Title
Gallardo vs. Aldana
Case
G.R. No. 31636
Decision Date
Aug 26, 1929
Election protest over Las Piñas municipal presidency; irregularities in ballot preparation alleged, but no fraud proven; Aldana's victory upheld.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 31636)

Summary of Lower Court Proceedings

The initial proceedings took place in the Court of First Instance of Rizal, where Gallardo contested Aldana’s election due to alleged electoral frauds, including improper ballot handling and assistance provided to illiterate voters without the necessary legal formalities. The trial court reviewed election returns and conducted a revision of the ballots, eventually affirming Aldana's election with a revised count of 432 votes for Aldana and 382 for Gallardo.

Allegations of Fraud

Gallardo’s protest included allegations of incorrect ballot appreciation, ballot subtraction, unlawful assistance to voters, and failures to prepare ballots according to legal requirements. Many allegations were either abandoned during the trial or ruled unfounded by the trial court. The focus remained on whether votes should be invalidated due to alleged irregularities in ballot preparation, particularly concerning assistance offered to illiterate voters.

Challenges to Ballot Validity

The central contention revolved around that 75 challenged ballots in the first precinct were allegedly assisted without recognised oaths, alongside similar claims for votes in the second and third precincts. Gallardo argued that these irregularities invalidated the contested votes, asserting that the lack of oaths from assistants necessitated the deduction of these votes from Aldana’s count.

Examination of Evidence

The evidence proffered included testimony from a handwriting expert who claimed that multiple ballots may have been filled out by the same individual, suggesting systematic assistance. However, the trial judge expressed doubt about the accuracy of this handwriting analysis.

Legal Analysis

The case's pivotal question was whether ballots should be disregarded based on improper assistance without the required oaths. Citing the case of Olano vs. Tibayan, the ruling underscored that while irregular assistance could justify vote deduction, the absence of proof of a broader fraudulent scheme rendered the irregularities insufficient to overturn the election results.

Court’s Conclusion

The court acknowled

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.