Title
Loong vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 133676
Decision Date
Apr 14, 1999
The case involves the automated counting of votes in the 1998 elections in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, where discrepancies and technical errors led to a manual count being ordered by the COMELEC, which was later upheld by the Supreme Court, affirming Abdusakur Tan as the duly elected governor of Sulu.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 133676)

Facts:

  • The case "Loong v. Commission on Elections" (G.R. No. 133676) was decided on April 14, 1999, by the Supreme Court of the Philippines.
  • Petitioner Tupay T. Loong contested the results of the May 11, 1998, elections in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), specifically in the Province of Sulu.
  • The elections used an automated election system as mandated by R.A. No. 8436.
  • Discrepancies and technical errors were reported during the automated counting of votes in the municipality of Pata.
  • Automated machines failed to read the ballots correctly due to misalignment of the ovals opposite the names of candidates and wrong sequence codes in the ballots of five other municipalities.
  • COMELEC ordered a manual count of the votes.
  • The ballot boxes were transported to Manila, where the manual count was conducted, resulting in the proclamation of Abdusakur Tan as the governor-elect of Sulu.
  • Petitioner Loong, who placed third, and intervenor Yusop Jikiri, who placed second, challenged the COMELEC resolutions, alleging denial of due process and illegality of the manual count under R.A. No. 8436.
  • The case was brought to the Supreme Court for resolution.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  1. The Supreme Court ruled that the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in ordering a manual count.
  2. The Court found that the petitioner and the intervenor were not denied due process.
  3. The Court held ...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Grave Abuse of Discretion:

    • The Supreme Court held that the COMELEC did not act arbitrarily, capriciously, or whimsically in ordering a manual count.
    • The automated machines failed to read the ballots correctly due to misalignment of the ovals and wrong sequence codes.
    • Technical experts confirmed that the problem was with the printing of the ballots, not the machines.
    • Given the circumstances, the COMELEC's decision to order a manual count was reasonable and necessary to determine the true will of the voters.
  2. Due Process:

    • The Court found that the petitioner and the intervenor were given ample opportunity to oppose the manual count.
    • They were orally heard, submitted written position papers, and their representatives escorted the transfer of ballots to Manila and observed the manual count from beginning to end.
    • Therefore, there was no denial of due process.
  3. Special Election:

    • The Court ruled that a special election could not be ordered unless th...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.