G.R. No. 174620 - Cordia vs. Monforte

Petitioner Aldo B. Cordia and respondent Joel G. Monforte were official candidates for the position of Punong Barangay of Barangay 16 (East Washington) in Legazpi City, Albay.
The election in question was held during the July 15, 2002 synchronized Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan elections.
The canvassing of votes initially resulted in petitioner obtaining 614 votes while respondent received 609 votes.

On July 18, 2002, respondent filed an Election Protest before the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) of Legazpi City.
Respondent’s protest centered on the allegation that the Board of Election Tellers failed to credit him with as many as ten votes due to alleged misinterpretation of the Rules on Appreciation of ballots under Section 49 of COMELEC Resolution No. 4846 dated June 13, 2002.
The MTCC ordered a recount of the votes which resulted in the following findings:

ii. 18 contested/objectionable votes credited. iii. 7 claimed and admitted votes. iv. Total tally computed to 616 votes.

ii. 174 contested/objectionable votes credited. iii. Total tally computed to 614 votes.

Annuling and setting aside the proclamation of the petitioner.
Declaring respondent as the Lawful and duly elected Punong Barangay.
Directing petitioner to vacate the office.
Ordering petitioner to pay P6,350.00 for honoraria of the Revision Committee and related expenses.

On appeal, the Second Division of the COMELEC affirmed the MTCC decision by Resolution on August 14, 2003.
The COMELEC En Banc, on a Motion for Reconsideration, affirmed the Second Division’s decision by a 5-1 vote, with Commissioner Rene V. Sarmiento dissenting.

Petitioner elevated the issue by filing a Petition for Certiorari (with an urgent application for a Temporary Restraining Order) before the Supreme Court.
His allegations focused on three primary points of grave abuse of discretion by the COMELEC:

Application of the “neighborhood rule” wherein the COMELEC credited votes favoring the respondent on the basis of the voter's marking on the first space or line intended for a different position (kagawad).
Invocation of the principle of idem sonans when counting a vote marked “Mantete” on Exhibit “A” even though the inscription was written on the space for kagawad rather than for Punong Barangay.
Ruling that a circle mark on the ballot marked as Exhibit “C-17” was merely an ink smudge, dismissing the possibility that it could be a deliberate mark.

Petitioner argued that these rulings disregarded judicial precedents and misapplied the vote-counting rules, thus invalidating his claim to the position.
Meanwhile, separate proceedings included:

The issuance of a writ of execution by the MTCC on October 31, 2006.
Subsequent issuance and execution of respondent’s judgment by the COMELEC, leading to respondent taking the oath of office on January 15, 2007.

Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion by applying the "neighborhood rule" to credit votes for the respondent that were marked ostensibly for the position of kagawad.

Did the interpretation of the voter's intention based solely on the placement of the candidate’s name in the first available space for kagawad constitute a misapplication of the rules on ballot appreciation?

Whether the COMELEC erred in applying the principle of idem sonans when it counted the vote marked “Mantete” in favor of the respondent.

Can “Mantete” reasonably be seen as referring back to the registered candidate, considering the contention that it might have denoted an alias for another candidate?

Whether the COMELEC correctly ruled that the mark observed on Exhibit “C-17” was an inadvertent ink smudge rather than a deliberate identification mark.

Did the COMELEC adequately consider the possibility that the mark might have been a deliberate burn (by comparing it to a hole burned by a lighted cigarette) before affirming its status as a non-invalidating ink smudge?