Case Digest (G.R. No. L-56361)
Facts:
The case involves Arnulfo Abaya as the petitioner and Eric Singson as the private respondent, with Judge Castor Z. Concepcion serving as the respondent judge. The events leading to this case began with the general election held on January 30, 1980, in the Municipality of Candon, Ilocos Sur, where Abaya and Singson were candidates for mayor. Following the election, the Municipal Board of Canvassers proclaimed Singson as the winner based on the canvassed returns from 68 voting centers. On February 9, 1980, Abaya filed a "Petition of Protest" contesting the election results, alleging various irregularities, including that votes cast for him were either not counted or counted for Singson, and that invalid ballots were counted in favor of Singson.
After the issues were joined, Judge Concepcion ordered the production of ballot boxes and election documents for examination. Following the recount of ballots, Abaya sought to examine the registry lists of voters and other el...
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-56361)
Facts:
Election and Protest:
- Arnulfo Abaya (petitioner) and Eric Singson (private respondent) were candidates for mayor of Candon, Ilocos Sur, in the January 30, 1980, general election.
- On January 31, 1980, the Municipal Board of Canvassers proclaimed Eric Singson as the winning candidate.
- On February 9, 1980, Arnulfo Abaya filed an election protest in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Ilocos Sur, contesting the election returns from all 68 voting centers in Candon. The protest alleged various irregularities, including:
- Votes for Abaya were misread or counted for Singson.
- Votes were invalidated due to marked ballots but were still counted for Singson.
- Votes for Singson were unlawfully increased or padded.
- Votes for Abaya were unlawfully reduced.
- Invalid ballots (prepared by others or marked) were counted for Singson.
Court Proceedings: 4. Judge Castor Z. Concepcion ordered the production of ballot boxes, registry lists, voting records, and other election documents. The ballots were examined and recounted by appointed revisors. 5. Abaya filed a motion to examine the registry lists, voting records, and election documents in all 68 voting centers. Singson opposed the motion. 6. On August 4, 1980, Judge Concepcion allowed the examination of documents only for six voting centers (Precincts Nos. 29, 9, 9-A, 38, 35, and 35-A), where Abaya had specifically alleged substitute voting. The motion to dismiss filed by Singson was denied. 7. After the examination of the six precincts, Abaya filed another motion to examine the remaining 62 voting centers. This was denied by Judge Concepcion on September 3, 1980, on the grounds that the necessity for such examination was not established and that it could lead to a "fishing expedition."
Appeal to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC): 8. On September 29, 1980, Abaya filed a petition for mandamus and prohibition with the COMELEC, seeking to compel Judge Concepcion to allow the examination of the remaining 62 voting centers and to halt the trial until the examination was completed. 9. The COMELEC initially dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction but later certified it to the Supreme Court on February 20, 1981.
Supreme Court Proceedings: 10. On March 20, 1981, Abaya filed a motion for a restraining order and/or preliminary injunction. He also filed a supplemental petition seeking to disqualify Judge Concepcion from hearing the election protest. 11. On October 15, 1981, the Supreme Court denied the supplemental petition to disqualify Judge Concepcion but issued a temporary restraining order on November 12, 1981.
Issue:
- Whether the respondent judge has a ministerial duty to allow the examination of registry lists, voting records, and election documents in the 62 voting centers.
- Whether the respondent judge abused his discretion in denying the examination of the remaining 62 voting centers.
- Whether the special remedies of mandamus and prohibition are available in this case.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Concurring and Dissenting Opinions
- Concurring: Chief Justice Fernando and Justices Barredo, Concepcion, Jr., Fernandez, Guerrero, De Castro, Melencio-Herrera, Ericta, Plana, and Escolin concurred with the decision.
- Reserved Vote: Justice Makasiar reserved his vote.
- Dissent: Justice Aquino dissented.
- In the Result: Justice Teehankee concurred in the result.