G.R. No. 190734 - Sema vs. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal

On 12 June 2007, Bai Sandra S.A. Sema, a Protestant and congressional candidate of Lakas-CMD who garnered 87,237 votes, filed an election protest against protestee Didagen P. Dilangalen who obtained 105,582 votes.
The protest arose after the Provincial Board of Canvassers of Shariff Kabunsuan proclaimed Dilangalen as the duly-elected Representative of the Lone District of Shariff Kabunsuan with Cotabato City on 1 June 2007, without a certified true copy of the Certificate of Canvass of Votes and Proclamation of the Winning Candidate being attached to the protest.

Allegation of deliberate manipulation by various Boards of Election Inspectors (BEI) to misread, misappreciate, and/or mistabulate the votes cast for her, thereby erroneously crediting votes to the protestee.
Specific claims that:

Ballots with valid votes for Sema were misappreciated as mere marked or stray ballots.
Ballots prepared by persons other than the voters and fake or unofficial ballots bearing the protestee’s name were illegally counted.
Ballots that were either blank or contained irregular markings were improperly included in the tally in favor of the protestee.
Manipulation of grouped or collaboratively prepared ballots was employed to favor Dilangalen.
Instances of vote-switching and tampering with election returns and ballot boxes occurred, including the use of badges indicating fraud, missing thumbmarks/signatures, and handwriting discrepancies on the ballots.

Over-voting, where the total votes in the contested precincts exceeded the number of registered voters or actual voters.
Involvement of vote-buying (both direct and negative) to skew the outcome.
Deployment of “flying voters” and armed men to terrorize and intimidate voters, thereby preventing a genuine expression of the electorate’s will.
Illegal switching of ballots and election returns by the protestee and his supporters.

On July 19, 2007, Dilangalen filed his Answer with Counter-Protest, contesting 198 precincts in Sultan Kudarat and 50 precincts in Sultan Mastura.
Grounds raised in the counter-protest included:

Blocking of Sema’s duly appointed election watchers from several precincts.
Allegations that the ballots in many precincts were not the product of actual voting but were pre-written by one or two persons.
Claims that the protestant and her supporters employed flying voters and engaged in massive vote-buying.
Allegation of voter intimidation and manipulation of election returns by members of the BEI and canvassers.

From 16 to 29 September 2008, the Electoral Tribunal conducted a revision of ballots in all the contested precincts.

In the 195 contested precincts of Datu Odin Sinsuat, the majority of ballot boxes showed spurious ballots without required security features; all ballot boxes lacked self-locking metal seals.
In the counter-protested precincts, only one out of 248 ballot boxes contained ballots; the other 247 boxes yielded no ballots or election documents.

Subsequent evidentiary submissions by both parties included the filing of formal offers of exhibits, offers of evidence, and various comments/objections during May 2009.

Proceedings and Findings of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET)

After considering the evidence and the revision results, the HRET at its session on 10 September 2009 ruled that:

The spurious ballots in the 195 precincts were indeed fake, being void of the requisite security features as testified by COMELEC officials.
The missing ballots from the counter-protested precincts indicated issues with the preservation and integrity of the ballot boxes.

The Tribunal ruled that Sema failed to show that the election itself was tainted by fraud or irregularities that would have frustrated the electorate’s true will.
Consequently, it relied on the untampered election returns and other election documents to ascertain the number of votes properly cast for each candidate, affirming Dilangalen’s proclamation as the duly elected representative.
The dispositive portion of the HRET Decision directed the dismissal of the protest, affirming the proclamation of Dilangalen, and ordering that no costs be imposed.
A motion for reconsideration by the petitioner, Sema, was later denied by a Resolution dated 12 November 2009.

Sema alleged that the HRET committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction by:

Failing to exclude spurious ballots allegedly introduced after the election.
Relying on election returns and other documents instead of the ballots themselves, contrary to the principle that the ballots are the best proof of the voters’ intent.
Not deducting the fraudulent ballots from Dilangalen’s vote count, which purportedly would have resulted in Sema obtaining a higher number.

The core issue raised was whether the HRET’s reliance on election returns (in light of the absence of intact ballots) was a proper exercise of its discretion or constituted a grave abuse thereof.

Whether the irregularities, anomalies, and errors discovered during the election revision (pertaining to the spurious ballots and missing ballot boxes) occurred during the elections or were the result of post-election tampering and thus whether they should render null the votes canvassed.
Determination of the true winner in the May 14, 2007 congressional elections for the Lone District of Shariff Kabunsuan with Cotabato City after a resolution based on the revised appreciation of the ballots, considering the evidence presented by both parties.