+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Election Laws and Comelec

Election Laws and Comelec

Date post: 18-Jul-2016
Author: shine-billones
View: 38 times
Download: 8 times
Share this document with a friend
Election Laws and Comelec
Embed Size (px)
of 41 /41
Election Laws and COMELEC ELECTION LAWS AND COMMISION ON ELECTIONS “Politics is too serious a matter to be left to politicians.” -Charles De Gaulle I. INTRODUCTORY CONCEPTS A. ELECTIONS AND RIGHT TO VOTE Article II, Section 1, 1987 Constitution The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them. Plato deprecated democracy as rule by the masses. He warned that if all the people were allowed to rule, those of low quality would dominate the state by mere numerical superiority. “tyranny of the majority=rule of the mob which would inevitably surrender its power to a single tyrant, and put an end to popular government. Aristotle’s = the will of the many could be equal to or even wiser than the judgment of the few. = preferred a rule of the upper class . He believed that the upper class could best govern for they represent people of the greatest refinement and quality. In the Middle Ages, exaggerated notion of individualism. They bannered the idea that all people were equal; As all were essentially equal, no one enjoyed the moral right to govern another without the consent of the governed. This theory of popular sovereignty = social contract theory: that is, the social contract is the act of people exercising their sovereignty and creating a government to which they consent. John Locke (1632-1704) – submitted that people, although sovereign, should not rule directly. Members of parliament represent their constituents and should vote as their constituents wanted. The government’s sole reason for being was to serve the individual by protecting his rights and liberties. The right to vote is not a natural right but it is a right created by law. Suffrage is a privilege granted by the State to such persons as are most likely to exercise it for the public good.” The existence of the right of suffrage is a threshold for the preservation and enjoyment of all other rights Notes by BB GHurL

Election Laws and COMELECELECTION LAWS AND COMMISION ON ELECTIONSPolitics is too serious a matter to be left to politicians. -Charles De Gaulle



Article II, Section 1, 1987 ConstitutionThe Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.

Plato deprecated democracy as rule by the masses. He warned that if all the people were allowed to rule, those of low quality would dominate the state by mere numerical superiority. tyranny of the majority=rule of the mob which would inevitably surrender its power to a single tyrant, and put an end to popular government.

Aristotles = the will of the many could be equal to or even wiser than the judgment of the few. = preferred a rule of the upper class . He believed that the upper class could best govern for they represent people of the greatest refinement and quality.

In the Middle Ages, exaggerated notion of individualism. They bannered the idea that all people were equal; As all were essentially equal, no one enjoyed the moral right to govern another without the consent of the governed.

This theory of popular sovereignty = social contract theory: that is, the social contract is the act of people exercising their sovereignty and creating a government to which they consent.

John Locke (1632-1704) submitted that people, although sovereign, should not rule directly. Members of parliament represent their constituents and should vote as their constituents wanted. The governments sole reason for being was to serve the individual by protecting his rights and liberties.

The right to vote is not a natural right but it is a right created by law. Suffrage is a privilege granted by the State to such persons as are most likely to exercise it for the public good. The existence of the right of suffrage is a threshold for the preservation and enjoyment of all other rights that it ought to be considered as one of the most sacred parts of the constitution. (People v. Corral)

Right to vote is not a naural right it is a privilege granted by the state. It is a POLITICAL RIGHT. It is not given to you just because you deserve it, the purpose why we are given this right to vote is? To preserve the government and the liberties in it. The framework being there is that the people are the only ones who are competent to guard liberties and preserve government

People vs. San JuanThe right of suffrage which, in the consensus of political philosophers of consequence, is the bedrock of all republican institutionssIndeed, 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.

Dissenting Opinion of Puno in Macalintal vs Comelec; In Re: Right of SuffrageThe people did not give up all their sovereign powers but merely delegated the exercise of these powers to some chosen representatives. The right of suffrage is one of these delegated powers, viz:The people, in their original sovereign character are the fountainhead of governmental authority, and all the powers necessary to be exercised in the continued administration of a representative government originated and are delegated by exertion of their sovereign will. Right of suffrage, a right that is the cornerstone of our democratic governmentSuffrage is an attribute of citizenship and is ancillary to the principle of republicanism enshrined in section 1, Article II of the 1987 Constitution. The right of suffrage, however, is not absolute. No political system in the whole world has literally practiced universal suffrage, even among its citizens. The scarlet history of the right of suffrage shows that restrictions have always been imposed on its exercise.

As a privilege delegated by the people, a citizen acquires no indefeasible right to the continuous exercise or enjoyment of the right of suffrage. The people of the State, in the exercise of their sovereign power, may disqualify, suspend or entirely withdraw it from any citizen or class of them, providing always that representation of the people, the essential characteristics of a republican government, be not disregarded or abandoned

Macalintal vs. Comelec, Carpios Separate opinion To require absentee voters to comply with the double residency requirement is to impose an impractical and even an impossible condition to the exercise of the constitutional right to vote. In the first place, the second residency requirement of establishing residence in a locality in the Philippines where the voters propose to vote is impossible to comply since overseas Filipinos will obviously not vote in any locality in the Philippines. Imposing the double residency requirement makes the absentee voting an empty right of overseas Filipinos. Certainly, the wise framers of the Constitution were incapable of such absurd scheme. xxxThe concept of absentee voting negates a residency requirement in the country of citizenship of the voter. By definition, an absentee voter is a non-resident voter. XxxAbsentee voting is understood in other jurisdictions as voting by a qualified or registered voter without any residency requirement.xxxThe right of suffrage is the cornerstone of a representative government like that established in the 1987 Constitution. A representative government is legitimate when those represented elect their representatives in government. The consent of the governed is what stamps legitimacy on those who govern. This consent is expressed through the right of suffrage. It is a precious right for which many have fought and died so that others may freely exercise it. A government that denies such right on flimsy or meaningless grounds does so at its peril.xxx

Who may exercise?

Article V, Sections 1 and 2, 1987 ConstitutionSection 1. 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.

Section 2. 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.

Restrictions:1. Citizenship. Suffrage is a political right appertaining to citizenship. Each individual qualified to vote is a particle of popular sovereignty, hence, the right of suffrage cannot be extended to non-citizens. As an attribute of citizenship, suffrage is reserved exclusively to Filipinos whose allegiance to the country is undivided.2. Age. Voting is an act of choice and involves prescience. It requires not only a familiarity of political realities but also the maturity to make reasoned choices out of these realities3. Residence. For the vote to be more meaningful as an expression of sovereignty, the voter must possess more than a passing acquaintance with the problems and prospects of the country. Thus, residence is imposed as a qualification to exclude a stranger and a newcomer, unacquainted with the conditions and needs of the community and not identified with the latter. Xxx also necessary for administrative purposes such as the preparation of accurate list of voters

Residence. Then we ask the question is there justification for requiring residence? To be acquainted with the problems of the community. Bear that in mind that for election purposes residence is synonymous with domicile.

You got this Absentee Voters Act, it was passed in 2004 in time for the 2004 Election which allows absentee voters to vote. First register in order to vote. You can see the eagerness to have this law passed because they grappled to have the issue on residence and the way that they grapple with it is to say that residence is synonymous with domicile. And must prove that you have not abandoned your residence by having this affidavit proving that you have the intention to resume actual physical permanent residence in the Philippines not later than 3 years after the approval of your registration.

Question is what if you have registered and voted but you did not come back with the 3 year period required in the law? What happens to your vote? It is still valid and you cannot recall it, why not? What happens to the vote and the registration of one who fails to come back within 3 years from the time registration has been approved? SC said the votes is still valid and will still be counted because at the time that you did cast your vote you are still qualified. But is there no sanction for your failure to comply? If you do not come back you will be permanently disqualified from ever registering

Electoral System

Article IX (c)(6), Section 6, 1987 ConstitutionSection 6. A free and open party system shall be allowed to evolve according to the free choice of the people, subject to the provisions of this Article:

Definition of terms

(a) "Initiative" is the power of the people to propose amendments to the Constitution or to propose and enact legislations through an election called for the purpose. There are three (3) systems of initiative, namely: a.1 Initiative on the Constitution which refers to a petition proposing amendments to the Constitution; a.2. Initiative on statutes which refers to a petition proposing to enact a national legislation; and a.3. Initiative on local legislation which refers to a petition proposing to enact a regional, provincial, city, municipal, or barangay law, resolution or ordinance. (b) "Indirect initiative" is exercise of initiative by the people through a proposition sent to Congress or the local legislative body for action. (c) "Referendum" is the power of the electorate to approve or reject a legislation through an election called for the purpose. It may be of two classes, namely: c.1. Referendum on statutes which refers to a petition to approve or reject an act or law, or part thereof, passed by Congress; and c.2. Referendum on local law which refers to a petition to approve or reject a law, resolution or ordinance enacted by regional assemblies and local legislative bodies. xxx(e) "Plebiscite" is the electoral process by which an initiative on the Constitution is approved or rejected by the people.




-conducted daily except 120 days before elections or 90 days before special elections.-personal filing of voters is required.

Who may register?-not otherwise disqualified by law-who are at least eighteen (18) years of age, - who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one (1) year, and in the place wherein they propose to vote, for at least six (6) months immediately preceding the election, may register as a voter.

Any person, who, on the day of registration may not have reached the required age or period of residence but, who, on the day of the election shall possess such qualifications, may register as a voter.

Double registration is not allowed. Every citizen is entitled only to one vote.

Process of registration: interview process , fill our forms, take a photo, signe, fingerprint, sign logbook, receipt is given

The following shall be disqualified from registering:

a) person sentenced by final judgment to suffer imprisonment of not less than one (1) year, such disability not having been removed by plenary pardon or amnesty: b) person adjudged by final judgment by a competent court or tribunal of having committed any crime involving disloyalty to the duly constituted government such as rebellion, sedition, violation of the firearms laws or any crime against national security, c) Insane or incompetent persons declared as such by competent authority unless subsequently declared by proper authority that such person is no longer insane or incompetent.- being insane without being declared by competent authority will no bar you from registering even if you know that under qualification, those that can register are those who of sound mind.

Challenges to Right to RegisteR

Who?Any voter, candidate or representative of a registered political party

What/How?- The challenge shall be under oath and be attached to the application, together with the proof of notice of hearing to the challenger and the applicant.-Indicate the grounds therein.

Jurisdiction in Inclusion and Exclusion Case.

Municipal and Metropolitan Trial Courts - original and exclusive jurisdiction over all cases of inclusion and exclusion of voters in their respective cities or municipalities.

- appealable to the Regional Trial Court within five (5) days from receipt of notice thereof.

-regional trial court shall decide the appeal within ten (10) days from the time it is received and the decision shall immediately become final and executory.

No motion for reconsideration shall be entertained.

Non-appearancve in the initial hearing raises the presumption of persons Inexistence.


Inclusion:Who?. -Any person whose application for registration has been disapproved by the Board or -whose name has been stricken out from the list

How?- file with the court a petition to include his name in the permanent list of voters in his precinct

When?-at any time except one hundred five (105) days prior to a regular election or seventy-five (75) days prior to a special election. (number of days may differ every election resolution of comelec)

If there is an affirmative decision--Board shall place the application for registration previously disapproved in the corresponding book of voters and indicate in the application for registration the date of the order of inclusion and the court which issued the same.


First to challenge the right to register before the election registration board or ERB but there is a certain period of time you have to comply with and it varies from one election to the other depending on the Comelec resolution thats issued on the particular election.

Second go to the court in a petition for exclusion of voters, again the period of time within which to file would vary from the Comelec resolution issued

Who?-Any registered voters, representative of a political party or the Election Officer,

How?-file with the court a sworn petition for the exclusion of a voter from the permanent list of voters giving the name, address and the precinct of the challenged voter - petition shall be accompanied by proof of notice to the Board and to the challenged voter and shall be decided within ten (10) days from its filing.

When?-at any time except one hundred (100) days prior to a regular election or sixty-five (65) days before a special election.

If the decision is affirmative--the Board shall, upon receipt of the final decision, remove the voters registration record from the corresponding book of voters, enter the order of exclusion therein, and thereafter place the record in the inactive file.

Annulment of Book of Voters

Third, If exclusion you cannot avail of because the time has passed within which to file a petition for exclusion of this voter then you can go on for the annulment of the book of voters or list of voters but I must caution you that thats really a long shot because you see in registration proceeding youve got this biometric procedure, that itself is supposed to detect already multiple registrants. Its not that you cannot vote at all, its just you cannot anymore vote for the subsequent precinct or polling places where you have been registered .

Nature and effect of proceedings

Nature of proceeding is Summary proceeding. So you are required to present affidavits, you are required to present evidence but there are presumptions that you ought to rely on as when the one being challenged failed to appear on the date set by the court and there is a presumption that he is a fictitious person or that he really shouldnt register as a voter.

EFFECT. When court, upon a challenge raised by a citizen, candidate or a political party, renders one person as disqualified from being registered because the court finds he is not a resident of the place he seeks to be registered, such fact cannot be used later on for puposes of determining your qualifications to run.

The supreme court says that whatever judgment that the court rendered in this case shouldnt be taken as a fact or shouldnt be taken as conclusive fact considering other issues for disqualification not to the voter but as candidate.

The effect of judgement is not in a nature of res judicata. All that it does is to settle the issue your right to vote at that particular place and at the specific election.

Domino v. COMELEC, July 19, 1999Case Doctrine: The only effect of the decision of the lower court excluding the challenged voter from the list of voters, is for the Election Registration Board, upon receipt of the final decision, to remove the voters registration record from the corresponding book of voters, enter the order of exclusion therein, and thereafter place the record in the inactive file.


"Candidate" refers to any person aspiring for or seeking an elective public office, who has filed a certificate of candidacy by himself or through an accredited political party, aggroupment, or coalition of parties.Who may file?

-Candidates must file a sworn certificate of candidacy in the form prescribed by the Commission (prescribed forms attached), and within the period fixed herein.

1.) citizen of the Philippines; 2.) -a registered voter in the barangay, municipality, city, or province or, in the case of a member of the sangguniang 3.) panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, or sangguniang bayan, the district where he intends to be elected; 4.) a resident therein for at least one (1) year immediately preceding the day of the election; 5.) able to read and write Filipino or any local language or dialect.

Residence- Physical occupation plus intention to return. -the place where a party actually or constructively has his permanent home, where he, no matter where he may be found at any given time, eventually intends to return and remain (animus manendi). A domicile of origin is acquired by every person at birth. It is usually the place where the childs parents reside and continues (sic) until the same is abandoned by acquisition of new domicile (domicile of choice).

Tess Dumpit-Michelena v. Boado (November 17, 2005)Case Doctrine: A beach house is at most a place of temporary relaxation. It can hardly be considered a place of residence. To effect change of domicile, there must be animus manendi coupled with animus non revertendi. The intent to remain in the new domicile of choice must be for an indefinite period of time, the change of residence must be voluntary, and the residence at the place chosen for the new domicile must be actual.

Limbona v. Comelec (October 16, 2009)Case Doctrine: We note the findings of the Comelec that petitioners domicile of origin is Maguing, Lanao del Norte, which is also her place of birth; and that her domicile by operation of law (by virtue of marriage) is Rapasun, Marawi City. The Comelec found that Mohammad, petitioners husband, effected the change of his domicile in favor of Pantar, Lanao del Norte only on November 11, 2006. Since it is presumed that the husband and wife live together in one legal residence, then it follows that petitioner effected the change of her domicile also on November 11, 2006. Articles 68 and 69 of the Family Code provide: Considering that petitioner failed to show that she maintained a separate residence from her husband, and as there is no evidence to prove otherwise, reliance on these provisions of the Family Code is proper and is in consonance with human experience.The Comelec correctly found that petitioner failed to satisfy the one-year residency requirement.

Social Justice Society vs PDEA

No additional requirement other than those in the constitution can be imposed. Drug test requirement is invalid.

Disqualifications:1.) given money or other material consideration to influence, induce or corrupt the voters or public officials performing electoral functions;2.) committed acts of terrorism to enhance his candidacy; 3.) spent in his election campaign an amount in excess of that allowed by this Code;4.) solicited, received or made any contribution prohibited5.) permanent resident of or an immigrant to a foreign country shall not be qualified to run for any elective office under this Code, unless said person has waived his status as permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country in accordance with the residence requirement provided for in the election law

When and Where to file?-shall be filed in five (5) legible copies with the offices of the Commission specified not later than the day before the date legally fixed for the beginning of his campaign period.

The certificate of candidacy shall be filed by the candidate personally or by his duly authorized representative. No certificate of candidacy shall be filed or accepted by mail, telegram or facsimile.

Effect of filing

Appointive officials are deemed resigned for the reason that the following substantial distinctions between appointive and elective officials are present.

1.) Appointive officials under the civil service commission are prohibited to conduct or participate in any partisan political activity whereas such fact is inherent to elective officials. 2.) Appointive officials has a continuity of tenure while an elective official serves only for a limited term provided by law.

Ministerial duty to receive COC.Receiving officer has ministerial duty to receive COCs provided said certificates are under oath and contain all the required data and in the form prescribed by the Commission.

In other words, if on the face of the COC, required data cannot be found, COMELEC may not accept or receive COC.

Petitions to Deny Due Course to or Cancel of a Certificate of Candidacy.

How?File a verified petition.Who?Any personWhen?Within five (5) days from the last day for filing of certificate of candidacy but not later than twenty five (25) days from the filing of the certificate of candidacyGrounds? Material misrepresentation on the contents of the certificate of candidacy

Nuisance Candidates.

How?who?Motu proprio by the commission, or upon verified petition (personally filed)of an interested party refuse to give due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy of candidates running for national position What grounds?-placing election process in mockery or disrepute-cause confusion to voters-no bonafide intention to run- no capacity to launch a viable campaignWhen?Within five (5) days from the last day for filing certificate of candidacy.

Pamatong vs Comelec (same;same)(lawyer running for president)

As earlier noted, the privilege of equal access to opportunities to public office may be subjected to limitations. Some valid limitations specifically on the privilege to seek elective office are found in the provisions9 of the Omnibus Election Code on "Nuisance Candidates" As long as the limitations apply to everybody equally without discrimination, however, the equal access clause is not violated.

Substitution of Candidates, in case of death, disqualification or withdrawal of another.

When?-after the last day for the filing of certificate of candidacy, Grounds? -an official candidate of a registered political party dies, withdraws or is disqualified for any cause,Prhohibition?-No substitute shall be allowed for any independent candidate.

Withdrawal of Certificate of CandidacyAny person who has filed a certificate of candidacy may, prior to the election, withdraw the same pursuant to Sec. 13 hereof. The filing of a withdrawal of a certificate of candidacy shall not affect whatever civil, criminal or administrative liabilities a candidate may have incurred.Comelec is allowed to set deadlines for the filing of COC and that has to be preserved and that you should file your New COC within the period set by Comelec.

Mosale vs NicoIssue:The pivotal question presented in this appeal is whether a candidate who has withdrawn his certificate of candidacy may revive it, either by withdrawing his letter of withdrawal or by filling a new certificate of candidacy, after the deadline provided by law for the filling of such certificate. NO, filing of candidacy must be done on the period provided by COMELEC.

Multiple Certificates of CandidacyNo person shall be eligible for more than one office to be filled in the same election. If he files a certificate of candidacy for more than one office he shall not be eligible for either. However, before the expiration of the period for the filing of certificate of candidacy, the person who has filed more than one certificate of candidacy may declare under oath the office for which he desires to be eligible and cancel the certificate of candidacy for the other office or office/s. Said declaration shall be filed personally or through his duly authorized representative with the proper office in accordance with Sec. 3 hereof.

Summary of all ATTACKS available against the candicay of a person:

1.) (Before election) Petition to deny due course by reason of material misrepresentation, in what is found in the COC.

Materiality refers to qualification for elective office: citizenship, residence, age, registration to vote.

Intent to deceive deliberate attempt to mislead, misinform or hide a fact which would otherwise render a candidate ineligible.

Grounds; material misrepresentation. Jurisdiction:COMELECPeriod: 5- days after expiration of date of filing but not more than 25 days after filing.

2.) After election, Petition for quo warranto. - Any voter contesting the election of any Member of the Batasang Pambansa, regional, provincial, or city officer.Ground;ground of ineligibility or of disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines Jurisdiction:COMELECPeriod:within 10 days after the proclamation of the results of the election.

3.) Aattack him by classifying him a NUISANCE candidate

Ground:-placing election process in mockery or disrepute-cause confusion to voters--no bonafide intention to run- no capacity to launch a viable campaign

Jurisdiction:COMELECPeriod:5 days from the last day of filing of the certificate of candidacy.

4.) Petition for disqualification-

Grounds:- no requirement that there must be intention to deceive.-having done acts of terrorism, giving money, fraud, material misrepresentation, defects to qualificationsJurisdiction;COMELECPeriod:-after filing of COC but before promulgation- availed with material misrepresentation but which has not been raised during the 25- day period required.

Effects of Disqualification

2nd placer rule-2nd placer does not win.The rule applies when:-decision for disqualification remained pending on election day-decision became final only after election day.

Any candidate who has been declared by final judgment to be disqualified shall not be voted for, and the votes cast for him shall not be counted. If for any reason a candidate is not declared by final judgment before an election to be disqualified and he is voted for and receives the winning number of votes in such election, the Court or Commission shall continue with the trial and hearing of the action, inquiry, or protest and, upon motion of the complainant or any intervenor, may during the pendency thereof order the suspension of the proclamation of such candidate whenever the evidence of his guilt is strong.

Lone Candidate LawUpon the expiration of the deadline for the filing of the certificates of candidacy in a special election called to fill a vacancy in an elective position other than for President and Vice President, when there is only one (1) qualified candidate for such position, the lone candidate shall be proclaimed elected to the position by proper proclaiming body of the Commission on Elections without holding the special election upon certification by the Commission on Elections that he is the only candidate for the office and is thereby deemed elected. C. CAMPAIGN AND ELECTION PROPAGANDA

"Election campaign" or "partisan political activity" refers to an act designed to promote the election or defeat of a particular candidate or candidates to a public office which shall include: (1) Forming organizations, associations, clubs, committees or other groups of persons for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign for or against a candidate; (2) Holding political caucuses, conferences, meetings, rallies, parades, or other similar assemblies, for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign or propaganda for or against a candidate; (3) Making speeches, announcements or commentaries, or holding interviews for or against the election of any candidate for public office; (4) Publishing or distributing campaign literature or materials designed to support or oppose the election of any candidate; or (5) Directly or indirectly soliciting votes, pledges or support for or against a candidate.

Candidate: A person who has file his certificate of candidacy.

An independent candidate is one:1) who has not been nominated by a registered political party or its duty authorized representative;2) whose nomination has not been submitted by a registered political party;3) who has not accepted a nomination from a registered political party;4) who accepts nominations from more than one registered political party, except in cases of coalitions of said political parties; or5) whose nomination was filed after the last day of filing of certificate of candidacy.

Lanot CasePenera Case-9/11/09 decisionPenera Case- 11/25/09 decision

Who is considered a candidate?

A person who files a certificate of candidacy is not a candidate until the start of the campaign periodOne becomes a candidate upon filing of the certificate of candidacyOne becomes a candidate upon the start of the campaign period

Purpose of filing of certificate of candidacyFor ballot printingupon filing of COC, one immediately becomes a candidate For ballot printing, until the start of campaign period

When can premature campaigning be committed?election offense cannot be committed during the campaign period-a candidate may be liable for premature campaigning after the filing of the candidates certificate of candidacy but before the start of the actual campaign period.- a candidate who commits premature campaigning can be disqualified or prosecuted only after the start of the campaign period-a candidate is liable for election offenses only upon the start of the campaign period. - the effective date when partisan political acts become unlawful as to a candidate is when the campaign period starts. Before the start of the campaign period, the same partisan political acts are lawful.


Upon filing, a person becomes a candidate only for purpose of ballot printing.The is no more BAN on Pre-Mature campaigning.Partisan political activities done prior to campaign period are not prohibited.Candidate becomes liable to election offenses only upon the start of campaign period.

Prohibited Forms

Regulations:1).cannot publicly document life of a candidate.2.) cannot publicly exhibit a movie where the candidate is the actor.3.) media practitioners cannot continue working during campaign period (must take a leave)4) media networks must be impartial, show no bias to any candidate or party.5) no campaign on Maundy Thursday and good Friday.6) there are limitations to time in radio and tv adds and to sizes and places for posters.7) Limitation to expenses

Law says there are only two persons authorized to disburse funds or make expenditures:a. The candidate himself andb. The treasurer of the political partyc. The person authorized by the political partyd. Two kinds of restrictions:1). Content-neutral= substaqntial governmental interest = regulate time, place and manner of dissemination; MUST BE UNRELATED TO SUPPRESSION OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH 2) Content-based= clear and present danger= focus on a specific content

SWS vs. COMELEC= COMELEC resolution that no publication of survey results can be done 15 days or 7 days before election is a violation of freedom of expression.= applied is content-neutral test 9substantial governmental interest). SC said prohibition has no relation to government interest. Danger may be avoided by other remedies.

SWS vs ComelecOBrien test: [1] if it is within the constitutional power of the Government; [2] if it furthers an important or substantial governmental interest; [3] if the governmental interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression; and [4] if the incidental restriction on alleged First Amendment freedoms [of speech, expression and press] is no greater than is essential to the furtherance of that interest.8


Definition of terms. 1. Automated election system, hereinafter to as AES - a system using appropriate technology which has been demonstrated in the voting, counting, consolidating, canvassing, and transmission of election result, and other electoral process;

AES Components that COMELEC must find in the bidder:

ROQUE CASE:Component 1: Paper-Based AES. 1-A. Election Management System (EMS); 1-B Precinct-Count Optic Scan (PCOS) System and 1-C. Consolidation/Canvassing System (CCS); Component 2: Provision for Electronic Transmission of Election Results using Public Telecommunications Network; and Component 3: Overall Project Management.

Information Technology Foundation vs. Comelec

Facts: Acquisition of the Automated Counting Machines by Comelec. It was awarded to the Mega Pacific Consortium Inc., even if it did not comply with the legal, technical and financial requirements.

Comprehensive Automated Election System, consisting of three (3) phases: (a) registration/verification of voters, (b) automated counting and consolidation of votes, and (c) electronic transmission of election results

Two envelope/two stage system of BIDDING:

1. Eligibility envelope= bidders eligibility to bid and its qualifications to perform acts2. Bid envelope=

MPC and the Total Information Management Corporation (TIMC) were found eligible.

Issue: WON the Commission on Elections, the agency, gravely abused its discretion when it awarded to MPC the contract for the second phase of the comprehensive Automated Election System.

Ruling: SC ruled that Comelec gravely abused its discretion

1. Failure to Establish the Identity, Existence and Eligibility of the Alleged Consortium as a Bidder.Two-Envelope, Two-Stage SystemEligibility Envelope would necessarily have to include a copy of the joint venture agreement, the consortium agreement or memorandum of agreement -- or a business plan or some other instrument of similar import -- establishing the due existence, composition and scope of such aggrupation. Otherwise, how would Comelec know who it was dealing with, and whether these parties are qualified and capable of delivering the products and services being offered for bidding?In the instant case, no such instrument was submitted to Comelec during the bidding process.

It thus follows that, prior the award of the Contract, there was no documentary or other basis for Comelec to conclude that a consortium had actually been formed amongst MPEI, SK C&C and WeSolv, along with Election.com and ePLDT.

No Consortium, No Joint VentureJoint venture as "an association of persons or companies jointly undertaking some commercial enterprise; generally, all contribute assets and share risks. It requires a community of interest in the performance of the subject matter, a right to direct and govern the policy in connection therewith, and [a] duty, which may be altered by agreement to share both in profit and losses."

2. DOST Technical Tests : Flunked by the Automated Counting Machines They failed to achieve the accuracy rating criteria of 99.9995 percent set-up by the Comelec itself They were not able to detect previously downloaded results at various canvassing or consolidation levels and to prevent these from being inputted again They were unable to print the statutorily required audit trails of the count/canvass at different levels without any loss of data

Roque vs. Comelec G.R. No. 188456; September 10, 2009

Facts: Petitioners H. Harry L. Roque, Jr., et al., suing as taxpayers and concerned citizens, seek to nullify respondent Comelecs award of the 2010 Elections Automation Project (automation project) to the joint venture of Total Information Management Corporation (TIM) and Smartmatic International Corporation (Smartmatic) and to permanently prohibit the Comelec, TIM and Smartmatic from signing and/or implementing the corresponding contract-award. Issue: (1) the Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) of Smartmatic and TIM (UNICORPORATED JVA); and (2) PILOT TESTING of the PCOS machines to be used.

Ruling: SC upheld the validity of the automation contract.

The Joint Venture Agreement: Its Existence and SubmissionJVA- 60-40 aggroupment, management and division of profits, dileanation of respective participation and responsibility (all complied)

The fact of non-incorporation was without a vitiating effect on the validity of the tender offers. For the bidding ground rules does not require, for bidding purposes, that there be an incorporation of the bidding joint ventures or consortiums. In an unincorporated joint venture, determination of the required Filipino participation may be made by examining the terms and conditions of the [JVA] and other supporting financial documents submitted by the joint venture.

Comelec knows the very entities whom they are dealing with, which it can hold solidary liable under the automation contract, should there be contract violation.

No requirement under either RA 8436, as amended, or the RFP, that all the suppliers, manufacturers or distributors involved in the transaction should be part of the joint venture. ====allows the bidder to subcontract portions of the goods or services under the automation project.

On the issue that there was no pilot testing of the PCOS machines of Smartmatic

The required 2007 automation, be it viewed in the concept of a pilot test or not, is not a mandatory requirement for the choice of system in, or a prerequisite for, the full automation of the May 2010 elections.

On the other hand, the last part, phrased sans reference to the May 2007 elections, commands thus: [I]n succeeding regular national or local elections, the [automated election system] shall be implemented. Taken in its proper context, the last part is indicative of the legislative intent for the May 2010 electoral exercise to be fully automated, regardless of whether or not pilot testing was run in the 2007 polls.


One chairman, two members.One must be info-tech capable. Preference to one with permanent appointment and served in previous election.Qualifications:a) Is of good moral Character and irreproachable reputation;b) Is a registered voter of the city or municipality;c) Has never been convicted of any election offense or of any other crime punishable by more than six (6) months of imprisonment;d) Has no pending case against him filed in COMELEC/count for any election offense; ande) Is able to speak, read and write English or the local dialect.

Disqualification. related to any candidate or his spouse with the 4th civil

Arrest of absent members. - The member or members of the BEI present may order the arrest of any member who, in his or their judgment, has absented himself with the intention of obstructing the performance of the duties of the BEI.

Powers and functions of the BEI. - The BEI shall have the following powers and functions:a) Conducts the voting in the polling place and administer the election counting of voters;b) Print the election returns and transmit electronically the election resultsc) Act as deputies of the Commission in the conduct of the elections;d) Maintain order within the polling place and its premises; keep access thereto open and unobstructed; enforce obedience to its lawful e) Perform such other functions prescribed by law or by the rules and regulations promulgated by the Commission.

Voting Privilege of the Members of BEI. - Members of the BEI who are registered voters in precincts other than where they are assigned, may avail of the Local Absentee Voting, or on the day of the elections, vote in the precincts where they are registered, provided that they do so when the voting in their respective places of assignments is light, and their absence shall not be for more that twenty (20) minutes.

You cannot prevent a registered voter from voting even if you feel he is disqualified. It is an election offense. But if he is not a registered voter then you can challenge him. 3 days before the election day, machines are supposed to arrived in the clustered precinct and not just that but also tested and sealed in front BEIs.

Casting of Votes under Automated Election System

Challenge against illegal voters. - Any voter or watcher may challenge any person offering to vote for:a) Not being registered;b) Using the name of another; orc) Suffering from an existing disqualification.

Challenge based on certain illegal acts. - Any voter or watcher may challenge any voter offering to vote on the ground that he:a) Received or expects to receive, paid, offered or promised to pay, contributed, offered or promised to contribute money or anything of value as consideration for his vote or for the vote of another; orb) Made or received a promise to influence the giving or withholding of any such vote; orc) Made a bet or is interested directly or indirectly in a bet that depends upon the results of the election.In such case, the challenge voter shall take on oath before the BEI that he has not committed any of the acts alleged in the challenge. Upon taking such oath, the challenge shall be dismissed and the voter shall be allowed to vote. In case the voter refuses to take such oath, the challenge shall be sustained and the voter shall not be allowed to vote.

Persons not allowed to enter the polling place. - Unless specifically authorized by the Commission, it is unlawful for the following to enter any polling place or stay within a radius of fifty (50) meters thereof, except to vote:a) Any officer or member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Philippine National Police; (Renumbered)b) Any peace officer or any armed person belonging to any extra-legal police agency, special forces, reaction forces, strike forces, Civilian Armed Force Geographical Units, barangay tanods or other similar forces or para-military forces, including special forces, security guards, special policeman; (Renumbered)c) All other kids of armed or unarmed extra-legal police forces; and (Renumbered)

Prohibition on voting. - It shall be unlawful for a voter to:a) Bring the ballot, ballot secrecy folder or making pen outside of the polling place;b) Speak with anyone other than as herein provided while inside the polling place;c) Prepare his ballot without using the ballot secrecy folder or exhibit its contents;d) Fill his ballot accompanied by another, except in the case of an illiterate or person with disability/disabled voter;e) Erase any printing from the ballot, or put any distinguishing mark on the ballot;f) Use carbon paper, paraffin paper or other means of making a copy of the contents of the ballot, or otherwise make use of any other scheme to identify his vote, including the use of digital cameras, cellular phones with camera or similar gadgets;g) Intentionally tear or deface the ballot; andh) Disrupt or attempt to disrupt the normal operation of the PCOS.

Preparation of ballots for illiterate and person with disability/disabled voters. - No voter shall be allowed to vote as illiterate or person with disability/disabled unless such fact is indicated in the EDCVL or VRR. If so, he may be assisted in the preparation of his ballot, by any:a) Relative within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity and affinity; or (As Revised)b) Any person of his confidence who belongs to the same household; orc) Any member of the BEI. (As Revised)

Qualifications of watchers. - No person shall be appointed watcher unless he:a) Is a registered voter of the city or municipality comprising the precinct where he is assigned;;b) Is of good reputation;c) Has not been convicted by final judgment of any election offense or of any other crime;d) Knows how to read and write Pilipino, English or of the prevailing local dialect; ande) Is not related within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity to the chairman or to any other member of the BEI in the polling place where he seeks appointment as watcher.

The watchers shall have the right to:a) Witness and inform themselves of the proceedings of the BEI;b) Take note of what they may see or hear;c) Take photographs of the proceedings and incidents, if any, during the voting, counting of votes, as well as of the generated election returns and of the ballot boxes;d) File a protest against any irregularity or violation of law which they believe may have been committed by the BEI or any of its members or by any person; ande) Obtain from the BEI a certificate as to the filling such protest and the resolution thereof.


Cause:force majeur, violence, terrorism, fraud, analogous circumstance resulting to failure of electionsInstances:1)election is not held on fixed date2)suspended before closing of voting3) suspended during preparation and trans mission of results------all resulting to failure to elect.

Canicosa vs. Comelec 282 SCRA 512Facts: Petition to Declare Failure of Election and to Declare Null and Void the Canvass and Proclamation because of alleged widespread frauds and anomalies in casting and counting of votes, preparation of election returns, violence, threats, intimidation, vote buying, unregistered voters voting, and delay in the delivery of election documents and paraphernalia from the precincts to the Office of the Municipal Treasurer. But the COMELEC en banc dismissed the petition on the ground that the allegations therein did not justify a declaration of failure of election.Issue: WON there is sufficient basis to declare failure of elections. Ruling: SC held that there was no failure of elections. Under Sec. 6 of BP 881, there are only three (3) instances where a failure of election may be declared, namely: (a) the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes; (b) the election in any polling place had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes; or (c) after the voting and during the preparation and transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect on account of force majeure. violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes.

Before COMELEC can act on a verified petition seeking to declare a failure of election, at least two (2) conditions must concur: (a) no voting has taken place in the precincts on the date fixed by law, or even if there was voting, the election nevertheless resulted in failure to elect; and, (b) the votes that were not cast would affect the result of the election.

From the face of the instant petition, it is readily apparent than an election took place and that it did not result in a failure to elect.

Batabor vs. Comelec G.R. No. 160428; July 21, 2004Facts: Bewailing the outcome of the election, petitioner filed with the COMELEC a petition to declare a failure of election on the basis that after lunch, the Chairwoman of the Board of Election Inspectors (BEI) of Precincts 3A, 4A and 5A suddenly tore all the unused official ballots. Thus, the voting was not continued

Issue: WON there is sufficient ground to declare failure of elections.

Ruling: SC ruled that there is no sufficient ground to declare failure of elections. Two (2) conditions must exist before a failure of election may be declared: (1) no voting has been held in any precinct or precincts due to fraud, force majeure, violence or terrorism; and (2) the votes not cast therein are sufficient to affect the results of the election. The cause of such failure may arise before or after the casting of votes or on the day of the election.

While the alleged 100 votes of petitioners relatives and supporters, if cast during the election, are sufficient to affect its result, however, he failed to prove that the voting did not take place in precincts 3A, 4A and 5A. As found by the COMELEC, the Statement of Votes and the Certificate of Canvass of Votes show that out of the 316 registered voters in the questioned precincts, at least 220 actually voted.

Carlos vs. Angeles 346 SCRA 571 (2000)Facts: The candidate receiving the highest number or plurality of votes shall be proclaimed the winner. Even if the candidate receiving the majority votes is ineligible or disqualified, the candidate receiving the next highest number of votes or the second placer, can not be declared elected. The wreath of victory cannot be transferred from the disqualified winner to the repudiated loser because the law then as now only authorizes a declaration of election in favor of the person who has obtained a plurality of votes and does not entitle a candidate receiving the next highest number of votes to be declared elected. In other words, a defeated candidate cannot be deemed elected to the office.

Assuming for the nonce that the trial court was correct in holding that the final tally of valid votes as per revision report may be set aside because of the significant badges of fraud, the same would be tantamount to a ruling that there were no valid votes cast at all for the candidates, and, thus, no winner could be declared in the election protest case. In short, there was failure of election.In such case, the proper remedy is an action before the Commission on Elections en banc to declare a failure of election or to annul the election.

Nonetheless, the annulment of an election on the ground of fraud, irregularities and violations of election laws may be raised as an incident to an election contest.

COMELEC- on petition, after notice and hearing call for continuation of election not later than 30 days after cessation of cause of such postponement.


What?-pre-proclamation controversy- refers to any question pertaining to or affecting the proceedings of the board of Canvassers

Who may file?- any candidate or by any registered political party or coalition of political parties

With whom filed?-before the board of canvassers or directly with the Commission,

Grounds?-1.)illegal composition of BoC 2.) illegal proceeding in the BoC


Belac vs. Comelec G.R. No. 145802; April 4, 2004Issue: WON respondent COMELEC in a pre-proclamation case can go beyond the face of the election returns.Ruling: In concluding that there were serious irregularities, tampering and falsification of the questioned election returns; and that they were manufactured, respondent COMELEC looked beyond the face of the documents, hence, exceeding its authority.

SC held that respondent COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion when it granted respondent Diasen's motion for reconsideration.

Pre-proclamation controversies are mandated by law to be summarily disposed of. Here, the Comelec failed to comply with this mandate. Let it be reminded that pre-proclamation controversies, by their very nature, are to be resolved in summary proceedings which obviously should be disposed of without any unnecessary delay.

Pre-proclamation controversies are allowed in cases involving elective provincial, city or municipal offices.Pre-proclamation cases in elections for President, VP, Senator, Congressman and Party-List are not allowed on matters relating to the preparation, transmission, receipt, custody and appreciation of election returns or certificates of canvass.However, this does not preclude the authority of the appropriate canvassing Board to correct manifest errors in the Certificates of Canvass or Election Returns, motu proprio or upon verified petition of an interested person.

What issues may be raised in pre-proclamation controversies?

Illegal Composition of the Board of Canvassers.- any of the members do not possess legal qualifications and appointments.

Illegal Proceedings of the Board of Canvassers.- when the canvassing is a sham or mere ceremony, the results of which are pre-determined and manipulated as when any of the following circumstances are present:a) precipitate canvassing;b) terrorism;c) lack of sufficient notice to the members of the BOC's;d) Improper venue

When to File Petition?-when the BOC begins to act as such is objected to, if it comes after the canvassing of the Board, or- when the proceedings become illegal.

a) In case the petition is filed before the BOC:a.1) Upon receipt of the verified petition, the BOC shall immediately announce the fact of the filing of said petition and the ground/s raised therein.a.2) The BOC shall immediately deliberate on the petition, and within a period of twenty-four (24) hours, make a prompt resolution thereon, which resolution shall be reduced into writing.a.3) Should the BOC decide in favor of the petition, it shall immediately inform the Commission of its resolution. Thereafter, the Commission shall make the appropriate action thereon.a.4) In no case shall the receipt by the BOC of the electronically transmitted precinct, municipal, city, or provincial results, be suspended by the filing of said petition.a.5) The petitioner may appeal an adverse resolution by the BOC to the COMELEC, by notifying the BOC of his or her intent to appeal, through a verbal, and a written and verified Notice of Appeal. The notice on the BOC shall not suspend the formal proclamation of the official results of the election, until the final resolution of the appeal.a.6) Within forty-eight (48) hours from such notice to the BOC, the petitioner shall submit before the Board a Memorandum on Appeal stating the reasons why he resolution being questioned is erroneous and should be reversed.a.7) Upon receipt by the BOC of the petitioner's memorandum on appeal, the Board shall forward the entire records of the petition at the expense of the petitioner.a.8) Upon receipt of the records herein referred to, the petition shall be docketed by the Clerk of Commission and submitted to the COMELEC en banc for consideration and decision.a.9) Within five (5) days therefrom the COMELEC en banc shall render its decision on the appeal.b) If filed directly with the Commission, the petition shall be heard by the COMELEC en banc under the following procedures. Upon receipt of the petition by the COMELEC, the Clerk of the Commission shall docket the same and forthwith send summons to the BOC concerned with an order directing it to submit, through the fastest verifiable means available, its answer within forty-eight (48) hours.

The COMELEC en banc shall resolve the petition within five (5) days from the filing of the answer, or upon the expiration of the period to file the same.


What? -A petition contesting the elections or returns

Who are covered? -elective regional, provincial, or city official

With whom filed?- with the Commission on Elections (division)

Who may file?- any candidate who was voted for in the same office and who received the second or third highest number of votes or,- in a multi-slot position, was among the next four candidates following the last ranked winner duly proclaimed, as reflected in the official results of the election contained in the Statement of Votes

The party filing the protest shall be designated as the protestant; the adverse party shall be known as the protestee.


- filed directly with the Commission in ten (10) legible copies plus such number of copies corresponding to the number of protestees, within a non-extendible period of ten days following the date of proclamation.

-Each contest shall refer exclusively to one office but contents for offices of the Sangguniang Pampook, Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Sangguniang Panglungsod may be consolidated in one case.

- Service and filing of pleadings, including the initiatory petition and other papers, shall be done personally. A violation of this Rule shall be a cause to consider the pleading or paper as not filed.-Petition must be verified and accompanied by a certificate of non-forum shopping personally signed by the protestant.

The pendency of a pre-proclamation controversy involving the validity of the proclamation as defined by law shall suspend the running of the period to file an election protest.

An election protest or petition for quo warranto shall specifically state the following facts:a) The position involvedb) That the protestant was a candidate who has duly filed a certificate of candidacy and has been voted for the same office.c) The date of proclamation; andd) The number of votes credited to the parties per proclamation.An election protest shall also state:e) The total number of precincts of the region, province or city concerned;f) The protested precincts and votes of the parties in the protested precincts per the Statement of Votes By Precinct or, if the votes of the parties are not specified an explanation why the votes are not specified;g) A detailed specification of the acts or omissions complained of showing the electoral frauds, anomalies or irregularities in the protested precincts.

The Commission shall summarily dismiss, motu proprio, an election protest and counter-protest on the following grounds:a) The Commission has no jurisdiction over the subject matter;b) The protest is insufficient in form and content as required in Section 7 hereof;c) The petition is filed beyond the period prescribed in these rules;d) The filing fee is not paid within the period for the filing the election protest or petition for quo warranto; ande) In case of protest where a cash deposit is required, the cash deposit is not paid within fifteen (15) days from the filing of the protest.


Composition1 chairman 6 commissioners

Qualifications Natural-born citizen1. Citizens of the Philippines from birth who do not need to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship.2. Those who elect Philippine citizenship under Art. IV, Sec 1(3). @ least 35 years old College degree Must NOT have been candidates for any elective position in the immediately preceding elections. Chairman must be a member of Phil. Bar & practiced law for @ least 10 years @ least majority of commissioners member of Phil. Bar & practiced law for @ least 10 years Must not hold any other position or office or engage in any other profession Should not be a spouse or relative of the President within the fourth civil degree (by affinity or consanguinity)Cayetano vs. Monsod.Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. Teaching is not practice of law. There must be a client and lawyer relationship.

Appointment of Commissioners-shall be appointed by the President- with the consent of the Commission on Appointments

Term-7 years without reappointment, inorder to assure the independence of comelec.-Of those first appointed, three Members shall hold office for seven years, two Members for five years, and the last Members for three years, without reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the unexpired term of the predecessor. In no case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity.

Appointment of personnelThe Constitutional Commissions shall appoint their officials and employees in accordance with law.

Salary and Resource

Salary is fixed by law and cannot be decreased during tenure.

The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Their approved annual appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released.

RemovalMembers of the Constitutional Commisions shall be removed from office by impeachment.

Functions (administrative and quasi-judicial)

Importance of classifying the powers: -procedure/ remedies are different depending on whether it exercises adjucatory or administrative powers

Bayan vs. Comelec: requirement that decisions, ruling and final orders of comelec involving elective officials are required first to go through various stages, plus the requirement that must go through comelec in division before proceeding en banc (see Sec. 3, Art. 9-C of the 1987 Constitution) pertains only to powers exercised by comelec in its quasi-judicial powers

Administrative- directly decided en bancQuasi-judicial- division first, appealable to en banc

Taule v SantosThe jurisdiction of the COMELEC does not cover protests over the organizational set-up of the katipunan ng mga barangay composed of popularly elected punong barangays as prescribed by law whose officers are voted upon by their respective members.

The COMELEC exercises only appellate jurisdiction over election contests involving elective barangay officials decided by the Metropolitan or Municipal Trial Courts which likewise have limited jurisdiction.


-enforce election lawsEnforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, and recall

Comelecs power to enforce laws relative to the conduct of election, refers to popular election (local (including barangay) and national elections) Does not apply to the election of the Federation of Associations of Barangay Councils (as in this case) or SK officials, so comelec does not have jurisdiction Election of SK officials fall under the DILG

Other examples of this power to enforce and administer laws: Power of comelec to look into issues regarding the determination of location of polling places, appointment of official and inspectors registration of voters

-decide administrative cases pertaining to elections except the right to vote -prosecute election law violators

Section 265.Prosecution. -The Commission shall, through its duly authorized legal officers, have the exclusive power to conduct preliminary investigation of all election offenses punishable under this Code, and to prosecute the same. The Commission may avail of the assistance of other prosecuting arms of the government: Provided, however, That in the event that the Commission fails to act on any complaint within four months from his filing, the complainant may file the complaint with the office of the fiscal or with the Ministry of Justice for proper investigation and prosecution, if warranted.

-investigate and prosecute (where appropriate) cases of violation of election laws-including acts or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses and malpractices

De Jesus vs People COMELEC and not SB has jurisdiction to try election offices committed by public officer in relation to his office

To divest the COMELEC of the authority to investigate and prosecute offenses committed by public officials in relation to their office would thus seriously impair its effectiveness in achieving this clear constitutional mandate.

Comelec vs Tagle It must be stressed that the COMELEC has the exclusive power to conduct preliminary investigation of all election offenses punishable under the election laws and to prosecute the same, except as may otherwise be provided by law. 11 The Chief State Prosecutor, all Provincial and City Prosecutors, or their respective assistants are, however, given continuing authority, as deputies of the COMELEC, to conduct preliminary investigation of complaints which maybe withdrawn by it at anytime. In this case, when the COMELEC nullified the resolution of the Provincial Prosecutor in I.S. No. 1-99-1080, which was the basis of the informations for vote-selling, it, in effect, withdrew the deputation granted to the prosecutor. People vs Basilla We note that while Section 265 of the Code vests "exclusive power" to conduct preliminary investigation of election offenses and to prosecute the same upon the Comelec, it at the same time authorizes the Comelec to avail itself of the assistance of other prosecuting arms of the Government (Section 2, Article IX-C of the 1987 Constitution; Executive Order No. 134). Moreover, the prosecution officers designated by the Comelec become deputies or agents of the Comelec and pro tanto subject to the authority, control and supervision of the Comelec 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, the acts of the Comelec itself. . Such sanctions - e.g., suspension or removal - may be recommended by the Comelec to the President (Sec. 2 [8], Article IX-C, 1987 Constitution) rather than directly imposed by the Comelec. People vs Inting

This means that the COMELEC is empowered to conduct preliminary investigations in cases involving election offenses for the purpose of helping the Judge determine probable cause and for filing an information in court. This power is exclusive with COMELEC. Hence, the Provincial Fiscal, as such, assumes no role in the prosecution of election offenses. If the Fiscal or Prosecutor files an information charging an election offense or prosecutes a violation of election law, it is because he has been deputized by the COMELEC. He does not do so under the sole authority of his office.

People vs Delgado Issue: authority of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to review the actions of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) in the investigation and prosecution of election offenses filed in said court is the center of controversy of this petition. Thus, when the COMELEC, through its duly authorized law officer, conducts the preliminary investigation of an election offense and upon a prima facie finding of a probable cause, files the information in the proper court, said court thereby acquires jurisdiction over the case. Consequently, all the subsequent disposition of said case must be subject to the approval of the court. The COMELEC cannot conduct a reinvestigation of the case without the authority of the court or unless so ordered by the court. what is contemplated by the term 'final orders, rulings and decisions' of the COMELEC reviewable on certiorari by the Supreme Court as provided by law are those rendered in actions or proceedings before the COMELEC and taken cognizance of by said body in the exercise of its adjudicatory or quasi-judicial powers." Thus, the decisions of the COMELEC on election contests or administrative questions brought before it are subject to judicial review only by this Court.

File verified complaints of exclusion or inclusion Recommend pardon, amnesty, parole or suspension of sentence of election law violators Deputize law enforcement agents and recommend their removal for violation of its orders-deputize with the concurrence of the president law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the government including AFP for free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections

Registration of political parties, coalitions,organizations and accreditation of citizens arms Regulation of public utilities and media information Recommend to the Congress effective measures to minimize election spending, Recommend to the President the removal of any officer or employee it has deputized, or the imposition of any other disciplinary action, for violation or disregard of, or disobedience to, its directive, order, or decision. Submit to the President and the Congress, a comprehensive report on the conduct of each election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall. Rule-making commission en banc may promulgate own rules concerning pleadings and practice before it or before any of its officessuch rules shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights

Aruelo vs CA Constitutionally speaking, the COMELEC can not adopt a rule prohibiting the filing of certain pleadings in the regular courts. The power to promulgate rules concerning pleadings, practice and procedure in all courts is vested on the Supreme Court (Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5 [5]).


1. Exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective regional, provincial, and city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction.



Original- elective regional, provincial, and city officials,

Appellate -Municipal officials 9decided by MTC -Barangay officials

Decisions, final orders, or rulings of the Commission on election contests involving elective municipal and barangay offices shall be final, executory, and not appealable.

Comelec may sit en banc or in 2 divisions and shall promulgate its rules of procedure in order to expedite disposition of election cases including preproclamation controversiesAll such election cases shall be heard and decided in divisionMotions for reconsideration of decisions shall be decided by the commission en banc

2. Decide, except those involving the right to vote, all questions affecting elections, including determination of the number and location of polling places, appointment of election officials and inspectors, and registration of voters.

Javier vs Comelec

In making the Commission on Elections the sole judge of all contests involving the election, returns and qualifications of the members of the Batasang Pambansa and elective provincial and city officials, the Constitution intended to give it full authority to hear and decide these cases from beginning to end and on all matters related thereto, including those arising before the proclamation of the winners The COMELEC en banc must hear and resolve a pre-proclamation controversy for Batasan members

Canicosa vs Comelec It is only in the exercise of its adjudicatory or quasi-judicial powers that the COMELEC is mandated to hear and decide cases first by Division and then, upon motion for reconsideration, by the COMELEC en banc. This is when it is jurisdictional.

The COMELEC exercises direct and immediate supervision and control over national and local officials or employees, including members of any national or local law enforcement agency and instrumentality of the government required by law to perform duties relative to the conduct of elections.

It exercises immediate supervision and control over the members of the boards of election inspectors and canvassers. Its statutory power of supervision and control includes the power to revise, reverse or set aside the action of the boards, as well as to do what the boards should have done, even if questions relative thereto have not been elevated to it by an aggrieved party, for such power includes the authority to initiate motu proprio or by itself such steps or actions as may be required pursuant to law.

Lazatin vs Comelec

Congress= to HRET or to SET not to COMELEC

Lazatin vs HRET

The Constitution vests exclusive jurisdiction over all contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives in the respective Electoral Tribunals [Art. VI, Sec. 17].

Roces vs HRET

There is no dispute that to support his motion to dismiss, Roces offered as evidence the COMELEC resolutions denying due course to Mrs. Ang Ping's COC. In doing so, Roces submitted to the HRET the admissibility and validity of these resolutions and the HRET cannot be faulted in reviewing the said resolutions especially for the purpose of determining whether Roces was able to discharge his burden of proving that Mrs. Ang Ping is not the proper party to assail his election. In passing upon the COMELEC resolutions especially for that purpose, it cannot be said that the HRET usurped the jurisdiction of the COMELEC. We hold that the HRET did not abuse its discretion in holding that Mrs. Ang Ping is a proper party to contest the election of Roces. The COMELEC en banc usurped the jurisdiction of the COMELEC First Division when it issued Resolution No. 6823 on May 8, 2004 which ordered the deletion of Mr. Ang Ping's name from the Certified List of Candidates and denied the spouses Ang Ping's motions to withdraw and substitute despite the fact that: (1) the reglementary period of Mr. Ang Ping to appeal had not yet expired; and (2) Mr. Ang Ping had filed a motion for reconsideration of the preceding order on May 10, 2004 within the five-day reglementary period.

Nowhere is it provided in the law that the COMELEC en banc has the power to assume jurisdiction motu proprio over a petition to deny due course pending before a division of the Commission. That motions for reconsideration of the COMELEC division's decisions, resolutions, orders or rulings must first be filed in the Divisions before the Commission en banc may take cognizance thereof. It is true that generally, the method of assailing a judgment or order of the COMELEC is via petition for certiorari.

Mendoza vs Comelec We state at the outset that the COMELEC did not lose jurisdiction over the provincial election contest, as the petitioner seems to imply, because of the transmittal of the provincial ballot boxes and other election materials to the SET. The Constitution conferred upon the COMELEC jurisdiction over election protests involving provincial officials. The COMELEC in this case has lawfully acquired jurisdiction over the subject matter, i.e., the provincial election contest, as well as over the parties Thus, the jurisdiction of the COMELEC over provincial election contest exists side by side with the jurisdiction of the Senate Electoral Tribunal, with each tribunal being supreme in their respective areas of concern (the Senate election contests for the SET, and the regional, provincial and city election contests for the COMELEC), and with neither one being higher than the other in terms of precedence so that the jurisdiction of one must yield to the other.

REVIEW OF DECISIONS-appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving elective municipal officials decided by RTC or involving elective barangay officials decided by MTCs decisions, final orders or rulings of the commission on election contests involving elective municipal and barangay offices shall be final, executory and not appealable shall decide by a majority vote of all its members any case or matter brought before it within 60 days from the date of its submission for decision or resolution deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon fling of the last pleading, brief or memorandum any decision or ruling may be brought to the SC on certiorari w/in 30 days from receipt of a copy thereof


Flores vs Comelec the decision rendered by the Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Tayum, Abra, should have been appealed directly to the Commission on Elections and not to the Regional Trial Court of Abra. the provision of Article IX-C, Section 2(2) of the Constitution that "decisions, final orders, or rulings of the Commission on election contests involving elective municipal and barangay offices shall be final, executory, and not appealable" applies only to questions of fact and not of law.

Garces vs CACOMELEC has jurisdiction over elective officials and not appointive officers.

IV. Fundamental PrincipleA. Peoples choice as fundamental consideration; 2nd placer rule

Geronimo vs Ramos it would be extremely repugnant to the basic concept of the constitutionally guaranteed right to suffrage if a candidate who has not acquired the majority or plurality of votes is proclaimed a winner and imposed as the representative of a constituency, the majority of which have positively declared through their ballots that they do not choose him.

Labo vs Comelec he obtained only the second highest number of votes in the election, he was obviously not the choice of the people The fact that the candidate who obtained the highest number of votes is later declared to be disqualified or not eligible for the office to which he was elected does not necessarily entitle the candidate who obtained the second highest number of votes to be declared the winner of the elective office. The votes cast for a dead, disqualified, or non-eligible person may not be valid to vote the winner into office or maintain him there. However, in the absence of a statute which clearly asserts a contrary political and legislative policy on the matter, if the votes were cast in the sincere belief that the candidate was alive, qualified, or eligible, they should not be treated as stray, void or meaningless.

Topacio v. Paredes (23 Phil. 238) "Again, the effect of a decision that a candidate is not entitled to the office because of fraud or irregularities in the election is quite different from that produced by declaring a person ineligible to hold such an office. . . . If it be found that the successful candidate (according to the board of canvassers) obtained a plurality in an illegal manner, and that another candidate was the real victor, the former must retire in favor of the latter. In the other case, there is not, strictly speaking, a contest, as the wreath of victory cannot be transferred from an ineligible candidate to any other candidate when the sole question is the eligibility of the one receiving a plurality of the legally cast ballots. . . ."

Domino vs Ocampo Thus, the votes cast for Domino were presumed to have been cast in the sincere belief that he was a qualified candidate, without any intention to misapply their franchise. Thus, said votes cannot be treated as stray, void, or meaningless.

It is now settled doctrine that the candidate who obtains the second highest number of votes may not be proclaimed winner in case the winning candidate is disqualified. In every election, the people's choice is the paramount consideration and their expressed will must, at all times, be given effect. . In such case, the electors have failed to make a choice and the election is a nullity. Ocampo vs Crespo there must be final judgment before the election for the votes of a disqualified candidate to be considered stray hence, when a candidate has not yet been disqualified by final judgment during the election day and was voted for, the votes cast in his favor cannot be declared stray 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 powers of the government Subsequent disqualification of a candidate who obtained the highest number of votes does not entitle the candidate who garnered the second highest number of votes to be declared the winner

Notes by BB GHurL