Digest: Saño, Jr. v. Commission on Elections (611 SCRA 475, 2010)

This case, with records spanning nearly 2,000 pages, revolves around the simple question of what issues may be properly alleged in a pre-proclamation controversy. Petitioner has valiantly and passionately argued his case and invoked every available ground to suspend and annul a proclamation validly made. Unfortunately, argument is not evidence; advocacy is not legitimacy. The mere invocation of the grounds of a pre-proclamation controversy, without more, will not justify the exclusion of election returns which appear regular and authentic on their face.

Facts: Saño argued to suspende and annul a proclamation validly made due to, among others, that the election returns were (1) obviously manufactured; (2) tampered or falsified; [3]that there was massive fraud; and [4] illegal proceedings. In support thereto, petitioner attached the affidavits of his two (2) supporters, who attested that they saw open ballot boxes from Precinct Nos. 49A, 31A, and 58A

COMELEC issued its Resolution dated October 3, 2007 upholding the proclamation of Que, to wit:

x x x A re-proclamation controversy refers to any question pertaining to or affecting the proceedings of the board of canvassers which may be raised by any candidate or by any registered political party or coalition of political parties before the board or directly with the Commission, or any matter raised under Sections 233, 234, 235, and 236 of the Omnibus Election Code in relation to the preparation, transmission, receipt, custody and appreciation of election returns. On the other hand, Section 243 of the Omnibus Election Code enumerates the issues that may be raised in a pre-proclamation controversy, viz:

1. Illegal composition or proceedings of the board of canvassers;

2. The canvassed election returns are incomplete, contain material defects, appear to be tampered with or falsified, or contain discrepancies in the same returns or in other authentic copies thereof as mentioned in Sections 233, 234, 235 and 236 of the Omnibus Election Code;

3. The election returns were prepared under duress, threats, coercion, or intimidation, or they are obviously manufactured or not authentic; and

4. When substitute or fraudulent returns in controverted polling places were canvassed, the results of which materially affected the standing of the aggrieved candidate.

It is likewise settled that the above enumeration of the grounds that [many] be properly raised in a pre-proclamation controversy is restrictive and exclusive.

 

Petitioner insists that all five contested ERs were written by only one person, and these ERs were surreptitiously presented before the MBOC. Thus, he argues that the issues raised before the MBOC, namely, that the contested ERs were tampered with and/or falsified, obviously manufactured, and subject of massive fraud, are pre-proclamation controversies as defined in Section 241 of the Omnibus Election Code and fall within the contemplation of Section 243(b) of said Code. As such, the contested ERs should have been excluded from the canvass. Consequently, the MBOC’s proclamation of Que violated Section 39 of Commonwealth Act No. 7859 and Section 20 of RA 7166.

On the other hand, Que argues that the allegations raised by petitioner on the contested ERs are not proper in a pre-proclamation controversy; that petitioner failed to substantiate his claim that the contested ERs were obviously manufactured, tampered with, or falsified; and that petitioner failed to follow the strict and mandatory procedure under Section 20 of RA 7166 and COMELEC Resolution No. 8969 for manifesting an appeal.

Issue: Whether or not contested ERs are  proper in a pre-proclamation controversy.

Ruling: A pre-proclamation controversy, as defined in BP Blg. 881, otherwise known as the OEC of the Philippines, is: Any question pertaining to or affecting the proceeding of the BOC which may be raised by any candidate or by any registered political party or coalition of political parties before the board or directly with COMELEC, or any matter raised under Sections 233, 234, 235 and 236 in relation to the preparation, transmission, receipt, custody and appearance of the election returns. A pre-proclamation controversy is summary in character. It is the policy of the law that pre-proclamation controversies be promptly decided, so as not to delay canvass and proclamation. The BOC will not look into allegations of irregularity that are not apparent on the face of ERs that appear otherwise authentic and duly accomplished. Section 20 of R.A. No. 7166 lays down the procedure to be followed when election returns are contested before the BOC. Compliance with this procedure is mandatory to permit the BOC to resolve the objections as quickly as possible.