Arao vs. Commission on Elections

Facts:

Benjamin F. Arao v. Commission on Elections and Warlito Pulmones, G.R. No. 103877, June 23, 1992, the Supreme Court En Banc, Bellosillo, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Benjamin F. Arao (protestee) sought certiorari under Sec. 7, Art. IX-A, 1987 Constitution to set aside the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) En Banc Decision of January 23, 1992, which reversed a First Division resolution and declared private respondent Warlito Pulmones duly elected mayor of Pagadian City.

In the January 18, 1988 local elections petitioner was proclaimed mayor-elect on January 21, 1988 with 12,447 votes versus Pulmones’ 12,030 (a 417-vote lead). On January 28, 1988 Pulmones filed an election protest with COMELEC alleging fraud and irregularities in numerous precincts (seeking opening and recounting of votes in a total of forty-five precincts). Petitioner filed an Answer with a Counterprotest on February 8, 1988; the First Division later dismissed that counterprotest for failure to pay required fees within the reglementary period.

Pulmones filed an Amended Protest on February 15, 1988 adding several precincts; petitioner filed comments dated March 3, 1988 (received April 4, 1988). The COMELEC First Division’s April 7, 1988 Order denied petitioner’s motion to strike the Amended Protest, treating the Amended Protest as admitted under COMELEC rules; nonetheless, the First Division’s February 7, 1991 Resolution initially stated the Amended Protest had not been duly admitted. After revision of ballots and hearing, the COMELEC First Division promulgated a Resolution on December 11, 1991 that dismissed the election protest and declared petitioner winner by a margin of 378 votes (revising his original lead). Pulmones moved for reconsideration on December 16, 1991.

On January 23, 1992 the COMELEC En Banc granted Pulmones’ Motion for Reconsideration, affirmed the First Division’s factual findings on contested ballots, declared Pulmones duly elected mayor with a 516-vote margin, and ordered Arao to vacate. COMELEC on February 28, 1992 granted a writ of execution to enforce the En Banc decision. Arao filed an original action for certiorari (February 1992) with this Court alleging grave abuse of discretion and/or excess of jurisdiction by COMELEC in (1) examining and invalidating ballots in precincts allegedly outside the original protest, (2) invalidating ballots for identical handwriting though Pulmones did not raise t...(Pro-only)

Issues:

• Did petitioner demonstrate that COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion or exceeded its jurisdiction by examining and invalidating ballots in precincts allegedly not covered by the original protest?
• Did COMELEC gravely abuse its discretion by invalidating ballots for having identical handwriting even though protestant did not specifically raise that ground?
• Did COMELEC exceed its jurisdiction or commit grave abuse by concluding certain ballots had identical handwriting, marking some as marked and others as stray, and de...(Pro-only)

Ruling:

• (Pro-only)

Ratio:

• (Pro-only)

Doctrine:

• (Pro-only)