|| Pre-Election ||
– registration
– challenge to registration
– inclusion
– exclusion
– voters qualification and
disqualification
– certificate of candidacy
– precincts and polling places
– watchers
– petition to deny course or to
cancel a certificate of
candidacy
– political parties
– election campaign,
expenditures, and election
propaganda
|| Election Proper ||
– casting of votes
– challenge of illegal votes
– records of challenges and
oaths
– minute of voting and
counting of votes
– list of unused ballots
|| Post-Election ||
– counting of votes
– board of elections inspectors
– appreciation of ballots
– election returns
– announcement of result and
issuance of certificate of
votes received
– canvass and proclamation
– pre-proclamation and
controversy
– election protest against
proclaimed candidate
– original and exclusive
jurisdiction
– appellate jurisdiction
– requisites of election protest
– quo warranto, its requisites
– election offenses
– appeal
 Chapter 3:
Challenge; Inclusion; Exclusion;
Annulment of Book of Records
• 1A / 2H Notes Compilation

Josephine Angelica Beatrice M. Enriquez | 2H

 CHALLENGES TO RIGHT TO REGISTER

WHO MAY a. any voter;

CHALLENGE b. candidate; or
c. representative of a political party.
(Sec. 18, RA 8189, SCR)

a. application in writing;
REQUIREMENTS b. under oath;
(Sec. 18, RA 8189, SCR) c. proof of notice of hearing to challenger and the applicant;
d. state the grounds for challenge.

PROCEDURE a. hearing on 3rd Monday of the month;

(Sec. 18, RA 8189, SCR) b. decision rendered before end of the month.

OPPOSITION TO
a. filed not later than 2nd Monday of the month;
CHALLENGE b. scheduled to be heard by Election Registration Board.
(Sec. 18, RA 8189, SCR)
 PETITION FOR INCLUSION
a. any person whose application for registration has been disapproved by
WHO MAY FILE the Board;
(Sec. 34, RA 8189, SCR) b. any person whose name has been stricken out from the list.

a. petition;
REQUIREMENTS b. certificate of disapproval of applications;
(Sec. 34, RA 8189, SCR) c. proof of service of notice of petition upon the Board.

WHERE TO FILE Municipal Trial Court or Metropolitan Trial Court

(Sec. 34, RA 8189, SCR)

a. at any time;
WHEN TO FILE b. except 105 days prior to regular election or 75 days prior to special
(Sec. 34, RA 8189, SCR) election.

WHEN TO DECIDE Within 15 days after its filing

(Sec. 34, RA 8189, SCR)

a. within 5 days from receipt of notice;

APPEAL b. to Regional Trial Court;
(Sec. 33, RA 8189, SCR) c. decide appeal within 10 days from receipt;
d. decision is final and executory (no MR)
 VELASCO v. COMELEC
G.R. No. 180051; 24 December 2008

FACTS:

Nardo Velasco – was born in Sasmuan Pampanga in 1952. In 1983, he moved to USA where he became a citizen. On July 31,
2006, his application for dual citizenship was approved. He returned to the Philippines on September 14, 2006, and he has not left
since. On October 13, 2004, he applied for registration but was denied by the Election Registration Board. He filed a petition for
Inclusion of his name in the listof voters with MTC-Sasmuan, which granted Velasco’s petition.

RTC-Guagua – reversed the MTC decision holding that Velasco lost his domicile of origin when he became a US citizen. Velasco,
according to the RTC, only registered or reacquired his Philippine residency on July 31, 2006 when he reacquired his Filipino
citizenship.Velasco appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA) via a petition for review.

Velasco – filed his COC for Mayor of Sasmuan, stating that he is a registered voter of Precinct No. 103-A of Sasmuan.

Mozart Panlaqui – who also filed his COC for Mayor of Sasmuan filed a Petition to Deny Due Course and/or To Cancel
Velasco’s COC claiming that, (1) he is not a registered voter; (2) RTC has denied Velasco’s petition for inclusion as a voter; (3)
Velasco does not possess the requirement of residency; (4) Velasco is not eligible to run for office since he is not a qualified voter.

Velasco – was proclaimed Mayor of Sasmuan on May 16, 2017.

HELD:

a. Velasco is not only going around the law by his claim that he is registered voter when he is not, as has been determined by a
court in a final judgment. Equally important is that he has made a material misrepresentation under oath in his COC
regarding his qualifications. For these violations, he must pay the ultimate price – the nullification of his election victory.

b. He may also have to account in a criminal court for making a false statement under oath.
 PETITION FOR EXCLUSION
a. any registered voter;
WHO MAY FILE b. representative of a political party;
(Sec. 35, RA 8189, SCR) c. Election Officer.

REQUIREMENTS a. sworn petition (stating name, address, precinct of challenged voter);

(Sec. 35, RA 8189, SCR) b. proof of notice to the Board and to the challenged voter.

WHERE TO FILE Municipal Trial Court or Metropolitan Trial Court

(Sec. 33, RA 8189, SCR)

a. at any time;
WHEN TO FILE b. except 100 days prior to regular election or 65 days prior to special
(Sec. 35, RA 8189, SCR) election.

WHEN TO DECIDE Within 10 days after its filing

(Sec. 32(g), RA 8189, SCR)

a. within 5 days from receipt of notice;

APPEAL b. to Regional Trial Court;
(Sec. 33, RA 8189, SCR) c. decide appeal within 10 days from receipt;
d. decision is final and executory (no MR).
 ASISTIO v. AGUIRRE
G.R. No. 191124; 27 April 2010

FACTS:

Luis Asistio – was the subject of a Petition for Exclusion of Voter from the List of Voters of Caloocan City before
MeTC – Caloocan City on the ground that Asistio is not a resident of Caloocan City, specifically not of 123 Interior P..
Zamora St. Barangay 15, Caloocan City, the address stated on the Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for Mayor in the 2010
Elections.

Enrico Echiverri – claims that when he was about to furnish Asistio a copy of the Answer to the latter’s petition, he
found out that Asistio’s address is non-existent.

METC, Branch 52, Caloocan Judge Malabaguio – rendered a decision directing the Election Registration Board,
Caloocan City to remove the name of LUIS A.ASISTIO from the list of permanent voters of Caloocan City.

HELD:

a. Asistio has always been a resident of Caloocan City since his birth or for more than 72 years. His family is known
to be among the permanent political families in Caloocan City. In fact, Asistio served in public office as Caloocan
City Second District representative in the House of Representatives, having been elected as such in the 1992, 1995,
1998, and 2004 elections. In 2007, he also sought election as City Mayor.

b. In all of these occasions, Asistio cast his vote in the same city. It cannot be denied that Asistio has qualified, and
continues to qualify, as a voter of Caloocan City. There is no showing that he has established his domicile elsewhere
or that he had consciously and voluntarily abandoned his residence in Caloocan City. He should, therefore, remain
on the list of permanent registered voters of Precinct No. 1811A, Barangay 15, Caloocan City.
 COMPARISON (Challenge, Inclusion, Exclusion)

CHALLENGE INCLUSION EXCLUSION

a. any person whose application
a. any voter;
for registration has been a. any registered voter;
b. candidate; or
WHO MAY FILE c. representative of a political
disapproved by the Board; b. representative of a political party;
b. any person whose name has c. Election Officer.
party.
been stricken out from the list.

a. application in writing;
a. petition; a. sworn petition (stating name,
b. under oath;
b. certificate of disapproval of address, precinct of challenged
c. proof of notice of hearing to
REQUIREMENTS challenger and the applicant;
applications; voter);
c. proof of service of notice of b. proof of notice to the Board and
d. state the grounds for
petition upon the Board. to the challenged voter.
challenge.

Municipal Trial Court or Municipal Trial Court or

WHERE TO FILE Election Registration Board
Metropolitan Trial Court Metropolitan Trial Court

a. at any time; a. at any time;

b. except 105 days prior to regular b. except 100 days prior to regular
WHEN TO FILE election or 75 days prior to election or 65 days prior to special
special election. election.

WHEN TO
Within 15 days after its filing Within 10 days after its filing
DECIDE

a. within 5 days from receipt of a. within 5 days from receipt of

notice; notice;
b. to Regional Trial Court; b. to Regional Trial Court;
APPEAL c. decide appeal within 10 days c. decide appeal within 10 days from
from receipt; receipt;
d. decision is final and executory d. decision is final and executory (no
(no MR) MR).
 ANNULMENT OF BOOK OF VOTERS
a. any voter;
Sec. 39, RA 8189
WHO MAY FILE b. Election Officer;
(Continuing Registration) c. duly resisted political party.

Sec. 39, RA 8189 a. verified petition;

REQUIREMENTS b. stating the ground therefor.
(Continuing Registration)

a. book of voters is not prepared in accordance

with RA 8189;
b. book of voters was prepared through fraud,
Sec. 39, RA 8189
GROUNDS bribery, forgery, impersonation, force or any
(Continuing Registration) similar irregularity;
c. book of voters contains data that are
statistically improbable.

a. order, ruling, decision annulling a book of

voters shall not be executed 90 days before an
Sec. 39, RA 8189 election;
LIMITATIONS b. order annulling book of list of voters shall not
(Continuing Registration)
constitute a ground for a pre-proclamation
controversy.
 UTUTALUM v. COMELEC
181 SCRA 335

FACTS:

Nurhussein Ututalum (congressional candidate in 1987 elections for 2nd District of Sulu) – objected to the election returns
from Siasi which showed the following results: N. Ututalum = 482 votes; Arden Anni = 35,581 votes out of the 39,801 registered voters. If
the returns of Siasi were excluded, Ututalum would have a lead of 5,301 votes.

Comelec – dismissed his objection for being “filed out of time” and because the grounds for the objections were not one of those
enumerated in Sec. 243 of the Election Code.” Anni was thereafter proclaimed by the Provincial Board of Canvassers as the winner.

Ututalum – filed petition for declaration of failure of election and thereafter, petition to annul Anni’s proclamation. While those two
petitions were pending:

Lupay Loong – candidate for Governor of Sulu, filed Petition with Comelec to annul the List of Voters of Siasi, for purposes of the election
of local government officials, which was opposed by Anni. Ututalum was not a party to this proceeding.

Comelec – issued on Jan. 16, 1988 Resolution annulling the Siasi List of Voters “on the ground of massive irregularities committed in the
preparation thereof and being statistically improbable” and ordering a new registration of voters for the local elections of 15 February 1988.

Ututalum – filed a supplemental pleading with Comelec entreating that such annulment be considered and applied by the Commission in
releasing his Petitions against Ani.

HELD:

a. “The subsequent annulment of voting list can not retroactively and without due process result in nullifying accepted election
returns in a previous election simply because such returns come from municipalities where the precinct books of voters were
ordered annulled due to irregularities in their preparation.”

b. The annulment of the list of voters shall not constitute a ground for pre-proclamation contest.