Case Digest (P.E.T. Case No. 003)
Facts:
Loren B. Legarda v. Noli L. de Castro, P.E.T. Case No. 003, March 31, 2005, Presidential Electoral Tribunal (Supreme Court en banc), Quisumbing, J., writing for the Tribunal. The resolution responds to a protest filed by Loren B. Legarda (protestant) against Noli L. de Castro (protestee) concerning the May 10, 2004 vice-presidential election.Legarda filed an election protest with the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET). In a Resolution dated January 18, 2005 the Tribunal confirmed its jurisdiction over the protest, denied De Castro’s motion to dismiss, and ordered protective measures for the ballot boxes and election documents subject to the protest. Thereafter, on February 4, 2005, De Castro filed a motion for reconsideration challenging that resolution.
De Castro’s motion for reconsideration raised four principal contentions: (I) the PET erred in ruling that it could re-canvass election returns and canvass documents despite ballots being available; (II) the PET erred in asserting power to correct manifest errors in election returns or certificates of canvass (COCs); (III) the PET improperly transformed itself into a canvassing body; and (IV) the protest failed to state a sufficient cause of action to contest De Castro’s victory. He argued the ballots are the best evidence, that correction of manifest errors is a function of canvassing bodies, that the protest allegations were conclusions or copied from another pleading, and that the errors alleged were no longer clear and obvious.
Legarda filed a comment characterizing De Castro’s motion as repetitious. The Tribunal revisited its January 18, 2005 Resolution to finally resolve the jurisdictional issues, considered precedent (including Lerias v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal and Pena v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal), and analyzed the sufficiency of the protest under the PET rules. The PET denied De Castro’s motion for reconsideration, denied Legarda’s urgent reiterating motion for ocular inspection and appointment of watchers, ordered Legarda to specify three provinces best exemplifying alleged manif...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the Presidential Electoral Tribunal have jurisdiction and authority to re-canvass election returns and correct manifest errors in statements of votes (SOVs) and certificates of canvass (COCs)?
- Must the PET limit resolution of vote-count disputes to ballot revision when ballots are available, or may it proceed to correct manifest errors in SOVs/COCs without full revision?
- Is the protest by Loren B. Legarda sufficient in form and substance to permit the PET to proceed (i.e., does it state ultimate facts rather than mere conclusions)?
- Should the PET grant the protested relief of ocular inspection, inventory-takin...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)