Case Summary (G.R. No. 199149)
HRET’s Early Actions and Contentions (G.R. No. 199149)
Panotes moved to suspend revision proceedings and demanded a preliminary hearing on the integrity of ballots and boxes. He urged, upon proof of tampering or improper preservation, printing of ballot images from CF cards. Chato opposed decryption and copying of images, citing lack of HRET guidelines and Section 10(d) of its own Rules requiring a preliminary hearing. She also alleged CF-card defects and replacements during election day, based on a TSN excerpt of canvassing. HRET nonetheless ordered decryption and copying of relevant ballot images.
HRET Resolutions and Preliminary Hearing Findings
At the May 27, 2011 hearing, Chato presented three witnesses whose testimonies lacked direct knowledge of CF cards in the precincts with variances. HRET Res. No. 11-321 (June 8, 2011) denied her motion to prohibit the use of decrypted ballot images, finding no proof of CF-card tampering or substitution affecting the contested precincts. HRET held that printed ballot images, under the Rules on Electronic Evidence, are functional equivalents of originals unless authenticity is genuinely questioned. Chato’s motion for reconsideration (Res. No. 11-487, September 15, 2011) was likewise denied.
Supreme Court Ruling on Use of Ballot Images (G.R. No. 199149)
The Court’s review for grave abuse of discretion emphasized deference to HRET’s exercise of its constitutional and rule-based authority. It recognized that under R.A. No. 9369, the paper-based AES generated “official ballots” both in paper and electronic image form. The PCOS machine’s encrypted CF-card images faithfully captured voter intent. HRET Guidelines permitted printing of such images when no proof of tampering emerged. Chato’s witnesses lacked material testimony as to CF-card integrity in the 20 precincts with variances. The Tribunal’s determination that ballot images were admissible and that CF cards were preserved was upheld.
HRET’s Continuation of Ballot Revision (G.R. No. 201350)
Chato’s recovery in pilot precincts fell short of unambiguous reversal, but HRET Res. No. 12-079 (March 22, 2012) ordered revision of the remaining 120 precincts, citing the need to “see the whole picture” and address prima facie substantial variances and questions about CF-card reliability. Panotes’s motion for reconsideration was denied (Order, April 10, 2012).
Supreme Court Ruling on Continuation of Revision (G.R. No. 201350)
The Court reaffirmed that HRET, as exclusive judge of House contests
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 199149)
Factual Antecedents
- The May 10, 2010 midterm elections in the Second Legislative District of Camarines Norte used automated voting (first full automation under R.A. 9369 amending R.A. 8436).
- District comprises seven municipalities (Daet, Vinzons, Basud, Mercedes, Talisay, San Vicente, San Lorenzo) with 205 clustered precincts.
- Liwayway Vinzons-Chato (incumbent) lost to Elmer E. Panotes: 47,822 vs. 51,707 votes (plurality 3,885).
- Vote totals by municipality:
• Daet – Panotes 18,085; Chato 15,911
• Vinzons – Panotes 8,107; Chato 6,713
• Basud – Panotes 7,879; Chato 6,527
• Mercedes – Panotes 7,739; Chato 9,333
• Talisay – Panotes 5,015; Chato 4,190
• San Vicente – Panotes 2,359; Chato 2,453
• San Lorenzo – Panotes 2,520; Chato 2,695
Electoral Protest and Pilot Revision
- May 24, 2010: Chato filed Electoral Protest HRET No. 10-040, challenging results in 160 clustered precincts across Daet, Vinzons, Basud, Mercedes.
- No counter-protest by Panotes.
- Under 2011 HRET Rules (Rule 37), Chato designated 40 “pilot” precincts (25% of protested precincts) for ballot revision.
- Initial revision (March 21–24, 2011) in Basud and Daet precincts revealed substantial variances between election returns and physical ballot counts (gains for Chato, losses for Panotes in each pilot precinct).
Motion to Suspend Proceedings and Rectify Records
- March 24, 2011: Panotes moved to suspend revision and conduct preliminary hearing on integrity of ballots and ballot boxes.
- Alleged irregularities in ballot boxes:
• Loose or tampered covers and padlocks; broken seals; disarray of contents; missing Minutes of Voting and Election Returns; folded/crumpled ballots (especially where Panotes lost votes). - Requested: if integrity not preserved, direct printing of “picture images” from data storage devices (CF cards).
Decryption and Copying of Ballot Images
- HRET Resolution No. 11-208 directed decryption and copying of ballot image files (April 25, 2011 onward).
- Chato moved to cancel decryption for lack of guideline and absence of preliminary hearing proving tampering (citing Section 10(d) of HRET Guidelines).
- Chato alleged CF card defects admitted by Provincial Elections Supervisor (cards for Labo, Vinzons, Basud had to be replaced on May 10, 2010).
- Panotes opposed: decryption was at HRET request (via Atty. Javier-Ibay, Feb 10, 2011); nothing in HRET rules barred use of decrypted images; CF card replacement occurred on election day and