legal voters should be permitted, unhampered and unmolested, to
cast their ballot.

ELECTION LAWS, PURPOSE.

​
Rulloda v COMELE, GR No. 154198, January 20, 2003
Facts: A widow substituted her deceased husband as candidate for punong barangay and obtained the highest
number of votes. But it was voided because substitution is not allowed in barangay elections, it being non-
partisan. As such, there is no political party from which a substitute is designated.
Held: The absence of the provision for substitution in barangay elections does not mean it is prohibited. Such
interpretation ignores the purpose of election laws which is to give effect to, rather than frustrate, the will of the
voters.

ELECTION LAWS, HOW CONSTRUED.

​
Frivaldo v COMELEC, 257 SCRA 727 (1996)
Facts: A candidate for governor was disqualified because he did not reacquire his Filipino citizenship at the
time he filed his CoC and at the time of election.
Held: Citizenship need not be possessed at the time of filing of CoC or election, but must be at the start of the
term.
In case of doubt, election laws are liberally construed and equitably construed in favor of sovereign will.
In applying election laws, it would be far better to err in favor of popular sovereignty than to be right in
complex but little understood legalisms.

Carlos v Angeles, 346 SCRA 571, 582 (2000)

Facts: The proclamation of a mayor was nullified by the lower court on the account that he won through
significant badges of fraud like mismatch of keys to the padlocks, empty ballot boxes, boxes with election
returns, delay in counting due to brownouts, absence of watchers during counting.
Held: These did not affect the integrity of the ballots.
Election contests involve public interest and technicalities should not impede the determination of the true will
of the people.

ELECTION, CLASSIFIED.
​
What are the kinds of election?
Regular election – refers to one provided by law on such dates at regular intervals for the election officers
either nationwide or in certain subdivisions.
Special election – refers to one held to fill vacancy before the expiration of the full term for which the
incumbent was elected.
- it is also held when there is failure of election
​
Is the Sangguniang Kabataan election regular or special?
Neither, based on the definition of a regular and special election.

How is this answered in the case of Paras v Comelec?

Facts: A punong barangay was subject of a recall election that was scheduled within a year prior to the SK
election, which also falls on the second year of the term of office of local elective officials.
Section 74 of the Local Government Code prohibits recall election within a year from assumption of office and
within a year immediately preceding the next regular local election.
Held: If the SK election was a regular election, there would be no more recall election because it always falls
within the second year of term of office, the only time when a recall election is allowed. Thus, the next regular
election must refer to one where the office of the official sought to be recalled is contested.
The SK election is not a regular election because its members do not even possess suffrage under the
Constitution. The SK is nothing more than a youth organization. Its elected officer are not one of those
enumerated as elective local officials under the law.

What are the requisites of special election after failure of election in Lucero v COMELEC?
Facts: Two candidates for district representative were separated by a mere 175 votes. But no election was done
in one polling place with 213 voters due to ballot snatching. But the leading candidate questioned the authority
of the COMELEC to call for special election after almost two years.
Held: There are two requisites for holding a special election: One, there is a failure of election. Two, such
failure affects the results of the election. Since only 175 votes separate them, the 213 votes in the polling place
where election failed could still affect the results of the election.
The delay was not attributable to the voters of the polling place where election failed but to the legal maneuvers
of parties. Thus, the holding of special election almost two years after the regular election is still ‘reasonably
close to the date of election not held.’

SYSTEMS OF ELECTION.
​
Manual system of election.
B.P 881 or the Omnibus Election Code

Automated Election System (AES)

R.A 8436 as amended by R.A. 9369

Manual count during automated election.

R.A. 8436, Section 9
R.A 9369, Section 11

How did Loong v COMELEC answer whether there can be manual count during automated election?
Facts: During the first automated election in ARMM the counting machines in the Province of Sulu could not
accurately read the official ballots because the ovals opposite the names of candidates were misaligned. In 5
municipalities, the official ballots were rejected because of incorrect sequence codes. Thus, the COMELEC
ordered a manual count which was opposed on the ground that under the automation law, automated counting is
mandatory. The remedy is not manual count but replacement of defective counting machines.
Held: Manual counting during automated election is not prohibited by law. The Constitutional grant of power to
‘enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of election’ is so broad as to cover all
the necessary and incidental powers for it to achieve the objective of holding a free, orderly, honest, peaceful,
and credible elections.

CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR ELECTION.

Article II, Section 1, 1987 Constitution:

The Philippines is a democratic and Republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government
authority emanate from them.

Elective Officials, enumerated.

1987 Constitution
Article VII Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in the President of the Philippines.
Section 2. No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the
Philippines, a registered voter, able to read and write, at least forty years of age on the day of the
election, and a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such
 election.

Article VI Section 2. The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected at large by the
qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law.

​Section 5 (1). The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two-hundred and fifty
members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned
among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of
their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as
provided by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and
sectoral parties or organizations.
​Section 5 (2). The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total number of
Representatives including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms after the ratification
of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party list representatives shall be filled, as
provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural
communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except religious
sector.

Article X Section 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the Philippines are the
provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous regions in Muslim
Mindanao and the Cordilleras as hereinafter provided.

Section 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras
consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas sharing common and
distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and other relevant
characteristics within the framework of this Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as
territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines.

Section 18. The Congress shall enact an Organic Act for each autonomous region with the assistance
and participation of the regional consultative commission composed of representatives appointed by
the President from a list of nominees from multisectoral bodies. The Organic Act shall define the
basic structure of government for the region consisting of the executive department and legislative
assembly, both of which shall be elective and representative of the constituent political units. The
Organic Act shall likewise provide for special courts with personal, family, and property law
jurisdiction consistent with the provisions of the Constitution and national law.
​ ​The creation of the autonomous region shall be effective when approved by majority
of the votes cast by the constituent units in a plebiscite called for the purpose, provided that only
provinces, cities, and geographic areas voting favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the
autonomous region.

Section 19. The First Congress elected under this Constitution shall, within eighteen months from the
time of organization of both Houses, pass the Organic Acts for the autonomous regions in Muslim
Mindanao and the Cordilleras.

RA No. 6734 or the Organic Act for ARMM as amended by RA No. 9054
RA No. 6766 of the Organic Act for CAR

Who are elective officials?

• 1 President
• 1 Vice-President
• 12 Senators
• 1 House Representative per legislative district
• 1 Governor per province
 • 1 Vice-governor per province
• 1 ARMM Governor
• 1 ARMM Vice-Governor
• 3 ARMM Assemblymen per assembly district
• 1 Mayor per city and municipality
• 1 Vice-Mayor per city and municipality
• 12/10/8 SP Members per city
• 858 Members per municipality

For May 9, 2016 elections:

• 1 President
• 1 Vice-President
• 12 Senators
• 238 House Representatives
• 81 Governors
• 81 Vice-Governors
• 776 SP Members
• 145 City Mayors
• 1,624 SP Members
• 1, 489 Municipal Mayors
• 1, 489 Municipal Vice-Mayors
• 11, 916 SB Members
• 1 ARMM Regional Governor
• 1 ARMM Regional Vice-Governor
• 24 ARMM Regional Assembly
• 18, 083 contested seats

Is there a Cordillera Autonomous Region according to Ordillo v COMELEC?

Facts: In a plebiscite, the people in the Cordillera region rejected autonomy, except the Province of Ifugao.
Thus, the COMELEC resolved that it now compose the Cordillera Autonomous Region.
Held: A sole province cannot constitute an autonomous region which should be interpreted in its common use
and ordinary meaning, which presupposes two or more provinces as shown in the 13 regions composed of
contiguous provinces into which the country is divided for administrative purposes.

Local Government Code of 1991, Section 39.

Comelec Resolution No. 9982, prom. August 18, 2015 as amended by

Comelec Res. No 9986, prom Sept. 10, 2010 as amended by
Comelec Res. No. 10002, prom. Oct.13, 2015.

PRESIDENT, HOW ELECTED, TERM OF OFFICE AND TERM LIMIT.

​
Article VII, Section 4(1), 1987 Constitution:
The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people for a term of six years which
shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election and shall end at noon of
the same date, six years thereafter. The President shall not be eligible for any re-election. No person who has
succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the
same office at any time.

What does the phrase “direct vote” mean?

It means the president is elected by popular vote of the people for a term of six years.

How is it different from the election of President and Vice-President in the United States?
• Americans do not directly elect their president and vice-president.
• Technically, they pick “electors” in an Electoral College.
• 538 Electoral College votes are distributed among the 50 states and the District of
Columbia.
• Each State along with the DC has a minimum of Electoral College votes.
• It increments depending on the population according to the Census.
• Based on 2010 Census, effective for the 2012, 2016, and 2020 presidential elections, the
electoral votes are distributed as follows:
o California ​- ​55
o Texas ​ ​- ​38
o Florida ​ ​- ​29
o New York ​- ​29
o Illinois ​ ​- ​20
o Pennsylvania ​- ​20
o Ohio ​ ​- ​18
o Georgia ​- ​16
o Michigan ​- ​16
o North Carolina- ​15
• The candidate who gets the popular vote in each state, wins all its the Electoral College
votes.
• Except in Maine and Nebraska, which use a tiered system.
• To win, the candidate needs at least 270 Electoral College votes.
• Argument for Electoral College system: it avoids concentration of power under the
hands of urban populations.
• Argument against – does not reflect the national will. In 2000, Gore won the popular vote
but Bush won 271 after he was deemed to have taken in Florida.

What does the sentence “The President shall not be eligible for any reelection.” mean?
It means that the presidency is once in a lifetime opportunity. He cannot be reelected either immediately after
his term of office or after an interval of two or more terms.

But why was Joseph Estrada allowed to run in 2010 after having been elected in 1998?
The COMELEC said that the provision applies to incumbent presidents only.
It is said the better policy approach is to let the people decide who the next president is.
For on political questions, this court may err but the sovereign people will not.

What did the Supreme Court say in Pormento v Estrada?

It declined to exercise its power of judicial review. Since Estrada already lost in the elections, the issue whether
he can still run has become moot and academic.

(No available slides: presidential term limit – vacancy in elective local officials)
DATE OF ELECTIONS

National, District, Local elective officials – Second Monday of May 1992 & every 3 years thereafter
Regional elective officials – Second Monday of May 2013 & every 3 years thereafter
Barangay & SK officials – Last Monday of October 2007 & very 3 years thereafter

NATURE OF BARANGAY ELECTIONS.

Non-partisan and conducted in an expeditious and inexpensive manner

Not supporting, belonging to or biased in favor of any political party

Specific acts of partisanship:

Filing of CoC representing or allowing to be represented as candidate of any political party or any other
organization.
No party, organization intervenes in the nomination or in the filing of CoC
Party or organization giving support, directly or indirectly, material or otherwise favorable to or against a
candidate

Except?
Relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity
Campaign staff – not more than 1 in every 100 registered voters

Caveat!
It should not be in any manner construed to impair the freedom of individuals to support or oppose any
candidate for any barangay office.

Facts: The constitutionality of an old law which had virtually the same provision on the non-partisan character
of barangay elections was challenged. It violates constitutional guarantees on the right to form association and
societies for purposes not contrary to law.
Held: The right to form association is not absolute. It is subject to pervasive police power thus may be
constitutionally regulated to serve important and appropriate public interest.
The right to organize remains intact but certain activities are restricted.
The ban is narrow, not total. It operates only on concerted or group action of political parties. Acting
individually, party members may intervene. (Occena v Comelec)

What is the purpose of non-partisan character?

Barangay is the basic unit or the base of the pyramid of both social and political structure.
It should not be insulated from divisive and debilitating partisan politics.
Barangay officials have legislative and consultative power
Act as agents of neutral community action such as distribution of basic services
Instruments in conducting plebiscites and referenda
Settle local disputes. (Occena v Comelec)

POSTPONEMENT OF ELECTION, GROUNDS.

Omnibus election Code, section 6
RA 7166, Section 4
RA 6679, Section 2
Montesclaros v Comelec, GR No. 152295, July 9, 2002

What are the grounds for postponement?

• Serious cause
o Violence
o Terrorism
 o Loss or destruction of paraphernalia or records
o Force majeure
o Other analogous causes of such a nature that the holding of free, orderly and honest election
becomes impossible in any political subdivision.

Postponement of election, jurisdiction.

Who postpones elections?
• Commission en banc
• By majority vote of its members
• Motu proprio
• Upon verified petition by any interested party
• After due notice and hearing
• All interested parties are afforded equal opportunity to be heard. (Section 4, R.A. 7166, cited in
Benito v Comelec)

What if the ground is not one of those enumerated?

The Commission cannot postpone, it merely recommends, as when it is operationally very difficult to
simultaneously hold the barangay and SK elections, legislative action to amend the law resetting the election is
required. (Montesclaros v Comelec)

Can the Election Officer postpone elections?

The election officer, on basis of threats of violence and bloodshed, cannot by herself declare failure of election
and reset it even with the agreement of the candidates. (Bashier v Comelec)

When is election postponed?

To date reasonably close to date of election not held, suspended or failed but not later than 30 days after
cessation of the cause.

But it should not be too close as to preclude notice to the electorate. The announcement made minutes before
the supposed voting is not a notice at all to the electorate who should be given ample notice of the exact
schedule and venue of the election. (Bashier v Comelec)

A one day notice is too short. The time for holding it must be authoritatively designated in advance. (Hassan v
Comelec)

Is the 30-day period mandatory?

No. Thus, it cannot be argued that once it lapses, the authority to postpone transfers to Congress.

In fixing the date of special elections, the Comelec sees to it that it should:
• not later than 30 days
• reasonably close to the election not held. (Lucero vs Comelec)

The holding of elections within the next few months from the cessation of the cause may still be considered
reasonably close to the date of election not held. (Pangandaman v Comelec)

The period of 2 years after the failure of election is still reasonable close to the election not held if the delay is
not attributable to the registered voters but to the legal maneuvers of the parties. (Lucero v Comelec)

But it should not be unreasonably too close for all the voters to be notified of the changes. For even in highly
urbanized areas, dissemination poses a problem. In the absence of proof of actual notice the special elections
reached a great number of voters, the special election is invalid. One day notice is insufficient. (Hassan v
Comelec)

But a few days away from failure of election is reasonably close. (Pangandaman v Comelec)

Less than a day’s notice of time and transfer of polling places 15 kilometers away deprived voters of
opportunity to participate in elections.

Even if voting occurred.

Where the difference is only 219 votes and only 328 out of 1,546 registered voters were able to vote, there is
failure of elections. (Hassan v Comelec)

FAILURE OF ELECTION, GROUNDS.

Omnibus election Code, section 6

RA 7166, Section 4
What are the grounds for failure of elections?
• Force majeure
• Violence
• Terrorism
• Fraud or other analogous causes the election in any election in any polling place was not held
o On the date fixed
o Suspended before the hour fixed by law for close voting
o After voting and during the preparation and transmission of election returns or in their
custody of canvass, such election results in a failure to elect and it affects election results.

Three instances where a failure of election may be declared:

One: Election in any polling place was not held on the fixed date on account of force majeure, terrorism, fraud,
violence, and other analogous causes.
Two: Election on polling place have been suspended before the close of voting on account of force majeure,
violence, terrorism, fraud and other analogous cases.
Three: After voting and during preparation and transmission of election returns or in their custody or canvass,
such election results in failure to elect the same grounds.

Canicosa v Comelec, 282 SCRA 512

Facts: A mayor was proclaimed winner after obtaining a majority of 24, 000 votes. But the second placer
petition to declare failure of election due to fraud, violence, threat, intimidation, vote-buying and delay in the
delivery of election documents and paraphernalia.
Missing names of registered voters
More than half of the registered voters failed to vote because others voted for them
He was credited with less votes than he actually obtained
Control data of election returns were not filled out in some polling places

Held: These grounds do not warrant failure of election as none of them fall under the three instances where
failure of election may be declared.
Missing name’s in voter’s list – remedy is inclusion or exclusion or annulment of book of voters.
More than half of the registered voters failed to vote because others voted for them – remedy is challenge the
identity of the voter during inside the polling place
Less votes – should have been raised before the BEI that counted the votes.
Control data of election returns were not filled – should have been raised before the Board of Canvassers that
canvassed the election returns
Unsecured ballot boxes - a mere defect that does not affect their integrity
Late election returns – not a ground for failure.
Two requisites for en banc to act on a verified petition to declare failure of election:
One: No voting took place in the polling places on the date fixed by law
Two: the votes that were not cast affect the result of elections (Mitmug v Comelec, Benito v Comelec)

Facts: A punong barangay lost by 29 votes. He alleged 100 of his relatives and supporters were not able to vote
because the BEI in 3 polling places discontinued the voting.
Found: Out 316 voters, 220 actually voted.
Held: No failure of election. If indeed voters were prevented from voting, remedy is election protest. (Batabor v
Comelec)
Even if less than 25% of the electorate in the questioned polling places cast their votes, it must still be
respected. (Mitmug v Comelec)
Even if only 1 out 177 voted in a polling place, there is still no failure of election. (Benito v Comelec)
For as long as there is voting, regardless of number, there is no failure of election. It only fails if the sovereign
will has been muted and cannot be ascertained. If the will of the people is determinable, it must be respected.
(Sardea v Comelec)
The power to nullify an election must be exercised with greatest care as not to disenfranchise voters. (Ruiz v
Comelec)

Facts: Elections in only 3 out of 5 polling places were sought to be nullified even if disruption of voting was
caused by a common act, firing guns to intimidate voters.
Held: Petition to declare failure of election should not be selective as to polling places if they were exposed to
the same ground. (Benito v Comelec)

Facts: Proclamation of one position was sought to be annulled on the ground of failure of election.
Held: Failure of election necessarily affects all elective positions in the place where elections failed. To hold
otherwise is discriminatory and violates equal protection clause. (Batabor)

Declaration of failure of election, jurisdiction.

Who declares failure of election?
Comelec en banc
The RTC, on account that a victory was attended by significant badges of fraud, cannot declare failure of
election in guise of voiding the proclamation of the winner despite obtaining 25, 000 majority votes during
canvass, 27, 000 votes by physical count and 17, 000 votes by revision. (Carlos v Angeles)
The election officer, on account of threats of violence and bloodshed, cannot by herself validly suspend of or
postpone elections even with the agreement of the candidates. (Bashier v Comelec)

Date of special elections after failed elections

Not later than 30 days after the cessation of causes like force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other
analogous causes.

Date of special elections to fill out permanent vacancy

District representative – not earlier than 60 days nor longer than 90 days after the office is vacated.
Except, if it occurs within a year prior to expiration of term

Senators – simultaneous with the succeeding regular election

President and Vice-President

• If the President, Vice-President, Senate President & House Speaker die, resign, or are permanently
disabled at the middle of the term
Congress legislates who serve as President
By special election for Presiden and VP
Not earlier than 45 days nor later than 60 days from time of such call
Once set, the special election cannot be postponed.
Except, if vacancy occurs within 18 months before the date of the next presidential election
• If the President, Vice-President, Senate President & House Speaker die, resign, or are permanently
 disabled at the start of the term
Congress legislates the manner in which one who is to act as President shall be selected

PART II
SUFFRAGE

SUFFRAGE, DEFINED.

Facts: A mayoralty candidate was disqualified for massive vote buying but he obtained the highest number of
votes. The second placer now argues he should be proclaimed winner.
Held: The second placer is not the choice of the people. This dispute involves not only the mayoralty, it
concerns suffrage which is the bed rock of republicanism. Suffrage is the means by which our people express
their sovereign judgment. (Nolasco v Comelec)

Facts: A couple was charged with an election offense for preventing a voter from entering the polling place. But
the Information was quashed for insufficiency because it failed to negate the exception there were more than 40
voters waiting inside the polling place.
Held: The exception does not form part of the offense hence need not be alleged in the Information. It is a
matter of defense. The validity of this view is affirmed when we realized that the case involves no less than
suffrage, which is the bedrock of all republican institutions.
“Each time the enfranchised citizen goes to the polls to assert this sovereign will, that abiding credo of
republicanism is translated into living reality.
If that will must remain undefiled at the starting level of its expression and application, every assumption must
be indulged in and every guarantee adopted to assure the unmolested exercise of the citizen’s free choice.
For to impede, without authority valid in law, the free and orderly exercise of the right of suffrage, is to inflict
the ultimate indignity on the democratic process.” (People v San Juan)

CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS OF SUFFRAGE

Article V, Section 1, 1987 Constitution

“Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the Philippines, not otherwise disqualified by law, who are at
least eighteen years of age, and who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one year and in the place
wherein they propose to vote, for at least six months immediately preceding the election. No literacy,
property, or other substantive requirement shall be imposed on the exercise of suffrage.”

Article V, Section 1, 1987 Constitution

“The Congress shall provide a system for securing the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot as well as a system for
absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad.
The Congress shall also design a procedure for the disabled and the illiterates to vote without the assistance of
other persons. Until then, they shall be allowed to vote under existing laws and such rules as the Commission on
Elections may promulgate to protect the secrecy of the ballot.”

NATURE OF SUFFRAGE

Is suffrage an obligation or a right?

Section 1, Article V, 1935 Constitution
Suffrage may be exercised by male citizens
Suffrage for women may be extended by the National Assembly through a plebiscite affirmed by at least
300,000 women qualified to vote.

Section 1, Article VI, 1973 Constitution:

Suffrage shall be exercised by citizens of the Philippines not otherwise disqualified by law.

Section 4, Omnibus Election Code:

It shall be the obligation of every citizen qualified to vote to register and cast his vote.
Section261(y)(1), Omnibus Election Code:
Any person who, having all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications as a voter, fails without
justifiable cause to register as a voter in an election, plebiscite or referendum in which he is qualified to vote

Penalty for failure to register and vote:

Imprisonment of not less than 1 year but not more than 6 years without probation
Disqualified to hold public office
Deprivation of suffrage

Article V, Section 1, 1987 Constitution:

Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the Philippines not otherwise disqualified by law

SUFFRAGE FOR OVERSEAS ABSENTEE VOTERS

Paragraph 1, Section 2, Article V, 1987 Constitution:

“The Congress shall provide a system for securing the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot as well as a system for
absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad.”

Section 5(d), RA 9189 or the Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003:

An immigrant or permanent resident who is recognized as such in the host country is disqualified from voting
under this Act.
Unless:
Upon registration, he or she executes an affidavit:
Resume actual permanent residence in the country within 3 years from approval of registration.
Not applied for citizenship in another country.
Failure to return results in the removal of the name from the National Registry of Absentee voters.
Permanent disqualification to vote in absentia.

In Macalintal v Comelec however, it was argued that Section 5(d) is unconstitutional based on the following:
It violates the Constitution which requires that a voter must be a resident of the country at least 1 year and in the
place where he or she proposes to vote at least 6 months prior to the immediately preceding election.
In Caasi v CA, it was held that a green card holder immigrant to the US is deemed to have abandoned his
domicile and residence in the Philippines.
The Constitution does not allow provisional registration or a promise by a voter to perform a condition
precedent to be qualified to vote.
Congress should not circumvent the Constitutional requirement on suffrage by providing condition which
amends the residence requirement.
Suffrage should only be granted to persons possessing qualifications on the day of election.
The Solicitor General however argued that Section 1, Article V of the 1987 Constitution is a verbatim
reproduction of the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions under which Co v Electoral Tribunal of the HR which held that
residence is synonymous with domicile.
A person can have only one domicile but have two residences, one permanent and the other temporary.
The definition of residence applies to absentee voters.
Romualdez-Marcos v Comelec, reiterating Faypon v Quirino, held that immigrants or permanent residence
abroad have in fact never abandoned their Philippine domicile.
Held: While it appears that under Section 1, immigrants and permanent residents in abroad are disqualified to
vote, Section 2 provides the exception: “The Congress shall provide a system for securing the secrecy and
sanctity of the ballot as well as a system for absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad.”
Thus, Congress enacted the Overseas Absentee Voting Act pursuant to Section 2 which did not provide for
parameters.
In absence of restrictions, Congress is presumed to have duly exercised its legislative authority.
Absentee voting is an exception to the regular system of voting.
It is intended to accommodate soldiers and other sailors and other qualified voters who on Election Day are
absent from the place where they are residents or registered.
The execution of the affidavit is not enabling or enfranchising act. It is not only proof of intention to return but
more importantly, it serves as an express declaration that the domicile was not abandoned.
By their status in the host country, permanent residents or immigrants are presumed to have relinquished their
intent to intent to return.
The purpose of the affidavit is to rebut such presumption.
The Caasi ruling held that green cardholders are disqualified to run for public office does not apply because it
did not consider the absentee voting rights of immigrants and permanent residents.
Section 5(d) does not circumvent the Constitution, instead, it complies with a constitutional mandate which
requires that Congress legislate absentee voting that presupposes the qualified citizen abroad is not physically
present in the country.
If the voter reneges on his promise to return, the penalty of permanent disenfranchisement serves as a deterrent.
The votes cast by absentee voters who failed to return is not invalidated, because what controls is whether the
voter is qualified to vote on the day of the election, and not after.

SUFFRAGE FOR LOCAL ABSENTEE VOTERS

Who are qualified?

Section 1, Executive Order No. 157:
“Any person who by reason of public functions and duties is not in his/her place of registration on election day,
may vote in a city or municipality where he/she is assigned on election day.”

Section 12, RA 7166:

Members of the AFP and PNP and other government officers and employees who, on election day, may be
temporarily assigned to perform election duties in a place where they are not registered voters.

Section 169, Omnibus Election Code:

Members of the Board of Election Inspectors may vote in the polling place where they are assigned on election
day provided they are registered voters in the city, municipality or province and their voting is noted in the
minutes.

Section 2, RA 10380:
Members of media, media practitioners, including the technical and support staff, who are duly registered voters
and who, on election day may not be able to vote due to the performance of functions in covering and reporting
on the elections.

Who can they vote for?

EO 157:
For 1987 election, they can vote only for senators

Section 12, RA 7166:

President, Vice-President & Senators

Section 2, RA 10380:
President, Vice-President, Senators & Party-list

Section 169, Omnibus Election Code:

All candidates

SUFFRAGE FOR PWDs & ILLITERATES

Section 2(2), Article V, 1987 Constitution

“The Congress shall also design a procedure for the disabled and the illiterates to vote without the assistance of
other persons. Until then, they shall be allowed to vote under existing laws and such rules as the Commission on
Elections may promulgate to protect the secrecy of the ballot.”

Section 11, RA 10366:

Who may be assisted?
A person with disability
A senior citizen who is illiterate or physically unable to prepare the ballot
Provided:
Such physical inability is such nature as to prevent the voter from personally accomplishing the ballot.
Such physical inability or illiteracy is indicated in the registration record.
Except:
If the physical inability is manifest.

Who can assist?

Relative by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree
If none, person of confidence who belong to the same household
Or, any member of the Board of Election Inspectors
Common qualification:
Of voting age

How the assistor votes:

Assistor votes inside the voting booth
Declares under oath:
To fill out the ballot strictly according to the instructions of the voter
Not to reveal the contents of the ballot
Limitation: Assistor cannot assist more than 3 times
Except: the Board of Election Inspectors

Section 9. Creation of Precincts for Persons with Disabilities and Senior Citizens:
Authorizes 1 accessible polling place for every voting center
Exclusive for PWDs and senior citizens who in registration records manifest their intent to avail of a separate
polling place
Non-territorial in nature
Provided with:
Assistive devices
Services of experts in assisting PWDs

RA 8189, Section 14, Continuing Registration Act:

Registration of PWDs and illiterate applicants

Who may be assisted in voter’s registration?

Illiterate persons
Persons with disability
Who can assist?
Illiterate – Election Officer or member of the accredited citizen’s arm
PWDs - Election Officer or member of the accredited citizen’s arm or relative within the fourth civil degree of
consanguinity or affinity
How assisted:
Illiterate or PWD is under oath
Interviewed and answers are recorded
Contents of the form are read aloud

VOTER’S REGISTRATION, DEFINED.

Section 3(a), RA 8189:

The act of accomplishing and filing of a sworn application for registration by a qualified voter before the
election officer of the city or municipality wherein he resides and including the same in the book of registered
voters upon approval by the Election Registration Board.

Yra v Abano, 52 Phil. 380

Facts: An aspiring lawyer from the province went to the city to study law where he also a registered as a voter.
When he became a lawyer, he returned to the province, ran for and won as municipal president. But he was not
able to register as a voter in the municipality because he failed to cancel his registration in the city on time.
Thus, his election was challenged on the ground that being not registered he is ineligible to run for and be
elected. It was established however that the municipal president was a resident of the municipality but is not a
registered voter there.
Held: Eligibility is not affected by failure to register. Registration is a mere step to voting, not an element to it.
Registration is a mere step to voting, not an element to it. Registration does not confer suffrage but a mere
condition precedent to its exercise. Registration merely regulates, not qualifies suffrage.

SYSTEM OF CONTINUING REGISTRATION

Section 8. System of Continuing Registration of Voters

Daily in the Office of the Election Officer during office hours
Except:
120 days before regular election
90 days before special election

Period of registration
Akbayan-Youth v Comelec, GR No. 147066, Mar. 26, 2001 (355 SCRA 318)
Facts: The Comelec conducted voter’s registration until December 27, 2000. Petitioners, who claim to represent
the youth sector, asked it conduct registration on February 17 and 18, 2001. They said that around 4 million
youth voters aged 18 to 21 failed to register on or before the deadline hence the need for extension. It was also
anchored on the renewed political awareness and interest among the youth to participate in the political process
generated by the recent political events in the country. The Comelec refused on the ground that it will affect its
preparations for the elections. Contrary to popular belief, voter’s registration is not limited to the act of going to
the election officer and writing down the names. Applications for the registration are subject to hearing, notice
and action of the Election Registration Board. Following the pre-election acts need to be done:
• Complete the Project of Precincts
• Constitution of Board of Election Inspectors
• Inspection, verification and sealing of book of voters
• Finalization of computerized voter’s list
• Preparation, bidding, printing and distribution of the Voter’s information Sheets, among many others.
But the petitioners argue that the Comelec is empowered to designate other dates of pre-election acts pursuant to
section 29 of RA 6646 and Section 28 of RA 8436.
Held: Suffrage is not absolute, it is subject to substantive and procedural requirements. Registration is a
procedural limitation. It is an indispensable precondition to suffrage. It was argued that the Comelec is endowed
with standby or residual powers to designate other dates for certain pre-election acts. While voter’s registration
is a pre-election act, we cannot ask the Comelec to do the impossible. The designation of other dates should be
premised on the capability of reasonable performance. The petitioners are to blame.

Kabataan Party List v Comelec, GR No. 189868, Dec. 15, 2009

Facts: The Comelec resolved to register voters from December 2, 2008 to December 15, 2009 for the purpose
of the May 10, 2010 national and local elections. It however resolved to adjust the deadline from December 15,
2009 to October 31, 2009 to afford it more time to prepare the automated elections. It was argued that based on
the NSO data, the projected voting population from age group 18 to 24 is 12.5 million which could be
disenfranchised for failure to register. It encroaches on the legislative power by amending Section 8 of RA 8189
to expand the prohibitive period of registration. But the Comelec argued it is empowered to fix other periods
and dates of pre-election activities.

Held: The period outside the 120-day prohibition is sufficient for Comelec to prepare for the elections. While
Comelec has rule-making power, it must be exercised in accordance with prevailing law. The power to fix other
periods can be used only if the activities cannot be reasonably held within the period provided by law.

Difference between the Akbayan and Kabataan rulings:

In Akbayan, the petition was filed during the prohibited period and extension prayed for falls on the prohibitive
period.
In Kabataan, the petition and the period prayed for were both outside the 120-day prohibitive period.

REGISTRATION, QUALIFICATIONS, DISQUALIFICATION, PROCEDURE

Who may register as a voter?
Filipino citizen not disqualified by law
At least 18 years of age on or before election
Resident of the Philippines for at least 1 year and the place where he or she proposes to vote for at least 6
months prior to election

Who are disqualified by law to register?

(1) Sentenced by final judgment to suffer imprisonment of not less than 1 year
Unless: Removed by plenary pardon or amnesty 5 years have lapsed after service of sentence.

(2) Sentenced by final judgment for any crime involving disloyalty to the government
Such as:
Rebellion, sedition
Violation of firearms law
Unless: Restored to full civil and political rights in accordance with law
5 years have lapsed after service of sentence

(3) Insane or incompetent persons declared as such by competent authority

Unless: Subsequently declared by competent authority that such person is no longer insane or incompetent

Contents for application for registration:

Name, surname, middle name
Sex
Date and place of birth
Citizenship
Civil status, if married, name of spouse
Profession, occupation or work
Periods of residence in the Philippines and in the place
Exact address
Statement that applicant possesses all qualification as a voter
Statement that applicant is not a registered voter of another precinct
Such information or data as may be required by the Commission

Residence
Romualdez v RTC, 226 SCRA 406
Facts: A natural-born Filipino constructed his house in a place where he became its punong barangay. When the
regime of President Marcos was about to end, he and his family fled the country and sought asylum in the US
which was granted. Five years later however, he received a letter from the US Immigration and Naturalization
Service that he should depart on or before a certain date otherwise he will be deported. Thus, he was forced to
leave even without any government document. When he arrived in the country, he returned to his barangay and
registered as a voter. But it was sought to be excluded in the MTC on the following grounds:
He is a resident of, practices his profession and works in the USA.
He just arrived in the country.
As such, he did not have the 1–year residency in the country and 6-month residency in the place where he
registered.
He argued that he has been a resident of the barangay and he never abandoned it. The MTC denied the
exclusion. On appeal to the RTC however, it reversed the denial and the ordered exclusion. The MTC and RTC
have no jurisdiction because it was filed by one who did not allege he was a registered voter of the place. The
RTC erred n deciding that he voluntarily left the country and abandoned his residence.

Held: While it is true that jurisdiction may be assailed any time, it is deemed waived by the active participation
where he even prayed that the decision of the MTC be affirmed. Residence and domicile are synonymous in
election cases. Domicile imports not only intention to reside in a fixed place but also personal presence in that
place, coupled with conduct indicative of such intention.

To acquire a new domicile of choice, the following requisites concur:

(1) Residence or bodily presence in the new locality
(2) Intention to remain there or animus manendi
(3) Intention to abandon the old domicile or animus non revertendi
The purpose to remain must be for an indefinite period of time.
The change of residence must be voluntary.
The new domicile chosen must be actual

The political situation brought by the people power must have caused great apprehension and serious concern
over the safety of the family that forced them to self-exile. Thus, their sudden departure from the country cannot
be deemed voluntary or abandonment of residence. it must be emphasized that the right to vote is a most
precious political right, as well as a bounden duty of every citizen, enabling and requiring him to participate in
the process of government so as to ensure that the government can truly be said to derive its power solely from
the consent of the governed. (Pungutan v Abubakar, 43 SCRA 1 (1972))

DEACTIVATION, REACTIVATION AND CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION

Grounds for deactivation of registration:

(1) Final judgment to suffer imprisonment for not less than 1 year
(2) Final judgment for any crime involving disloyalty to the government
(3) Insane or incompetent persons declared as such by competent authority
(4) Failure to vote for 2 successive regular elections
(5) Court order in exclusion proceedings
(6) Loss of Filipino citizenship
(7) Failure to validate
Remedy for deactivation: Reactivation

Ground for cancellation of registration:

Death

How to establish death:

Certification by the Local Civil Registrar
Submission by the LCR of a certified list of those who died during the previous month to the election officer of
the place where the deceased is registered.

Transfer of registration.
Modes of transfer.
Change of residence to another city or municipality
Change of address within the same city or municipality

Another city or municipality:

The registered voter may apply with the election officer of his new residence

Within the same city or municipality:

Immediately notify the election officer in writing
If change of address involves change of precinct, the Board shall transfer the registration and notify the voter of
the new precinct.

Exclusion through inadvertence or registered with an erroneous or misspelled name.

Remedy: apply for inclusion or reinstatement and correction of entry

If denied or not acted by the ERB:

Petition the MTC for entry or correction, as the case may be.

Election Registration Board (ERB)

Composition:
Chair: Election Officer
Members:
Public school official most senior in rank
Local Civil Registrar

Disqualification: Relationship within the fourth civil degree to each other and to any incumbent elective
official of the city or municipality

Powers:
Acts on all applications for registration, transfer, reactivation, correction of entry
Deactivates registration
Cancels registration
Decides challenges on the right to register
When: Quarterly
Challenges the right to register.
Grounds: Not specified
Who can challenge: Any voter, candidate or representative of a registered political party

INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION PROCEEDINGS

Common rules for inclusion and exclusion proceedings and correction of names:
Petition refers to 1 precinct, impleads the ERB
Any voter, candidate or party may intervene
Decision is based on evidence and not on stipulation of facts
Heard and decided within 10 days from filing
Appeal is decided within 10 days from receipt
Not later than 15 days before the election day
Decision is final and executory
If the question is whether the voter is real, non-appearance on the day set for hearing is prima facie evidence the
voter is fictitious.

Grounds for inclusion:

Disapproval of application for registration by the ERB
Removal of name from list of voters

Grounds for exclusion: Not specified

Who can file for inclusion: Any person whose application was disapproved or name was removed

Who can file for exclusion:

Any registered voter
Representative of a political party
Election Officer

Where to file inclusion and exclusion: Municipal Trial Court

When to include:
Anytime except:
105 days prior to regular election
75 days prior to special election

When to exclude:
Anytime except:
100 days prior to regular election
65 days prior to special election

What to attach to the petition:

Inclusion – certificate of disapproval, POS
Exclusion – proof of notice to ERB and voter

Challenge to right to register distinguished from inclusion and exclusion proceddings:

The first is administrative, the second is judicial.
Any questions involving suffrage is removed from the jurisdiction of Comelec.
But the exclusion of election returns from canvassing pertains to the administrative jurisdiction of the Comelec.
(Pungutan v Abubakar)
The first involves the right to register, the second involves the right to vote.

Inclusion & exclusion distinguished.

Prohibited time:
Inclusion – 105 days & 75 days
Exclusion – 100 & 65 days

Time decided:
Inclusion – 15 days from filing
Exclusion - 10 days
Grounds:
Inclusion – disapproval or removal
Exclusion - not specified

Party to file:
Inclusion – voter
Exclusion - any registered voter, representative of political party, election officer

Proof of service of petition:

Inclusion – ERB
Exclusion - ERB and challenged voter

Facts: The MTC excluded a voter in one place and transferred his registration to another.
Held: Exclusion merely removes a name from the voter’s list, it does not include transfer. It is summary in
nature hence the rule of res judicata does not apply. Subject matter of exclusion is removal from list whereas
quo warranto involves expulsion from office. It does not preclude the Comelec from inquiring into the
residence and citizenship qualification of a candidate. (Domino v Comelec)

Facts: The Comelec excluded election returns on the ground that they are spurious and/or manufactured or no
returns at all as these were prepared through massive violence, terrorism and fraud. Voting was done by persons
other than the registered voters while armed men went from one polling place to another, prepared the ballots
and dictated how the election returns should be prepared. It was argued since the Comelec has no jurisdiction to
decide the right to vote, it cannot exclude election returns because it disenfranchises votes which is purely
judicial.
Held: It is true that inclusion or exclusion from the list of voters is purely judicial power to the exclusion of the
Comelec. But to determine whether an election was held is purely within the administrative jurisdiction of the
Comelec. The disenfranchisement is only provisional, subject to the final determination of the validity of votes
in election protest. (Pungutan v Abubakar)

NATURE OF VOTER’S REGISTRATION RECORDS

Confidentiality of voter’s registration records:

Section 41, Continuing Registration Act:
Open to public examination during regular office hours
Legitimate inquiries on election-related matters
Law enforcement agencies
Upon prior authority and subject to regulations by the Commission
Access registration records necessary or in aid of their investigative functions
Section 9, R.A. 10367 on database security:
Not used under any circumstance except for electoral exercises

Comelec Minute Res. No. 13-1132, October 17, 2013

Acts on the request of BSP
• For use in application for tax identification numbers in connection with consolidation of titles to
properties acquired by BSP
Office of the President
• Notice to the former employees with unliquidated cash advances
Requests for voter’s registration record may be granted only if it is done by:
The voter or his/her authorized representative
Court order
• exclusively for use in electoral cases
• Pending before it

ANNULMENT OF LIST OF VOTERS, GROUNDS.

Section 39, Continuing registration Act:

Not prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Continuing Registration Act
Prepared through fraud, bribery, forgery, impersonation, intimidation, force or any similar irregularity
Contains statistically improbable data

Who annuls:
The Commission upon verified petition of:
• Any voter
• Election officer
• Duly registered political party

Limitation: No ruling, order or decision annulling the book of voters shall be executed within 90 days before
an election.

Ututalum v Comelec, 181 SCRA 335

Facts: In a special election for district representative, there were 39, 801 registered voters in one municipality.
One candidate obtained 482 votes while the other got 35, 581 votes.
(Lacking)
Owing to the great excess of votes. In that municipality, there were only 42 polling places, which if multiplied
by 300 results in 12, 600 voters only, way below the 36, 663 who cast their votes, or a difference of 23, 947
ghost voters. In his petition, however he admitted that there was an error because the municipality had 148
polling places. But he said that if the returns from the municipality are excluded, he will win by 5, 301 votes.
but the objections were denied for being filed out of time. the other candidate was proclaimed. He petitioned to
annul the proclamation and prayed for his proclamation. While these were pending however, a candidate for
governor petitioned to annul the list of voters of the municipality. It was opposed by the proclaimed
congressional candidate. The Comelec annulled the list of voters on the ground that of massive irregularities
committed in its preparation and for being statistically improbable. Another list was prepared yielding only 12,
555 names.

He then filed a supplemental pleading to entreat the annulment in his pending petitions to annul proclamation of
the other candidate and for his proclamation. But the Comelec dismissed it on the ground that while there may
be padding of the list of voters, it cannot annul the elections otherwise it disenfranchises the good or valid votes.

Padding of voter’s list, like fraud and terrorism, is not a proper issue to be raised in a pre-proclamation
controversy, but in an election protest. He now contends that the issue he raised refers to obviously
manufactured returns hence a proper pre-proclamation issue.
The election return in the municipality should be excluded in the canvass because the list of voters has been
annulled. There is no need to re-litigate in an election protest the matter of annulment because it is already ‘fait
accompli’.

Held: There is no great excess of votes since only 36,000 voted out of 39,000 registered voters. The Lagumbay
case, heavily relied on by petitioner, deals with the preparation of the manufactured returns while this case deals
with the preparation of the list of voters, a matter which is not reflected in the face of the returns.

Padding of list of voters is not a proper ground in a pre-proclamation controversy. The new list of voters cannot
be applied to determine the number of votes in a previous election. The Comelec is not empowered to annul a
previous election on the basis of a subsequent annulment of voter’s list. It has no retroactive effect.

In Bashier v Comelec, GR No. L-33692, February 24, 1972, it was held that the subsequent voter’s list in a
separate proceedings where the protagonists are not parties, cannot retroactively and without due process annul
the previous election.

The voter’s list in the previous elections is valid and unquestioned prior to and on the day of election. It was the
only legitimate roster used as a basis for voting. In absence of prior petition to set it aside, it is considered
conclusive evidence or persons who could vote in that particular election. Since the winning candidate has
already proclaimed, the pre-proclamation case dies, the next remedy is an election protest before a proper
forum, which is the HRET. (Ututalum v Comelec)

Sarangani v Comelec, 334 SCRA 379, GR No. 135927, June 26, 2000
Facts: Way back in the 1950s and during the martial law era, the dead, the birds and the bees voted in Lanao.
Several precincts and their books of voters were sought to be annulled on the ground that they contained ghost
voters. It was opposed by the incumbent mayor and the 23 punong barangays on the ground that the move is
merely intended to diminish bailiwicks. The Comelec investigated and found that:
• The supposed barangay Padian Torogan does not exist.
• The area has only two structures, one a concrete house without a roof and the other a wooden
structure without walls and roof.
• The name Padian Torogan means a cemetery, and not a residential place.
• When the people around the area were asked who among them is registered in Padian Torogon,
none of them answered in the affirmative.
Based on this report the Comelec ruled that Padian Torogan is a ghost precinct and should be excluded in the
special election.

Held: It is erroneous for the Comelec to rule that Padian Tororgan is a ghost precinct because it is a barangay
which should have at least 1 precinct. But since it is factual matter to be determined by the Comelec in the
exercise of its administrative power, the Court refuses to review. It is not impossible for a barangay not to have
actual inhabitants because people migrate. A barangay may officially exist on record and the fact that nobody
resides there does not result in its automatic cessation as a unit of local government.

Under the LGC of 1991, abolition of a local government unit may be done by congress if it involves a province,
city, or a municipality. If it involves a barangay, it may be done by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan or
Sangguniang Panlungsod concerned subject to plebiscite, except in Metro Manila areas and cultural
communities. The findings of the Comelec, being an administrative agency, cannot be reversed on appeal or
certiorari especially when no significant facts and circumstances are shown to have been overlooked or
disregarded which when considered would have substantially affected the outcome of the case.

No voter is disenfranchised because no voter such exists. Suffrage is not tampered with when a list of fictitious
voters is excluded from election. Suffrage is conferred by the Constitution only on citizens who are qualified to
vote and who are not otherwise disqualified by law. The exclusion of non-existent voters all the more protects
the validity and credibility of the electoral process as well as suffrage because the sovereign will is not rendered
nugatory by the inclusion of some ghost voters.
 PART III
THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

COMPOSITION, QUALIFICATIONS & TERM OF OFFICE.

Who compose the Commission?

1 Chair
6 Commissioners

What are their qualifications?

Natural-born citizen
At least 35 years old
Holders of college degree
Not a candidate for any elective position in the immediately preceding elections
Majority, including the Chair must be lawyers engaged in the practice of law for at least 10 years

What is practice of law?

It means an activity, in and out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge,
training and experience.
Thus, a lawyer-economist, lawyer-manager, lawyer-entrepreneur, lawyer-negotiator of contracts, lawyer-
legislator for the rich and poor satisfy the requirement. (Cayetano v Monsod)

Who appoints them and for how long?

The President with the consent of the COA, for a term of 7 years without reappointment.
Can any member be appointed or designated in an acting capacity?
No, otherwise it violates security of tenure which is one of the constitutional safeguards of Comelec
independence. (Brillantes v Yorac)

How is its independence safeguarded?

Describe as independent.
During the tenure, its members are not allowed to:
• Hold any other office or employment
• Engage in the practice of any profession
• Actively manage or control any business which in any way be affected by the functions of his
office
• Be beneficially interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract with, or in any franchise or
privilege granted by - the government or any of its subdivisions, agencies, instrumentalities,
including government owned or controlled corporations and its subsdiaries.
• Salary is fixed by law and cannot be decreased.
• They appoint their officials and employees.
• Enjoy fiscal autonomy
• It promulgates its own rules concerning pleadings and practice before it.

What are the constitutional powers and functions of the Commission?

• It enforces and administers all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of election, plebiscite,
initiative, referendum and recall.
• It exercises exclusive original jurisdiction over all contest relating to the election, returns, and
qualifications of all elective, regional, provincial and city officials.
• It exercises appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving elective municipal officials decided
by the RTC, or involving elective barangay officials decided by the MTC.
• Its decisions, final orders, or rulings on election contest involving elective municipal and
 barangay offices shall be final, executory, and not appealable.
• It decides, except those involving the right to vote, all questions affecting elections, including
the number and location of polling places, appointment of election officials and inspectors, and
registration of voters.
(Lacking)
• It deputizes with the concurrence of the President, law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities
of the Government, including the AFP for the exclusive purpose of ensuring free, orderly, honest
and peaceful, and credible elections.
• It registers political parties, organizations, or coalitions.
• It accredits citizen’s arms.
• It files upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative, petitions in court for inclusion or
exclusion of voters.
• It investigates and prosecutes election offenses.
• It recommends to the Congress effective measures to minimize election spending, including
limitation of places where propaganda materials shall be posted, and to prevent and penalized all
forms of election frauds, offenses, malpractices, and nuisance candidates.
• It recommends to the President the removal of any officer or employer it has deputized, or the
impositions of any other disciplinary action, for violation or disregard of, or disobedience to its
directive, order, or decision.
• It reports to the President and the Congress a comprehensive report on the conduct of each
election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall.

How are the Constitutional powers and functions classified?

Administrative or quasi-judicial, (Filipinas v Ferrer, Baytan v Comelec);
Quasi-legislative (Mendoza v Comelec); or
Ministerial

What are the administrative and quasi-judicial powers and functions?

Article IX(C), Section 2 paragraphs 1, 3-9 are administrative while paragraph 2 is quasi-judicial.

Enforcement and administration of all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of election plebiscite,
initiative, referendum, or recall
A resolution awarding the contract in favor of one bidder is not issued pursuant to its quasi-judicial functions
but merely as an incident of its inherent administrative functions over the conduct of elections. As such, it does
not fall under the final order contemplated by law as reviewable by the SC on certiorari. Since it is non-judicial
in character, the Commission cannot issue its contumacy power. Thus, any question arising from it may be well
taken in an ordinary civil action before the trial courts. (Filipinas Eng’g. Machine Shop v Ferrer, GR No L-
31455, February 28, 1985)

ADMINISTRATIVE POWERS

(1) POWER TO ENFORCE AND ADMINISTER ELECTION LAWS

What is the extent of the administrative power to enforce and administer all election laws?
It is so broad it includes all the necessary and incidental powers to hold free, orderly, honest, peaceful and
credible elections. Thus, even if manual count is not expressly authorized under the automation law, it may still
be done if the accounting machines could not accurately count the votes due to misalignment of ovals and
incorrect sequence of the code. (Loong v Comelec)

But it covers only popular elections, not election of federation officers. (Taule v Santos)

Does it include the power to place areas under the Comelec control and on what ground?
Yes, on the ground of serious armed threats.
What are serious armed threats?
Presence of paramilitary forces, private armies or identifiable armed bands
Widely perceived to have committed terrorism, fraud or other election irregularities
And threaten or tend to disrupt the holding of a free, peaceful, honest, orderly and credible elections.

What areas may be covered by control?

Any political division, subdivision, unit or area

What are the implications of Comelec control?

(1) Immediate and direct control and supervision over all national and local officials and
employees required by law to perform duties and/or comply with prohibitions relative to the
conduct of elections in the area.
(2) Exercise full control and supervision over all national and local law enforcement agencies as
well as military officers and men assigned or deployed in the area.

Who enforces Comelec control?

Special Task Force

Who composes Special Task Force?

Head – Commissioner
Members – Regional Election Director concerned, highest ranking PNP official in the area, highest ranking AFP
official in the area
Additional members – lawyers of the Commission at the discretion of the Head or exigency requires

What are powers of the Special Task Force?

(1) Supervise and control administration and transactions of the local government unit to enforce strict
compliance ith election bans and prohibitions like:
• Disbursement of public funds
• Construction of public works
• Movement of governmental personnel
(2) Oversee distribution, assignment and deployment of PNP and AFP officers and personnel and control the
activities relative to the strict enforcement of:
• Gun Ban
• Security personnel of candidates and citizens
• Appointment or use of special policemen
(3) Augment police force
(4) Substitute whole unit of police force
(5) Relieve any police or military officer
(6) Revoke exemptions from gun ban and cancel all permits to carry firearms.
(7) Act as law enforcement arm of the Commission
(8) Adopt appropriate measures to safeguard elections
(9) Submit periodic reports

For how long does the Commission place certain area under its control?
Until the end of election period, unless sooner lifted by the Commission.

Does the power to administer cover elections only?

No, it also includes the conduct plebiscite, initiative, referendum and recall.

(2) POWER TO CONDUCT PLEBISCITE, INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM& RECALL

Plebiscite, defined.
What is plebiscite?
It is the electoral process by which an initiative on the Constitution is approved or rejected by the people.

Initiative, defined.
What is the people’s initiative?
It refers to the power of the people to directly propose amendments to the Constitution upon a petition of at least
12% of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least
3% of its registered voters.

Conditions:
It is subject to ratification.
It is subject to an enabling law passed by the Congress.
It cannot be exercised within 5 years from ratification.
Nor oftener than once every 5 years thereafter.
It is limited to amendments only.
Must be directly proposed by at least 12% of the total number of registered voters nationwide.
Every legislative district must be represented by at least 3% of its registered voters.

What is the form of petition?

It is written.
In a form to be determined by Comelec.
It must contain the entire proposal on its face.
Or attached to it.
No agent or representative can sign on their behalf.
Prior to signing the person must have examined the entire proposal.
And its failure and effect are explained.

“DO YOU APPROVE OF THE AMENDMENT OF ARTICLES VI AND VII OF THE 1987
CONSTITUTION, CHANGING THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT FROM THE PRESENT BICAMERAL
PRESIDENTIAL TO A UNICAMERAL PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, IN ORDER TO
ACHIEVE GREATER EFFICIENCY, SIMPLICITY, AND ECONOMY IN GOVERNMENT AND
PROVIDING AN ARTICLE XVIII AS TRANSITORY PROVISIONS FOR THE ORDERLY SHIFT FROM
ONE SYSTEM TO ANOTHER?”
I hereby APPROVE the amendment to the 1987 Constitution. My signature herein shall form part of the petition
for initiative to amend the Constitution signifies my support for the filing thereof.

Implications of the proposed amendments:

1. The term limits on members of the legislature will be lifted and thus members of the Parliament
can be re-elected indefinitely.
2. The interim Parliament can continue to function indefinitely until its members, who are almost
all the present members of Congress, decide to call for parliamentary elections. Thus, the
members of the interim Parliament will determine the expiration of their own term of office.
3. Within 45 days from the ratification of the proposed changes, the interim Parliament shall
continue to propose further amendments or revisions to the Constitution.

The proposed transitory provision is unrelated to the shift from bicameral presidential to unicameral
parliamentary form of government.
This is logrolling.
It happens when a petition incorporates an unrelated subject matter in the same petition. (Lambino v Comelec)

Is there an enabling law for the people’s initiative?

Yes, the Initiative and Referendum Act enacted on August 4, 1989. It defines initiative as the power of the
people to propose amendments to the Constitution or to propose and enact legislations.

It likewise enumerates three systems of initiative:

Initiative on the constitution – petition proposing amendments to the constitution
Initiative on statutes – petition proposing to enact a national legislation
Initiative on local legislation - petition to enact a regional, provincial, city, municipal or barangay law,
ordinance or resolution.

Is the enabling law sufficient to govern the people’s initiative?

No, it is incomplete, inadequate or wanting in essential forms and conditions to cover the system of initiative to
amend the Constitution. (Santiago v Comelec)

But since the petition is in itself void for failure to comply with the basic constitutional requirements on the
conduct and scope of the people’s initiative to amend the constitution, there is no need to revisit the Santiago
ruling. ( Lambino v Comelec)

On motion for reconsideration however, the SC reversed its previous ruling and said RA 6735 is after all, a
sufficient enabling law to implement the people’s initiative. ( Lambino v Comelec)

Revision, defined.
What is revision?
It broadly implies a change that alters a basic principle of the Constitution like the principle of separation of
powers, as when the Office of the President as the locus of executive power is abolished alone, or the system of
checks and balances, as when one chamber of Congress is abolished alone.

Amendment, defined.
What is amendment?
It broadly refers to the change that adds, reduces, or deletes without altering the basic principle involved.

Where the proposed change applies only to a specific provision of the constitution affecting any other section or
article, it may generally be considered an amendment and not a revision, as when it merely reduces the voting
age from 18 to 15, Filipino ownership of mass media companies from 100% to 60%.

What is the difference between an amendment and revision?

Revision generally affects several provisions of the Constitution while amendment generally affects only the
specific provision being amended.

An amendment envisages an alteration of one or a few specific and separable provisions. The guiding original
intention of amendment is to improve specific parts or to add new provisions deemed necessary to meet new
conditions or to suppress specific portions that may have become obsolete or that are judged to be dangerous.

In revision, however, the guiding original intention and plan contemplates a re-examination of the entire
document, or of provisions of the document which have over all implications for the entire document to
determine how and to what extent they should be altered.

Thus, for instance a switch from the presidential system to a parliamentary system would be a revision because
of its overall impact on the entire constitutional structure. So would a switch from a bicameral system to a
unicameral system be because of its effect on other important provisions of the Constitution.

How do we know if it is revision or amendment?

Quantitative test and qualitative test

Quantitative Test – whether the proposed change is so extensive in its provisions as to change directly the
substantial entirety of the constitution by the deletion or alteration of numerous existing provisions. Examines
the number of provisions affected and not the degree of change.

Qualitative Test – whether the proposed change has far reaching implications. Examines the degree of change
whether it alters the structure of the government.
Under the quantitative and qualitative test, the Lambino petition is not merely an amendment but a revision.

Quantitatively – it changes two Articles

Article VI on the Legislature
Article VII on the Executive
105 provisions

Qualitatively – it alters the structure of the government:

From presidential to parliamentary
From bicameral to unicameral
BUT, there is no fixed rule whether the change is an amendment or a revision.

Referendum, defined.
What is referendum?
It is the power of the electorate to approve or reject a legislation through an election called for a purpose.
It has two classes:
Referendum on statutes
Referendum on local law

Recall, defined.
What is recall?
A mode of removal of an elective public officer by the people before the end of term of office, it is an incident
of the people’s sovereign power. Indispensable for the proper administration of public affairs.

Who exercises the power of recall?

Registered voters of local government unit to which the local elective official subject of the recall belongs.

On what ground?
Loss of confidence

How is it exercised?
Initiated upon the petition of at least 25% of the total number of registered voters in the local government unit
concerned during the election in which the local official sought to be recalled was elected.

Written petition for recall duly signed before the election officer or his or her representative.

Publication by Comelec of the petition for the purpose of verifying the authenticity and genuineness of the
petition and the required percentage of voters

Announcement of acceptance of candidates to the position

When is recall effective?

Election and proclamation of the winner.

What are its implications to the official sought to be recalled?

If he or she wins the recall, confidence is affirmed.
If he or she loses the recall, confidence is truly lost.

What are the prohibitions against the elective official sought to be recalled?
He or she cannot resign.
As a matter of fact, he or she is automatically considered as a candidate.

What are the limitations on recall?

Only once during the term of office for loss of confidence.
No recall within one year from assumption to office.
No recall within one year prior to the next regular election.

Why is there a 25% minimum?

To ensure that a recall election is not held in response to a small and unrepresented minority. Thus, a recall
petition initiated and signed by one person only and setting another date for others to follow is not allowed.
Otherwise, it invites the public to sign something they did not think about in the first place. It circumvents the
explicit requirement of 25% of the total number of registered voters.
(Angobung v Comelec)

Is it necessary that the 25% of the total number of registered voters sign the petition at the time it is
filed?
If it is a mere initiation, it must contain the names of 25% of the total number of registered voters. If it is filing,
25% of the total number of registered voters must personally appear and sign the petition before the election
officer or his or her representative.

Is it practicable?
No, thus the Comelec resolve to dispense with the personal appearance and signing. It required that at the time
of filing, 25% must sign the petition.

(3) POWER TO DECIDE ALL QUESTIONS AFFECTING ELECTIONS

Except: Suffrage or the right to vote

But it can still inquire whether a candidate is a resident despite a court ruling in exclusion proceedings that he
is. (Domino v Comelec)

It can also exclude spurious election returns because by doing so, it does not nullify the votes per se but the
spurious document that embodies them. Thus, exclusion of election returns does not amount to denial of the
right to vote. (Pungutan v Abubakar)

Powers not given

It has no power to apportion legislative districts. A province was created resulting in unequal distribution of
inhabitants.

The Comelec transferred a municipality from one district to another on the ground that Section of the Ordinance
appended to the Constitution authorizes it to make minor adjustments in redistricting.

The Comelec is without jurisdiction to apportion the legislative districts and the phrase “minor adjustments”
refers to the instance where a municipality was omitted in the enumeration of those composing the legislative
district. (Montejo v Comelec)

If it involves pre-proclamation controversies, the Commission en banc cannot acquire jurisdiction unless it is
brought to it on motion for reconsideration from the decision of a division.

But upon the start of term of office, cases involving pre-proclamation controversies are deemed terminated.

Without prejudice to the filing of appropriate election protest cases. (Sarmiento v Comelec)

What does “all questions affecting” mean?

The word “affecting” does not refer to “any and all” questions. It is not construed to divest the SC of
jurisdiction. (Diocese)

(4) POWER TO DEPUTIZE OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Who or which can be deputized?

Law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the Government, including the AFP.

For what purpose?

Exclusive purpose of ensuring free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.

How does the President concur?

It was exercised in general terms and in advance in EO No. 134, dated February 27, 1987. (People v Basilla)

What is the purpose of deputation to investigate and prosecute?

Lack of man power
The prompt and fair investigation and prosecution of election offenses committed before or in the course of
nationwide elections would simply not be possible, unless, perhaps, it had a bureaucracy many times larger than
what it actually has. (People v Basilla)

What is the extent of deputation?

The deputies become the alter ego of the Commission.

They are subject to its authority, control and supervision in respect of the particular functions covered by such
deputation.

The acts of such deputies within the lawful scope of their delegated authority are, in legal contemplation of the
acts of the Commission itself. (People v Basilla)

What is the limit of deputation?

It cannot suspend or remove the deputy from his or her original, it can only recommend. (People v Basilla)

(5) RECOMMENDATORY POWER

What is covered by the power to recommend and to whom?

It may recommend to Congress measures.
Minimize election spending.
Limitation of common poster areas.
Prevention of and penalty for all forms of election fraud, offenses, malpractices and nuisance candidates.
It may recommend to the President.
Removal or suspension of its deputies
For violation, disregard or disobedience to its directive, order or decision
But prior to recommendadtion
It must first satisfy itself that indeed there has been an infraction of the law or its allied directives by the person
administratively charged.
Thus, it may take cognizance of an administrative case involving performance of duties of a city prosecutor as a
deputized canvasser.
It relates to the performance of his duties as canvasser and not as prosecutor. (Tan v Comelec)
In disallowing oversized tarpaulins in private property, the Commission cannot invoke its power to recommend
because it pertains to candidates only. (Diocese of Bacolod)

(6) POWER TO REGISTER POLITICAL PARTY AND PARTY-LIST

Political party, defined.

What is a political party?
It refers to an organized group of citizens advocating an ideology of platform, principles, and policies for the
general conduct of government and which, as the most immediate means of securing their adoption, regularly
nominates and supports certain of its leaders & members as candidates for public office.
National party – constituency is spread over the geographical territory of at least a majority of the regions
Regional – constituency is spread over the geographical territory of at least a majority of the cities and
provinces comprising the region.
Groups which cannot be registered as political parties
Are there groups that cannot be registered as political party?
Yes and these are:
• Religious denominations and sects
• Those which seek to achieve their goals through violence and unlawful means
• Those which refuse to uphold and adhere to the Constitution
• Those which are supported by any foreign government
But the power to determine the identity of a political party or whether it is separate and distinct from any other
party is exclusive unless gravely abused. (Santos v Comelec)

Why is foreign support prohibited?

It constitutes interference in national affairs. Thus, financial contributions from foreign governments and their
agencies to political parties, organizations, coalitions, or candidates related to elections are prohibited.

What happens if it is accepted?

It constitutes additional ground for the cancellation of their registration with the Commission, in addition to
other penalties that may be prescribed by law.

Are there groups that cannot be registered as party-list?

Yes, if it:
• is a religious sect or denomination, organization or association organized for religious purposes,
• advocates violence or unlawful means to seek its goal
• is a foreign party or organization
• is receiving support from any foreign government, foreign political party, foundation, organization,
whether directly or through any of its officers or members or indirectly through third parties for
partisan election purposes
• violates or fails to comply with laws, rules, or regulations relating to elections
• declares untruthful statements in its petition
• has ceased to exist for at least 1 year, or
• it fails to participate in the last 2 preceding elections or fails to obtain at least two per centum (2%)
of the votes cast under the party-list system in the 2 preceding elections for the constituency in
which it has registered

(7) POWER TO SUPERVISE OR REGULATE FRANCHISES, TRANSPORTATION, ETC.

What is the coverage of the supervisory and regulatory powers?

It covers enjoyment or utilization of all franchises or permits for the operation of transportation and other public
utilities, media of communication or information, all grants, special privileges, or concessions granted by the
Government or any of its subdivision, agency, or instrumentality, including any government-owned or
controlled corporation or its subsidiary.

Such supervisory power does not extend to the very freedom of an individual to express his or her preference of
candidates in an election by placing election campaign stickers on his or her vehicle. (Adiong, cited in 1-UTAK)

The Constitution merely grants the Commission power to supervise the enjoyment and utilization of all
franchises and permits public utilities. It does not extend to the ownership per se of PUVs and transport
terminals but only to the franchise or permit to operate them. The posting of campaign materials on PUVs and
terminals is not only a form of political expression but an act of ownership. (1-UTAK)

What is the limit of these powers?

To ensure equal opportunity time and space, and right to reply, including reasonable, equal rates for it, for
public information campaigns and forum among candidates in connection with the objective of holding free,
orderly, peaceful, and credible elections. (1)

What is an election survey?

It refers to the measurement of opinions and perceptions of the voters as regards a candidate’s popularity,
qualifications, platforms or a matter of public discussion in relation to the election, including voters’ preference
for candidates or publicly discussed issues during the campaign period.
---------
Can election surveys be published?
Facts: The Comelec prohibited the publication of election surveys affecting national and local candidates 15
and 7 days before an election period, respectively.
Held: It is unconstitutional.
1. It imposes a prior restraint on the freedom of expression.
2. it is a direct and total suppression of a category of expression even though such suppression is
only for a limited period, and
3. the governmental interest sought to be promoted can be achieved by means other than the
suppression of the freedom of expression. (SWS v Comelec)
--------
What about newspaper columns and commentaries about candidates?
The prohibition against political advertisements for newspapers, radio broadcasting and or television station and
other mass media does not restrict reporting of news and news events relating to candidates their qualifications,
political parties and their platforms of government. It does not cover commentaries, expressions of belief or
opinion for as long as they are not in fact advertisements for candidates secretly paid for. (NPC v Comelec, GR
No. 102653, Mar. 5, 1992)

Are the members of media allowed to run for public office?

No, any mass media columnist, commentator, announcer or personality who is a candidate for any elective
public office is required to take a leave of absence from his or her work as such during the campaign period.
It is to prevent the possibility that a franchise holder may favor or give any undue advantage to a candidate in
terms of advertising space or radio or television time. The columnist or the commentator who is also a candidate
would be more exposed to the voters to the prejudice of other candidates unless required to take a leave of
absence. (Sanidad v Comelec)

Media practitioners during plebiscite

Are the members of the media allowed to campaign for or against a plebiscite?
Facts: Comelec resolved that no mass media , columnist, commentator, announcer or personality shall use his
or her column or radio or television time to campaign for or against plebiscite issues.
Contention of the petitioner: It violates constitutional guarantees of the freedom of expression and of the
press. Unlike a regular news reporter or news correspondent who merely reports the news, a columnist
obviously and necessarily writes his or her opinions, views and belief on any issue or subject. It thus constitutes
prior restraint on the constitutionally-guaranteed freedom of the press and further imposes subsequent
punishment for those who may violate it because it contains a penal provision.
Contention of the Comelec: It is a valid implementation of its power to supervise and regulate media during
election or plebiscite periods. It does not absolutely bar petitioner from expressing his views and/or from
campaigning for or against the Organic Act.
Held: It is unconstitutional. What is granted to the Comelec was the power to supervise and regulate the use and
enjoyment of franchises, permits or other grants issued for the operation of media of communication or
information. It does not include the right to supervise and regulate the exercise by media practitioners
themselves of their right expression during plebiscite periods. Media practitioners exercising their freedom of
expression during plebiscite periods are neither the franchise holders nor the candidates. In fact, there are no
candidates involved in a plebiscite. (Sanida v Comelec)

Exit Polls
What is exit poll?
It is a species of electoral survey conducted by qualified individuals or groups of individuals to determine the
probable result of an election by confidently asking randomly selected voters whom they have voted for,
immediately after they have officially cast their ballots. (ABS-CBN v Comelec)

Is it allowed?
No law prohibits the holding and reporting of exit polls. To ban it absolutely will violate the freedom of
expression, speech and of the press.
But it was argued it should not be allowed otherwise it violates the sanctity and secrecy of the ballot, conditions
the public mind and confuses who won and lost the elections.
These are purely speculative.
First, by the very nature of the survey, the interviewees or participants are selected at random, so that the results
will as much as possible be representative or reflective of the general sentiment or view of the community or
group polled.
Second, the survey result is not meant to replace or be at par with the official Comelec count.
It consists merely of the opinion of the polling group as to who the electorate in general has probably voted for,
based on the limited data gathered from polled individuals.
Finally, not at stake here are the credibility and integrity of the elections, which are exercises that are separate
and independent from the exit polls.
The holding and the reporting of the results of exit polls cannot undermine those of the elections, since the
former is only part of the latter. If at all, the outcome of one can only be indicative of the other.

So, is it allowed?
It is not prohibited but merely regulated. For instance, a specific limited area for conducting exit polls may be
designated. Only professional survey groups may be allowed to conduct the same. Pollsters may be kept at a
reasonable distance from the voting center. They may be required to explain to voters that they may refuse to be
interviewed, and that the interview is not part of the official balloting process. The pollsters may further be
required to wear distinctive clothing that would show they are not election officials. They may be required to
undertake an information campaign on the nature of the exercise and the results to be obtained. These measures,
together with a general prohibition of disruptive behavior could ensure a clean, safe and orderly election. (ABS-
CBN v Comelec)

Did the Comelec issue such rules?

Yes, pollsters are:
Not allowed to conduct survey within 50 meters from the polling place
Wear distinctive clothing
Inform the voters that they may refuse to answer
Result of the exit polls may be announced after the closing of polls on Election Day
Clearly identify the total number of respondents and the places where they were taken
It is unofficial and does not represent trend. (Sec. 5.5, RA 9006)

Does it not violate ballot secrecy?

In exit polls, the contents of the official ballot are not actually exposed. The revelation of whom an elector has
voted for is not compulsory, but voluntary voters may also choose not to reveal their identities. (ABS-CBN v
Comelec)

(8) POWER TO INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE

What covers this power?

It includes cases of violations of election laws including acts or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses,
and malpractices.

Is it exclusive?
OEC: Comelec has the exclusive power to investigate and prosecute election offenses. But it may avail of the
assistance of the prosecuting arms of the government.

R.A 9369: Comelec and the prosecuting arms of the government have concurrent jurisdiction to investigate and
prosecute election offenses.

Power to investigate and prosecute does not include the duty to gather evidence
Facts: A letter complaint was tried before the Comelec alleging use of government funds for election purposes.
The evidence attached were newspaper column, transcripts of testimony in Congress hearings and an affidavit.
It was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence for being plain conjectures and hearsay. But it was argued that it
is incumbent upon the Comelec to gather evidence as part of its constitutional duty to investigate and prosecute
election offenses.
Held: The power to investigate and prosecute does not include the physical searching and gathering of proof in
support of a complaint for an alleged commission of an election offense. A complainant, who in effect accuses
another person of having committed an act constituting an election offense, has the burden, as if it is his
responsibility, to follow through his accusation and prove his complaint. The claim that the complainant is a
mere informant and not the private complainant with the burden of proof is ridiculous. (Kilosbayan v Comelec)

The power to investigate and prosecute election offenses is administrative in nature

The power to investigate and prosecute election offenses, like double registration, is inherently administrative.
Hence, it may be decided directly by the Commission en banc as opposed to the exercise of quasi-judicial
power which should be heard first by division and later by the en banc on motion for reconsideration. (Baytan v
Comelec, GR No. 153945, Jan. 4, 2003)

(9) DUTY TO REPORT

What is covered by the Constitutional duty to report?

The Commission on Elections submits to the President and the Congress a comprehensive report on the conduct
of each election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall.

Does the Comelec exercise judicial powers?

Essentially it does. But since judicial power is technically exercised by judges and justices, it is more apt to say
it performs quasi-judicial functions. If the power is judicial in nature or character, but it does not involve the
functions of a judge or is conferred upon an officer other than the judge. It is quasi-judicial. (Sandoval v
Comelec)

When can we say that it exercises quasi-judicial functions?

When it exercises original and appellate jurisdiction over election contests including pre-proclamation
controversies.

Appeals from rulings of the Board of Canvassers involve pre-proclamation controversies. (Sarmiento v
Comelec)

Annulment of pre-proclamation & determination of existence of manifest errors requires arbitration hence
quasi-judicial. (Sandoval)

Petition for declaration of failure of election on the ground of missing names and control data, unsecured ballot
boxes, delay in the delivery of election returns.

Its determination is only an exercise of administrative functions. (Canicosa v Comelec)

Determination of probable cause is administrative. (Baytan v Comelec)

What are the necessary incidents of the exercise of quasi-judicial powers?

It holds hearings and exercises discretion of a judicial nature. It receives evidence, ascertains facts, and
determines the law and legal rights of the parties. It decides on the merits of the case and renders judgment.
(Mendoza v Comelec)

LEGISLATIVE POWERS

(1) RULE-MAKING POWER

1987 Constitution
It promulgates rules concerning pleadings and practice before it.
Provided, it does not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.
Omnibus Election Code
Promulgate rules and regulations implementing the OEC and other laws which it is required to enforce and
administer.
In case of conflict, between its rules and any other administrative government agency concerning the same
matter relative to elections, the Comelec rules prevail.

What is the history of the rule-making power?

1935 Constitution: It has exclusive charge to enforce and administer all laws relative to the conduct of
elections.

1973 Constitution: It enforces and administers all laws relative to the conduct of elections.
But, it was not expressly granted the power to promulgate rules and regulations. It may only be granted by
Congress through special law.

1987 Constitution: It enforces and administers all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of elections.
The incorporation of the word regulations took into account its power to promulgate rules and regulations
implementing election laws under the Omnibus Election Code. This upgrades the statutory authority to
promulgate rules and regulations into a constitutional authority. Otherwise, Congress may withdraw it anytime
violates the independence of the Comelec. (Gallardo v Tabamo)

Are the rules promulgated by the Comelec binding on the regular courts?
No, the rules concerning pleadings and practice promulgated by the Commission on Elections in the exercise of
its power to promulgate rules and regulations are applicable to actions and proceedings brought before it only.
Thus, the prohibition of motion to dismiss and motion for bill of particulars does not apply in election protest
cases filed before the regular courts where the Rules of Court applies. (Aruelo v CA)

(2) SUSPENSION OF RULES OF PROCEDURE

Can the Comelec procedure be suspended?

Yes, in the interest of justice and in order to expedite disposition of cases pending before it (Dela Llana v
Comelec)

Facts: A candidate lost by mere 24 votes. It turned out however that in one election return, his 42 votes was
transposed to the statement of votes as only 4, denying him 38 votes that could have won him the election. The
election protest he filed was treated as a petition to correct manifest errors. It was opposed because it must be
done within 5 days from proclamation. It was late by 2 days.
Held: The Comelec has broad powers. It includes resolution and determination of election controversies. It has
also the power to promulgate its rules to expedite disposition of election cases. Concomitant to such powers is
the authority to determine true nature of cases before it. Thus, it examines the allegations in the pleadings,
aware that in determining the nature of the complaint, the averment, rather than the caption, is the proper gauge.
The primary duty is determine the will of the people. When it treated it as correction, it simply complied with its
duty. (Dela Llana)

What is manifest error?

It refers to errors in the election returns, in the entries of the statement of votes by precinct per municipality, or
in the certificate of canvass. (Dela Llana v Comelec)
When what is involved is purely:
• Mathematical and/or mechanical error in the operation of adding machine
• And it does not involve opening of ballot boxes
• Appreciation of ballots
• Examination of election returns
• All that is required is to reconvene the board of canvassers to rectify. (Torres v Comelec)

When is an error manifest?

• Evident to the eye and understanding;
• Visible to the eye;
 • That which is open, palpable and incontrovertible;
• Needing no evidence to make it more clear;
• Not obscure or hidden. (Dela Llana v Comelec)

What are instances of manifest error?

• A copy of election returns or certificate of canvass was tabulated more than once.
• Two copies of election returns or certificates of canvass were tabulated separately.
• There was a mistake in adding or copying of the figures into the certificate of canvass or into the
statement of votes.
• So-called election returns from non-existent precincts were included in the canvass. (Sec. 7, Rule
27, Rules of Procedure)

How is a manifest error corrected?

The Board of Canvassers may, motu proprio, or upon verified petition by any candidate or political party, after
due notice and hearing, correct the error. (Sec. 7, Rule 27)

Can a manifest error be corrected after proclamation?

Facts: Manifest error was corrected after proclamation upon the request of the BoC. It was argued it is allowed
only prior to proclamation because after the proclamation, the Board of Canvassers loses jurisdiction.
Held: A proclamation based on a statement of votes containing erroneous entries is null. It is no proclamation at
all and the assumption to office of the proclaimed winner does not divest the Commission on Elections the
power to annul proclamation. Since the SOV forms the basis of COCP, any error affects the validity of the
proclamation. (Torres v Comelec)

What are the Electoral Tribunals?

Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET)
Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET)
House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET)

What is their composition?

PET – Supreme Court en banc
SET & HRET – 9 members
• 3 Justices of the SC
• 6 members of the Senate or House – chosen based on proportional representation
Most senior justice acts as the Chair.

What is their function?

Sole judge of all contests relating to the:
• Election
• Returns
• Qualifications of their respective members

What is the extent of their jurisdiction?

The use of the word “sole” emphasizes the exclusive character of the jurisdiction conferred. It is complete and
unimpaired as if it remained originally in the legislature. Characterized as full, clear, and complete. (Lazatin v
HRET)
It excludes the exercise of any authority on the part of the SC that affects, curtails, or restricts it. It is beyond
judicial interference except it is arbitrary and denies due process. Thus, in case of conflict between the Omnibus
Election Code and the HRET rules on timeliness, the latter prevails. (Lazatin v HRET)

But while it is true that the SC is the sole judge of all contests relating to the qualifications of the President, it
applies only to the elected President, and not to the candidate for President, which the Comelec has jurisdiction.
(Tecson v Comelec)

When does the jurisdiction of the Comelec and the HRET begin?
Facts: A district representative was proclaimed, took oath and assumed office. But the proclamation was
nullified by the Comelec because it was void. The BoC simply corrected the contested returns without waiting
for their final resolution.
Held: The jurisdiction pertains to the HRET because the district representative already assumed office. (Lazatin
v Comelec)

Facts: The CoC of a district representative was cancelled for material representation but since it did not acquire
finality yet, she was proclaimed. The cancellation became final. But she now argues that after the proclamation,
the Comelec lost jurisdiction over her qualification and it now pertains to the HRET.
Held: Despite the proclamation, the Comelec retains jurisdiction because three conditions did not concur for the
HRET to acquire it:
• Valid proclamation
• Proper oath
• Assumption to office (Reyes v Comelec)