EN BANC

[G.R. No. 165691. June 22, 2005.]

ROBERT Z. BARBERS , petitioner, vs . COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS,

NATIONAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS FOR SENATORS AND PARTY-
LIST REPRESENTATIVES, and RODOLFO G. BIAZON , respondents.

DECISION

CARPIO , J : p

The Case
This is a petition for certiorari 1 and prohibition with prayer for temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunction to nullify the Resolution dated 6 July 2004
of the Special Division of the Commission on Elections ("COMELEC"), 2 as well as the
Resolution dated 25 October 2004 of the COMELEC en banc. 3 The Resolutions
a rmed the proclamation of the COMELEC sitting en banc as the National Board of
Canvassers. ("NBC") declaring Rodolfo G. Biazon ("Biazon") as the duly elected 12th
Senator in the 10 May 2004 National and Local Elections.
The Facts
Robert Z. Barbers ("Barbers") and Biazon were candidates for re-election to the
Senate of the Philippines in the 10 May 2004 Synchronized National and Local Elections
("elections").
On 24 May 2004, the COMELEC sitting en banc as the NBC for the election of
Senators promulgated Resolution No. NBC 04-002 proclaiming the rst 11 duly elected
Senators in the elections. The COMELEC as the NBC promulgated the Resolution based
on the Certi cates of Canvass ("COCs") submitted by the following: (a) 78 Provincial
Boards of Canvassers; (b) 7 City Boards of Canvassers of cities comprising one or
more legislative districts; (c) 13 City Board of Canvassers from the National Capital
Region; (d) 2 District Boards of Canvassers from Metro Manila; (e) 74 Special Boards
of Canvassers for Overseas Absentee Voting; and (f) 1 Board of Canvassers for Local
Absentee Voting. The COMELEC declared that it would proclaim the remaining 12th
winning candidate for Senator after canvassing the remaining unsubmitted COCs. 4
On 2 June 2004, the COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. NBC 04-005
proclaiming Biazon as "the 12th ranking duly elected 12th Senator of the Republic of
the Philippines in the May 10, 2004 national and local elections, to serve for a term of 6
years, beginning on June 30, 2004 in accordance with Article VI, Section IV of the
Constitution of the Philippines." The COMELEC stated that after the canvass of the
supplemental Provincial COCs from Maguindanao (Cotabato City), Lanao del Sur and
one barangay in Nueva Vizcaya, Biazon obtained 10,635,270 votes nationwide. On the
other hand, Barbers obtained 10,624,585 votes. Thus, Biazon obtained 10,685 more
votes than Barbers. The COMELEC stated that this "difference will not materially be
affected by the votes in certain precincts where there was failure of elections." 5
Claiming that Biazon's proclamation was void, Barbers led a petition to annul
the proclamation of Biazon as Senator of the Republic of the Philippines with the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 COMELEC on 7 June 2004. The petition, docketed as SPC Case No. 04-258, was
assigned to a Special Division of the COMELEC. 6
In his petition, Barbers asserted that the proclamation of Biazon was "illegal and
premature being based on an incomplete canvass." Barbers asserted that the
remaining uncanvassed COCs and votes and the results of the special elections, which
were still to be conducted, would undoubtedly affect the results of the elections. 7
In his Comment/Answer, Biazon asserted that: (1) the First Division of the
COMELEC has no jurisdiction to review, modify, or set aside what the COMELEC sitting
en banc as the NBC for Senators has o cially performed, which is the promulgation of
Resolution No. NBC 04-005; (2) since the COMELEC has proclaimed Biazon on 2 June
2004 in Resolution No. NBC 04-005 as the duly elected 12th Senator and Biazon has
taken his oath of o ce on 30 June 2004, the Senate Electoral Tribunal, not the
COMELEC, has jurisdiction to entertain the present petition; (3) with Biazon's admitted
and established margin of 10,685 votes, the votes from the alleged uncanvassed COCs
and the votes still to be cast in the special elections which were still to be conducted
would not substantially affect the results of the election for the 12th and last slot for
Senator; and (4) the NBC committed a manifest error in crediting to Barbers a total of
34,711 votes from the province of Lanao del Sur while crediting to Biazon only 1,428
votes from the supplemental Provincial COCs for Lanao del Sur despite the existence
and availability of the Municipal COCs for Balabagan and Tagoloan, Lanao del Sur. 8
On 9 June 2004, Barbers led an Omnibus Motion for Immediate Service of
Summons, for Suspension of the Effects of Proclamation, and to Set Case for Hearing.
Barbers asserted that an immediate resolution of the present case was necessary
because the term of o ce of Senators would commence on 30 June 2004. Barbers
further claimed that there were Municipal COCs still to be included in the senatorial
canvass and special elections still to be held in certain municipalities involving a total of
29,219 votes. Thus, Barbers insisted that "suspension of the effects of the
proclamation" of Biazon was necessary. Barbers stressed that there could be no valid
proclamation based on an incomplete canvass. 9
On 6 July 2004, the COMELEC issued the rst assailed Resolution, disposing as
follows:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Commission (Special Division)
hereby DENIES the petition to annul the proclamation of respondent RODOLFO G.
BIAZON for LACK OF MERIT. cHaDIA

ACCORDINGLY, the Special Division RESTATES the proclamation of the

Commission on Elections sitting en banc as the National Board of Canvassers
declaring RODOLFO G. BIAZON as the duly elected 12th Senator of the Republic
of Philippines in the May 10, 2004 National and Local Elections.

SO ORDERED. 1 0

Barbers filed a motion for reconsideration 1 1 which the COMELEC en banc denied
in the second assailed 25 October 2004 Resolution.
The COMELEC's Ruling
In its 6 July 2004 Resolution, the COMELEC (Special Division) denied Barbers'
petition, thus:
The instant petition is not a pre-proclamation case as the issues raised
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 herein clearly are not among those enumerated under Section 34 of COMELEC
Resolution No. 6669. Neither is it a protest case because the ground cited in the
petition is not proper for protest although a proclamation has already been made.
It is a petition, as entitled, to annul proclamation based on alleged incomplete
canvass.

The power to annul proclamation is an exclusive power of the Commission

vested upon it by the Constitution, which states that the Commission shall
exercise the power to "Decide except those involving the right to vote, all
questions affecting elections . . ." (Article IX-C, Section 2 (3).
As held in the Case of Aguam vs. COMELEC, the COMELEC shall have
exclusive charge of the enforcement and administration of all laws relative to the
conduct of elections and shall exercise all other functions which may be
conferred upon it by law. The Constitution enjoins the COMELEC to decide, saving
those involving the right to vote, all administrative questions, affecting elections.
Corollary thereto, the court has given its imprimatur on the principle that
COMELEC is with authority to annul any canvass and proclamation illegally
made.

Records reveal that on June 2, 2004, the National Board of Canvassers

(NBC), on the basis of the Certi cates of Canvass submitted by seventy-eight (78)
Provincial Board of Canvassers; seven (7) City Boards of Canvassers of cities
comprising one or more legislative districts; thirteen (13) from the National
Capital Region (NCR); two (2) from the District Boards of Canvassers of Metro
Manila; seventy-four (74) from the Special Board of Canvassers for Overseas
Absentee Voting; and one (1) from the Board of Canvassers for Local Absentee
Voting, including the supplemental Provincial Certi cates of Canvass from
Maguindanao (Cotabato City), Lanao del Sur and Nueva Vizcaya (one barangay),
declared that private respondent obtained ten million six hundred thirty- ve
thousand two hundred seventy (10,635,270) votes as against the ten million six
hundred twenty-four thousand ve hundred eighty- ve (10,624,585) votes
garnered by petitioner.

On the basis of the number of votes garnered by private respondent, he

was proclaimed on June 2, 2004 as the duly elected Senator in the recently
concluded May 10, 2004 National and Local Elections.

However, after his proclamation, the Commission received Certi cates of

Canvass from the aforementioned provinces. The results of the votes for
petitioner and private respondent, showed the following figures, to wit:

PROVINCE NO. OF VOTES OBTAINED

PRECINCTS
BARBERS BIAZON

1. Maguindanao
a. South Upi 35 4,068 997
b. Talitay 32 116 138

2. Sultan Kudarat
a. Columbio 21 831 656

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com

 3. Northern Samar
a. Silvino Lobos 31 462 372

4. Albay
a. Ligao City 12 1,259 100
––––– –––––
Total 6,736 2,263

Although special elections in Tinglayan, Kalinga were conducted on June

7, 2004, no voters voted, thus, there was no COC to canvass. CAaDTH

On the other hand, special elections for the remaining places are yet to be
conducted, namely:

1. Lanao del Sur

a. Bayang 259 votes (3 precincts)
b. Balabagan 375 votes (2 precincts)
c. Madalum 537 votes (4 precincts)
d. Kapai 197 votes (1 precinct)

2. Maguindanao
a. Kabuntalan 263 votes (1 precinct)

3. Northern Samar
a. Silvino Lobos 1,300 votes (8 precincts)
–––––––––
Total 2,931 votes

From the foregoing data, petitioner and private respondent should be

credited with the following number of votes, to wit:

As canvassed by the NBC Not included in

the PCOC
where special
elections were Total
conducted

BLAZON 10,635,270 2,263 10,637,533

BARBERS 10,624,585 6,736 10,631,321

From the above summation, the lead of private respondent over petitioner
undoubtedly was reduced to six thousand two hundred twelve (6,212). Assuming
that the remaining uncanvassed votes of two thousand nine hundred thirty-one
(2,931) in places where special elections are yet to be held were all votes in favor
of petitioner Barbers, nevertheless, this will not materially affect the results of the
election. To say the least, even if private respondent's lead was decreased to three
thousand two hundred ninety-nine (3,299) votes, he remains to be the winner and
therefore the lawful occupant of the 12th slot for the senatorial position. 1 2

In its 25 October 2004 Resolution, the COMELEC en banc denied Barbers' motion
for reconsideration, thus:
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 We maintain Our declaration and ndings as established by the Special
Division. After a judicious and thorough scrutiny of the records, We are more than
convinced that respondent's proclamation was indeed, valid and operative. In the
questioned resolution issued by the Special Division, We based our ruling on the
o cial Comelec records, revealing that respondent's lead over petitioner was
insurmountable regardless of the results from the delayed certi cates of canvass
and from the uncanvassed votes for the special elections. This ratiocination was
very well explained in the assailed resolution and need not be reiterated herein.
Unfortunately for petitioner, he failed in this motion to adduce evidence su cient
to overturn Our ruling and justify the prayer for reliefs.
It must be noted that, in a pleading, petitioner has raised the
Report/Recommendation of the Supervisory Committee to buttress his claim that,
indeed, there was incomplete canvass. Petitioner is invited to examine the said
report closer, for the same shows the extent of irregularities that transpired in the
subject towns and provinces such as Columbio, Sultan Kudarat, and Talitay,
Maguindanao, rendering the supplemental provincial certi cates of canvass
dubious at the very least.
For the town of Columbio, the Committee reported that:
. . . Records with the ERSD show that the MCOC and corresponding
SOV dated June 18 and 17, 2004, respectively, for the twenty-one (21)
precincts used as basis for the supplemental PCOC are unsigned by the
chairman of the municipal board of canvassers, but signed by the two
other members. Please note that the two other members of the MBC who
signed the SOV and MCOC used as basis of the supplemental PCOC are
the members of the Pangamadun board all of whom were replaced by the
Radam board as early as May 20, 2004. (emphasis supplied)
On the other hand, the Committee noted that for the town of Talitay, thus:
Atty. Wyne Asdala, Chairman of the Provincial Board of Canvassers
for the Province of Maguindanao then submitted a supplemental
provincial certi cate of canvass dated June 16, 2004 containing the
results from the municipalities of South Upi and Talitay. Per SOV attached
to the supplemental PCOC, Barbers obtained 4,472 votes and Biazon, 455
votes for the municipality of Talitay. Records do not show which MCOC
was used as basis by the Asdala board for the preparation of the
supplemental PCOC. (emphasis supplied) CHTAIc

And by exercising its prerogative and discretion, the Commission duly

noted the said Committee's recommendation to "use only the MCOCs prepared by
the duly constituted municipal boards of canvassers as basis for the provincial
canvass in Sultan Kudarat and Maguindanao."

At any rate, We likewise con rm the opinion of Commissioner Florentino A.

Tuason, Jr., on the nature and rami cations of herein SPC Case for Annulment of
Proclamation.
Citing the case of Rasul vs. Comelec, the Honorable Supreme Court
declared that — In Pangilinan vs. Commission on Elections, this Court has ruled
that 'where the candidate has already been proclaimed winner in the
congressional elections, the remedy of petitioner is to le an electoral protest with
the Electoral Tribunal of the House of Representatives.' In like manner, where as in
this case, petitioner assails the Commission's resolution proclaiming the twelfth
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 (12th) winning senatorial candidate, petitioner's proper recourse was to le a
regular election protest which under the Constitution and the Omnibus Election
Code exclusively pertains to the Senate Electoral Tribunal.
Under the Omnibus Election Code (OEC), following the clear enunciation of
Section 242 and the immediately succeeding sections, it is clear that annulment
of proclamation, be it partial or total, arises from the Commission's jurisdiction
over pre-proclamation controversies. Republic Act (RA) No. 7166, quali es such
power of the Commission by so stating that a pre-proclamation contest may only
apply in cases where there are "manifest errors" in the election returns or
certi cates of canvass, with respect to national elective positions such as herein
case.
To prove that the same is manifest, the errors must appear on the
certi cates of canvass or election returns sought to be corrected and/or
objections thereto must have been made before the board of canvassers and
speci cally noted in the minutes of their administrative proceedings. ( Chavez vs.
Comelec, GR No. 150799, 03 February 2004)
Parties, therefore, ought to be careful in availing themselves of remedies
lest they fall into a trap of their own making — one that they cannot escape from.

Nevertheless, granting arguendo that the present case is not a pre-

proclamation case, as so painstakingly pointed out by petitioner, but one that is
due to an incomplete canvass, and the relief sought emanates from the plenary
power of the Commission, herein petitioner, sadly, failed to present convincing
and legitimate evidence in support of his petition (including this motion for
reconsideration). 1 3

Hence, this petition.

The Issues
Barbers raises the following issues for resolution:
Whether or not public respondent COMELEC gravely abused its discretion,
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it deliberately insisted in
resorting to and in using and considering, for purposes of tallying/tabulation of
the still uncanvassed election results, MERE improvised Municipal COCs, which
are NON-CANVASSED election documents, unauthentic, unreliable and dubious
on their faces which documents were submitted, not to the NBC, but to a mere
Comelec. Department [ERSD]; instead of availing and relying on o cial CANVASS
documents — PROVINCIAL COCs submitted to COMELEC, as the National Board
of Canvassers for Senators. AcSEHT

Whether or not the public respondent COMELEC gravely abused its

discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it rst correctly
recognized the undisputed fact that there was an INCOMPLETE CANVASS at the
time that respondent Biazon was initially "proclaimed" PREMATURELY on June 2,
2004, but adamantly refused to rectify its VOID premature proclamation when it
opted to reinstate the said sham proclamation of respondent Biazon, by
anomalously resorting to and relying on, unauthentic, dubious and non-
canvassed documents [Municipal COCs], rather, than on the legal and lawful
canvassed documents [PROVINCIAL COCs]. 1 4

The Court's Ruling

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com

 The petition must fail.
To our mind, the basic issue for resolution is whether this Court can take
cognizance of this petition.
Certiorari as a special civil action is available only if there is concurrence of the
essential requisites, to wit: (a) the tribunal, board or o cer exercising judicial or quasi-
judicial functions has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction, and (b) there is no appeal or any plain,
speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law to annul or modify the
proceeding. There must be capricious, arbitrary and whimsical exercise of power for
certiorari to prosper. 1 5
On the other hand, prohibition as a special civil action is available only if the
following essential requisites concur: (a) the proceedings of the tribunal, corporation,
board, o cer or person exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions are
without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and (b) there is no appeal or any other plain,
speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law to compel the respondent
to desist from further proceedings in the action. 1 6
Article VI, Section 17 of the 1987 Constitution provides:
Sec. 17. The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have
an Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to
the election, returns, and quali cations of their respective Members. Each
Electoral Tribunal shall be composed of nine Members, three of whom shall be
Justices of the Supreme Court to be designated by the Chief Justice, and the
remaining six shall be Members of the Senate or the House of Representatives, as
the case may be, who shall be chosen on the basis of proportional representation
from the political parties and the parties or organization registered under the
party-list system represented therein. The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal
shall be its Chairman. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

Rule 12 of the Revised Rules of the Senate Electoral Tribunal provides:

RULE 12. Jurisdiction. — The Senate Electoral Tribunal is the sole
judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and quali cations
of the Members of the Senate. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

In Pangilinan v. Commission on Elections, 1 7 we ruled that:

The Senate and the House of Representatives now have their respective
Electoral Tribunals which are the "sole judge of all contests relating to the
election, returns, and quali cations of their respective Members," thereby
divesting the Commission on Elections of its jurisdiction under the 1973
Constitution over election cases pertaining to the election of the Members of the
Batasang Pambansa (Congress).

In Javier v. COMELEC , 18 we interpreted the phrase "election, returns and

qualifications" as follows:
The phrase "election, returns and quali cations" should be interpreted in its
totality as referring to all matters affecting the validity of the contestee's title. But
if it is necessary to specify, we can say that "election" referred to the conduct of
the polls, including the listing of voters, the holding of the electoral campaign, and
the casting and counting of the votes; "returns" to the canvass of the returns and
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 the proclamation of the winners, including questions concerning the composition
of the board of canvassers and the authenticity of the election returns; and
"quali cations" to matters that could be raised in a quo warranto proceeding
against the proclaimed winner, such as his disloyalty or ineligibility or the
inadequacy of his certificate of candidacy. (Emphasis supplied) HcDSaT

The word "sole in Section 17, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution and Rule 12 of
the Revised Rules of the Senate Electoral Tribunal ("SET") underscores the exclusivity of
the SET's jurisdiction over election contests relating to members of the Senate. The
authority conferred upon the SET is categorical and complete. It is therefore clear that
this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the instant petition. 1 9 Since Barbers contests
Biazon's proclamation as the 12th winning senatorial candidate, it is the SET which has
exclusive jurisdiction to act on Barbers' complaint. 2 0
In Pangilinan, 2 1 we ruled that "where the candidate has already been proclaimed
winner in the congressional elections, the remedy of petitioner is to le an electoral
protest with the Electoral Tribunal of the House of Representatives." 2 2 In like manner,
where as in the present case, Barbers assails Biazon's proclamation as the 12th duly
elected Senator, Barbers' proper recourse is to le a regular election protest with the
SET. 2 3
Certiorari and prohibition will not lie in this case considering that there is an
available and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law to annul the COMELEC's
assailed proceedings. We take pains to emphasize that after the proclamation, Barbers
should have filed an electoral protest before the SET.
While the resolution of the issues presented in this petition falls within the sole
jurisdiction of the SET, still we opt to discuss them to show the absence of grave abuse
of discretion on the part of COMELEC.
Barbers claims that Biazon's 2 June 2004 proclamation as the 12th winning
senatorial candidate is a nullity because it was based on an incomplete canvass.
Barbers asserts that the COMELEC's act of making such premature proclamation
constituted grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
Barbers also claims that the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion when, after having
used Provincial Certi cates of Canvass ("PCOCs") in the canvass of election results for
Senators up to 2 June 2004, the COMELEC used the Municipal Certi cates of Canvass
("MCOCs") in the " nal tabulation of the uncanvassed results and that of the special
elections yet to be held in certain parts of the country. 2 4
Barbers' arguments are specious.
An incomplete canvass of votes is illegal and cannot be the basis of a
subsequent proclamation. A canvass is not re ective of the true vote of the electorate
unless the board of canvassers considers all returns and omits none. However, this is
true only where the election returns missing or not counted will affect the results of the
election. 2 5
The COMELEC, in promulgating its 2 June 2004 Resolution No. NBC 04-005
proclaiming Biazon as the 12th duly elected Senator, observed the following provisions
of the Omnibus Election Code:
SEC. 233. When the election returns are delayed, lost or destroyed. — In
case its copy of the election returns is missing, the board of canvassers shall, by
messenger or otherwise, obtain such missing election returns from the board of
election inspectors concerned, or if said returns have been lost or destroyed, the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 board of canvassers, upon prior authority of the Commission, may use any of the
authentic copies of said election returns or certi ed copy of said election returns
issued by the Commission, and forthwith direct its representative to investigate
the case and immediately report the matter to the Commission.
The board of canvassers, notwithstanding the fact that not all the
election returns have been received by it, may terminate the canvass
and proclaim the candidates elected on the basis of the available
election returns if the missing election returns will not affect the results
of the election . (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

On 5 May 2004, the COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. 6749, i.e., "General
Instructions for the Canvass of Votes and Proclamation of the Results for Senators and
Party List in the May 10, 2004 National and Local Elections." Section 9 of the Resolution
provides:
SEC. 9. Proclamation of results. — Upon completion of the canvass,
the Supervisory Committee and the watchers if available shall certify the nal
printout of results as canvassed. On the basis of the certi ed nal printout, the
NBC shall cause the preparation of, sign and approve the Certi cate of Canvass
and Proclamation, and proclaim the winning candidates for senators, certify the
results of the election of the party-list system and proclaim the nominees of the
parties which obtained the required percentage of votes. EcDSHT

Notwithstanding the fact that not all of the COCs have been
received or canvassed the NBC may terminate the canvass if the
missing COCs would no longer affect the results of the elections .
(Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

In the present case, the report which the COMELEC Supervisory Committee
submitted on 29 June 2004 shows that Barbers obtained 6,736 votes in areas where
results were not included in the national canvass. As for Biazon, he garnered 2,263
votes. 2 6 Also, the Supervisory Committee's report shows that the total number of
registered voters in areas where special elections were still to be conducted was only
2,931, covering only 19 precincts in three municipalities. 2 7
As correctly stated by the COMELEC:
From the above summation, the lead of private respondent over petitioner
undoubtedly was reduced to six thousand two hundred twelve (6,212). Assuming
that the remaining uncanvassed votes of two thousand nine hundred thirty-one
(2,931) in places where special elections are yet to be held were all votes in favor
of petitioner Barbers, nevertheless, this will not materially affect the results of the
election. To say the least, even if private respondent's lead was decreased to three
thousand two hundred ninety-nine (3,299) votes, he remains to be the winner and
therefore the lawful occupant of the 12th slot for the senatorial position. 2 8

It su ces to say that the COMELEC based its ruling in the assailed Resolutions on
o cial COMELEC records. The COMELEC enjoys the presumption of good faith and
regularity in the performance of official duty. 2 9
Since the election returns not included in the national canvass as well as the results
of the special elections to be held would not materially affect the results of the elections, it
is immaterial whether the COMELEC used PCOCs or MCOCs in the subsequent canvass.
The alleged invalidity of Biazon's proclamation involves a dispute or contest relating
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 to the election returns of members of the Senate. Indisputably, the resolution of such
dispute falls within the sole jurisdiction of the SET. For this Court to take cognizance of the
electoral protest against Biazon would usurp the constitutional functions of the SET. In
addition, the COMELEC did not commit any grave abuse of discretion in issuing the
assailed Resolutions a rming Biazon's proclamation since the uncanvassed returns and
the results of the special elections to be held would not materially affect the results of the
elections.
WHEREFORE, we DISMISS the instant petition. No pronouncement as to costs. SIaHTD

SO ORDERED.
Panganiban, Quisumbing, Corona, Carpio Morales, Azcuna, Chico-Nazario and Garcia,
JJ., concur.
Davide, Jr., C.J., Puno, Ynares-Santiago, Austria-Martinez and Tinga, JJ., we concur on
the ground of lack of jurisdiction.
Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., I concur in the result. This court has no jurisdiction.
Callejo, Sr., J., concurs in the result only (for lack of jurisdiction).
Footnotes
1. Under Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
2. Composed of Ru no S.B. Javier as Presiding Commissioner, with Commissioners
Resurreccion Z. Borra and Florentino A. Tuason, Jr.
3. Composed of Benjamin S. Abalos, Sr. as Chairman, with Commissioners Ru no S.B.
Javier, Mehol K. Sadain, Resurreccion Z. Borra, Florentino A. Tuason, Jr., Virgilio O.
Garcillano and Manuel A. Barcelona, Jr.

4. Rollo, p. 95.
5. Ibid., pp. 94-96.
6. Ibid., pp. 97-109.
7. Ibid., p. 100.
8. Ibid., pp. 131-143.
9. Ibid., pp. 167-171.
10. Ibid., p. 70.
11. Ibid., pp. 259-282.
12. Rollo, pp. 66-70.
13. Rollo, pp. 76-78.
14. Ibid., p. 17.
15. Section 1, Rule 65, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; Aggabao v. COMELEC , G.R. No.
163756, 26 January 2005; Garcia v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal , 371
Phil. 280 (1999).

16. Section 2, Rule 65, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 17. G.R. No. 105278, 18 November 1993, 228 SCRA 36.
18. 228 Phil. 193 (1986).
19. Chavez v. Commission on Elections , G.R. No. 105323, 3 July 1992, 211 SCRA, 315; Co
v. Electoral Tribunal of the House of Representatives , G.R. Nos. 92191-92, 92202-03, 30
July 1991, 199 SCRA 692; Lazatin v. House Electoral Tribunal , No. L-84297, 8 December
1988, 168 SCRA 391.
20. Rasul v. Commission on Elections , 371 Phil. 760 (1999); Comments on the Omnibus
Election Code, Ruben E. Agpalo, p. 523, Revised Edition, 2004.
21. Supra note 17.
22. See Magno v. COMELEC , 439 Phil. 339 (2002); Guerrero v. COMELEC , 391 Phil. 344
(2000); Caruncho III v. Commission on Elections , 374 Phil. 308 (1999); Lazatin v.
Commission on Elections, No. L-80007, 25 January 1988, 157 SCRA 337.
23. Supra note 20.
24. Rollo, pp. 4, 5, and 27.
25. Nasser Imman v. Commission on Elections , 379 Phil. 953 (2000); Caruncho III v.
Commission on Elections, supra note 22.
26. Rollo, p. 177.
27. Ibid., p. 176.
28. Ibid., p. 70.
29. Nasser Immam v. Commission on Elections, supra note 25.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com