ELECTION CONTESTS

Jurisdiction over Election Contests  Original and Exclusive

1. President/VP SC 2. Senator Senate ET 3. Representative HRET 4. Regional/Provincial/City COMELEC 5. Municipal RTC 6. Barangay MTC/MeTC  Appellate  Decision of RTC/MTC/MeTC = exclusively to COMELEC, whose decision shall be final, executory and unappealable.  Election Contests for Municipal Offices: o Filed with RTC shall be decided expeditiously.

o Decision may be appealed to COMELEC w/in 5 days from promulgation or receipt of copy by the aggrieved party. o COMELEC shall decide appeal within 60 days after it is submitted for decision, but not later than 6 months after the filing of the appeal, which decision shall be final, executory and unappealable.

o MR is a prohibited pleading.

o COMELEC cannot deprive RTC of its competence to order EXECUTION of its decision PENDING APPEAL, being a judicial prerogative and there being no law disauthorizing the same.

o In the exercise of its exclusive appellate jurisdiction, COMELEC has the power to issue writs of prohibition, mandamus or certiorari.

 In the absence of any express provision, RTC, a court of general jurisdiction, has jurisdiction over controversies involving election of members of the Sangguniang Kabataan.

 Decision in appealed cases involving elective municipal and barangay officials raised to SC via SCA for certiorari on the ground that COMELEC’s factual finding is marred by grave abuse of discretion.

 Review of a decision of the Electoral Tribunal is possible only in the exercise of supervisory or extraordinary jurisdiction, and only upon showing that the Tribunal’s error results from whimsical, capricious, unwarranted, arbitrary or despotic exercise of power.

 Purposes of election contests cognizable by Electoral Tribunal  HRET rules of procedure prevail over provisions of the Omnibus Election Code

Actions which may be Filed 1. Election Protest

2. Quo Warranto Election Protest

Requisites:

1. filed by any candidate who has filed a certificate of candidacy and has been vote upon for the same office.

2. on grounds of fraud, terrorism, irregularities or illegal acts committed before, during or after casting and counting of votes

 rights of contending parties must yield to the far greater interest of the citizens in upholding the sanctity of the ballot.

 COMELEC cannot simply close its eyes to the illegality of the ballots, even if the protestant omitted to raise the ground in his protest.

 Handwriting  even without the use of experts; being an internal matter.

 Order regarding the revision of ballots is an interlocutory order  requires a party to perform certain acts leading to the final adjudication of the case.

 General Rule: The filing of an election protest or quo warranto precludes the subsequent filing of a pre-proclamation controversy or amounts to an abandonment of one earlier filed, depriving the COMELEC of the authority to inquire into and pass upon the title of the protestee or the validity of the proclamation.

o Exceptions:

1. Board of Canvassers was improperly constituted.

2. Quo Warranto is not the proper remedy. 3. What was filed was not really a petition for quo warranto or an election protest but a petition to annul a proclamation

4. filing of an election contest was expressly made without prejudice to the pre- proclamation controversy or was made in ad cautelam

5. proclamation was null and void (in which case the pre-proclamation case is not rendered moot)

 general denial does not amount to an admission of the material allegations in the protest.

 Failure to commence the revision of ballots in the counter-protested precincts’ is deemed a waiver of his counter-protest.  Omissions are merely administrative lapses, error to nullify election results in the absence of clear showing of fraud.

3. w/in 10 days from proclamation of the results of the election

 period for filing election protest is suspended while pre-proclamation case is pending.

 After 5 days from Proclamation  files appeal in pre-proclamation case  only 5 days left to file election protest.

 COMELEC may not entertain a counter- protest filed beyond the reglementary period to file the same

 Petition or protest contesting the election of a barangay official should be decided by the MTC/MeTC w/in 15 dyas from filing.

Payment of Docket Fees o Pay docket fee of )300

o Additional docket fees for damages o Failure to pay, protest should be dismissed

Requirement for Certificate of Absence of Forum Shopping

Death of Protestant

o Does not extinguish election protest. o Imbued with public interest – involves not only adjudication of the private interest of the rival candidates but also the paramount need of dispelling once and for all the uncertainty that beclouds the real choice of the electorate with respect to who shall discharge the prerogatives of the office.

o If persons not real parties in interest in the action could be allowed to intervene, proceedings will be unnecessarily complicated, expensive and interminable. Quo Warranto

Requisites:

1. filed by any registered voter in the constituency

2. grounds of ineligibility or disloyalty to the Republic

3. w/in 10 days from proclamation

Distinction between Quo Warranto in elective and appointive office

1. Elective Office

- Issue is the eligibility of the officer-elect - Court/tribunal cannot declare protestant or the candidate who obtained the 2nd _highest

 There must be a final judgment of disqualification before the election in order that the votes of the disqualified candidate can be considered “stray.”

 In voting for a candidate who has not been disqualified by final judgment during election day, the people voted for him bona fide, without any intention to misapply their franchise and in the honest belief that the candidate was then qualified to be the person to whom they would entrust the exercise of the power s of government. 2. Appointive Office

- Issue is the legality of the appointment - The court determined who of the parties has legal title to the office

Execution Pending Appeal

 TC may grant a motion for execution pending appeal, because the mere filing of an appeal does not divest the trial court of its jurisdiction.

 Since it had jurisdiction to act on the motion at the time it was filed, that jurisdiction continued until the matter was resolved, and was not lost by the subsequent action of the opposing party.

 Rationale: to give as much recognition to the worth of the trial judge’s decision as that which is initially ascribed by law to the proclamation of the Board of Canvassers,  To prevent the “grab the proclamation, prolong the protest” techniques.

 Factors:

o Public interest involved or will of the electorate

o Shortness of the remaining portion of the term

o Length of time that the election contest has been pending

 Reasons allowing for immediate execution must be of such urgency as to outweigh the injury or damage of the losing party should such party secure a reversal of judgment on appeal.

 Filed before expiration of the period for appeal.

Award of Damages

 Actual and compensatory damages may be awarded in election contests and quo warranto proceedings

 Intent of the legislators to do away with the provisions indemnifying the victorious party for expenses incurred in the election contest, in the absence of a wrongful act or omission clearly attributable to the losing party.

 Question for damages remain ripe for adjudication notwithstanding that the appeal from a decision of the election case has already been moot

Contest

 Involving title or claim of title to an elective office, made before or after proclamation of the winner, whether or not the contestant is claiming the office in dispute.

Election, Returns and Qualifications

 Collectively, all matters affecting the validity of the contestee’s title to the position

Election

 Conduct of the polls  Includes

1. listing of votes

2. holding of election campaign 3. casting of votes 4. counting of votes Returns  Includes: 1. canvass of returns 2. proclamation of winners

3. questions concerning composition of Board of Canvassers

Qualifications

 may be raised in quo-warranto proceeding against proclaimed winner