Case Digest (G.R. No. 185401)
Facts:
Duenas v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, G.R. No. 185401, July 21, 2009, Supreme Court En Banc, Corona, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Henry "Jun" Duenas, Jr. and private respondent Angelito "Jett" P. Reyes were rival candidates for congressman of the 2nd Legislative District of Taguig City in the May 14, 2007 elections; Duenas was proclaimed winner with 28,564 votes to Reyes' 27,107. On June 4, 2007 Reyes filed an election protest ad cautelam in the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) praying for revision/recount in 170 precincts; Duenas answered and counter-protested 560 precincts. The HRET ordered collection of ballots and directed revision proceedings.
At the July 26, 2007 preliminary conference the parties agreed that because the protested precincts were less than 50% of the district, the protested precincts would be revised in full without pilot precincts; the HRET thereafter began revision on September 18, 2007. The Tribunal completed revision of 100% of the protested precincts and only 25% (140) of the counter-protested precincts, then, by order dated September 25, 2008, directed continuation of revision of the remaining 75% of counter-protested precincts pursuant to Rule 88 of the HRET Rules, stating it "cannot determine the true will of the electorate" and citing discovery of fake/spurious ballots.
Petitioner moved for reconsideration and to withdraw/abandon the remaining counter-protested precincts, and objected to an HRET order requiring him to augment cash deposit; the HRET denied the motions and, in Resolution No. 08-353 (November 27, 2008), denied petitioner’s urgent motion, reiterated continuation of the revision, recalled the order requiring petitioner’s augmentation, and ordered that the HRET's own funds be used...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the HRET commit grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to withdraw/abandon his remaining 75% counter-protested precincts and directing continuation of revision proceedings?
- Did the HRET commit grave abuse of discretion in ordering that its own funds be used to finance the revision of ballots in the remaining 75% c...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)