View full case

MS. BAIRANSALAM LAUT LUCMAN v. COMELEC

FACTS:

The petitioner and private respondent were mayoralty candidates in Poona-Bayabao, Lanao del Sur during the May 10, 2004 elections. Private respondent objected to the inclusion of certain election returns, alleging that they were manufactured, falsified, incomplete, and lacked statistical data. The Municipal Board of Canvassers (Board) overruled the objections and proclaimed the petitioner as the winning candidate. Private respondent appealed to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), alleging massive fraud and irregularities in the conduct of the elections. Private respondent also filed a motion to annul proclamation and/or suspend the effects of the proclamation pendente lite. The COMELEC's First Division issued an order requiring document examiners to conduct an examination of the List of Voters with Voting Record and the VRRs of the contested precincts. The First Division subsequently annulled the petitioner's proclamation and ordered the Vice-Mayor to assume the position. Commissioner Garcillano dissented, arguing that the issues raised were proper for an election protest. The petitioner moved for reconsideration, which was certified to the Commission en banc. The en banc issued a temporary restraining order and a status quo ante order. However, the en banc later denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration, affirming the First Division's order. Commissioner Sadain protested his lack of participation in the en banc resolution. The petitioner filed a special civil action for certiorari and prohibition, arguing that the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in annulling his proclamation.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has jurisdiction to determine the validity of election returns and the conduct of elections beyond the face of the returns in a pre-proclamation controversy.

  2. Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in annulling the proclamation of the petitioner.

RULING:

  1. The COMELEC has jurisdiction to determine the validity of election returns and the conduct of elections beyond the face of the returns in a pre-proclamation controversy. The COMELEC, in exercising its constitutional power to decide election contests, is not limited to mere mathematical computation of the votes. It can inquire into the authenticity and genuineness of the election returns, examine the physical integrity of the ballots, and order the examination and comparison of ballots to ascertain the authenticity or validity of the contested election returns.

  2. The COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in annulling the proclamation of the petitioner. The examination and comparison of the List of Voters with Voting Record and the Voter's Registration Records (VRRs) of the contested precincts are necessary to determine whether actual voting by duly registered voters took place during the elections. If it is established that the elections in the precincts involved were a sham or that no actual voting occurred, then the proclamation of the winning candidate is null and void.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The COMELEC has jurisdiction to determine the validity of election returns and the conduct of elections beyond the face of the returns in a pre-proclamation controversy.

  • The COMELEC can inquire into the authenticity and genuineness of the election returns, examine the physical integrity of the ballots, and order the examination and comparison of ballots to ascertain the authenticity or validity of the contested election returns.

  • The proclamation of the winning candidate may be annulled if it is established that the elections in the precincts involved were a sham or that no actual voting occurred.