Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28539)
Facts:
Salvador Q. Pedido and the First Municipal Board of Canvassers for Pioduran, Albay v. Commission on Elections, Atty. Gertrudo Kalambakal, Atty. Barbara Portugal, the Second and Third Municipal Board of Canvassers for Pioduran, Albay, and Protesto Pavia, G.R. No. L-28539. March 30, 1968. The Supreme Court En Banc. Sanchez, J., writing for the Court.
The dispute arose from the November 14, 1967 municipal elections in Pioduran, Albay, in which incumbent Salvador Q. Pedido and Protesto Pavia were the mayoralty candidates. The municipal board of canvassers (hereinafter the first board) convened on December 13, 1967 and had canvassed 27 precincts when it encountered an anomaly in the Election Return for Precinct No. 28 (wrong color and serial number). A board member, Salazar Floranza, objected; Barbara Portugal, the local Comelec registrar, urged the board to count the return. The first board resolved to send the return back to the precinct inspectors for explanation and adjourned, leaving only one member, Ildefonso Nunez.
On December 14, 1967, when the first board refused to reconvene at the election registrar's direction, Portugal suspended the first board and named a new board of canvassers (the second board). The second board completed the canvass that same day, using the municipal tally sheet verified against returns in the municipal treasurer’s possession, and, together with Nunez of the first board, signed a certificate showing Pavia 2,143 votes and Pedido 2,086 votes and proclaimed Pavia.
The first board later met on December 22, 1967 (their members having been suspended by Portugal) at Pedido’s house without notifying the municipal treasurer or the election registrar and without producing the official election returns or tally sheets. Relying on an improvised tally and their “noted record” from the December 13 meeting, the first board prepared a makeshift tally and proclaimed Pedido Mayor-elect with 2,131 votes over Pavia’s 2,098.
Concerned with the delay and discrepancies, the Commission on Elections (Comelec) on December 19, 1967 directed an attorney of its Law Department, Gertrudo Kalambakal, to proceed to Pioduran with Comelec’s copy of Precinct 28’s election return and “to supervise the canvass and proclamation with the authority to suspend recalcitrant members … and appoint their substitutes.” Kalambakal thereafter met local officials, declared both the December 14 and the December 22 proclamations defective (for lack of Comelec confirmation and because the December 22 meeting lacked proper notice and official returns), suspended the recalcitrant first-board members, appointed a third board, and on December 28, 1967 the third board—using Comelec’s copy of the Precinct 28 return—canvassed all returns and proclaimed Pavia winner, 2,143 to 2,086.
Comelec received the third board’s certificate and tally on December 30, 1967, and received the first board’s December 22 documents on January 4, 1968. Despite Pedido’s taking of oath on December 30, 1967 (and reports that Pavia also took oath on Janu...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the December 22, 1967 proclamation by the first municipal board of canvassers declaring Salvador Q. Pedido Mayor-elect valid?
- Did the Commission on Elections have the authority to supervise the municipal canvass, suspend recalcitrant board members, appoint substitutes and annul the December 22 proclamation (i.e., had Comelec lost jurisdiction once a municipal board proclaimed a winner)?
- Is the certificate of canvass and proclamation dated December 28, 1967, issued by th...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)