Case Digest (G.R. No. 107847)
Facts:
Irma C. Alfonso v. The Commission on Elections, The City Board of Canvassers of the City of Manila, and Alberto A. Domingo, G.R. No. 107847, June 02, 1994, Supreme Court En Banc, Quiason, J., writing for the Court.In the May 11, 1992 elections, Pedro Alfonso ran for councilor in the First District of Manila; he died on the eve of the election. At about 2:45 A.M. on May 11, 1992, his daughter Irma C. Alfonso (petitioner) filed a certificate of candidacy in substitution for her deceased father. After canvass by the City Board of Canvassers, the announced results listed Pedro Alfonso with 34,648 votes and private respondent Alberto A. Domingo with 28,715 votes among other candidates.
Private respondent Domingo filed a petition on May 29, 1992, praying that the votes cast for Pedro Alfonso be declared stray and that he be proclaimed as the sixth winning councilor. On June 3, 1992, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) granted the petition: it declared all votes cast in favor of Pedro Alfonso stray, directed that only votes bearing the name “ALFONSO” or “IRMA ALFONSO” be credited to petitioner, and ordered the City Board to reconvene and proclaim the winners. Petitioner challenged that resolution in G.R. No. 105577; on June 16, 1992 this Court dismissed that petition for lack of grave abuse of discretion by COMELEC.
The City Board sought clarification from COMELEC on whether a recount should be conducted. COMELEC issued an order dated November 4, 1992 clarifying that the City Board should reconvene the canvass without opening any ballot box and directed the Law Department to implement the order. Petitioner moved for partial reconsideration asking, under Section 234 of the Omnibus Election Code, that votes cast for Pedro Alfonso be credited as votes for Irma “Pete” Alfonso; COMELEC denied that motion on November 23, 1992 and directed implementation of its prior order.
On December 1, 1992 petitioner filed the present petition for certiorari contesting COMELEC’s denial of her motion for a recount under Section 234; the Court (temporarily) restrained implementation. Meanwhile, the City Board reconvened and reported canvass totals in which Irma Alfonso received 7,588 votes, Pedro Alfonso 23,644 votes and Alberto Domingo 25,825 votes. The City Board denied petitioner’s effort to exclude 740 election returns where petitioner’s name allegedly was omitted and resolved to proclaim Domingo; petitioner filed a notice of appeal to COMELEC but did not pursue it because of the temporary restraining order issued by this Court.
Petitioner posed three questions for resolution: (1) ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- May petitioner still question COMELEC’s ruling that the votes cast in favor of deceased Pedro Alfonso should be considered stray votes?
- Did COMELEC commit grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioner’s motion for a recount of the ballots under Section 234 of the Omnibus Election Code?
- Are the issues raised by petitioner ripe for judicial determination in th...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)