G.R. No. 189078 - Varias vs. Commission on Elections

In the May 14, 2007 elections for Mayor of Alfonso, Cavite, petitioners Virgilio P. Varias and respondent Jose “Joy” D. PeAano were the principal candidates.
After the canvass of election returns, Varias was proclaimed winner with 10,466 votes against PeAano’s 10,225 votes, a margin of 241 votes.

On May 25, 2007, PeAano filed an election protest before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), alleging various irregularities in 14 precincts/clustered precincts.
The irregularities alleged included:

Deliberate misappreciation or miscounting of votes correctly cast for the protestant.
Unlawful attribution of votes meant for the protestant to the protestee.
Invalid treatment of valid ballots (e.g., marking ballots as stray or null even when correctly cast).
Voting irregularities such as excess votes or ballots prepared by persons other than the actual voters.

The RTC issued precautionary orders to safeguard ballot boxes and other election documents immediately after the protest was filed.
On June 12, 2007, the ballot boxes (among other paraphernalia) were placed under RTC custody until the revision of ballots.
A revision committee was formed and conducted a physical recount and examination of ballots in the contested precincts.
The Revision Report detailed numerous observations including:

Discrepancies in the number of votes credited to the candidates in particular precincts (notably in Precinct 87A, 90A/B, 92A, and 102A).
Allegations of substitution, misapprehension, and irregularities in the handling of ballots (e.g., torn envelopes, forced opening of padlocks, irregularities in the self-locking metal seals, and superimposition of candidate names).

The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Questioned Documents Division later submitted a report noting:

A significant number of ballots in favor of PeAano were written by a single person.
Differences in BEI chairpersons’ signatures across ballots, with findings of erasures and superimpositions involving the candidates’ names.

The RTC rendered its decision on December 17, 2007, finding in favor of PeAano with a revised vote count (10,312 votes for PeAano versus 10,208 for Varias) based largely on the findings of the revision of the ballots in the disputed precincts.
The COMELEC First Division later affirmed the RTC’s decision with its own tally based on a similar reliance on the physical recount of ballots and the revision reports.
Varias subsequently petitioned for certiorari, arguing that the COMELEC had gravely abused its discretion in:

Relying on the revision results rather than the official election returns.
Failing to require proof that the integrity of the ballot boxes had been preserved according to the law.

Whether the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion by relying on the physical count of the revised ballots instead of the official election returns in determining the winning candidate.

Whether, in light of the Rosal doctrine, the protestant (PeAano) was required to show that the ballots had been preserved inviolate prior to using them to overturn the election returns.
Whether the evidence indicating possible tampering (e.g., forced opening of padlocks, irregularities in security seals, superimposed candidate names, and discrepancies supported by the NBI report) warranted rejecting the revision results.

Whether the COMELEC correctly shifted the burden of proof regarding the integrity of the ballots from the protestant-appellant to the protestee-appellee, and if its evaluation of the evidence was proper.

Whether the COMELEC properly considered the testimonial and physical evidence regarding the handling and preservation of the ballot boxes.
Whether the application of the burden-shifting doctrine under the electoral contest rules and the Rosal doctrine was correctly implemented.

Whether the COMELEC’s findings and methodology in determining the final vote counts in the contested precincts were based on relevant and correct considerations.