Cauton vs. Commission on Elections

The Commission on Elections may order the opening of ballot boxes — on its own initiative or upon petition by a prejudiced candidate — to retrieve the copy of the election returns deposited therein, where the copies outside the ballot box have been shown to be tampered, so that a genuine and untampered basis for the canvass and for a judicial recount under Section 163 of the Revised Election Code may be ascertained.

Under the election law each board of inspectors prepares four copies of the election return for every precinct: one is deposited in the ballot box, one delivered to the municipal treasurer, one sent to the provincial treasurer, and one sent to the Commission on Elections. For candidates for provincial or national offices the canvass uses the copies received by the provincial treasurer, who turns them over to the provincial board of canvassers. The question raised was how far the Commission on Elections may go, in the exercise of its constitutional power over the conduct of elections, when the copies outside the ballot box are alleged to have been altered.

In the national elections held on November 9, 1965, petitioner Lucas V. Cauton and respondent Pablo Sanidad, along with Godofredo S. Reyes, were candidates for the office of Representative in the second congressional district of Ilocos Sur. During the canvass by the Provincial Board of Canvassers of Ilocos Sur of the votes cast for Representative in that district, and particularly after the Board had opened the envelopes containing the copies of the election returns from each of the election precincts in the municipalities of Candon, Santiago and Sta. Cruz that were presented by the Provincial Treasurer of Ilocos Sur, Sanidad brought to the Board's attention the fact that the entries of votes for the candidates for Representative in those copies differed from the entries appearing in the copies of the returns from the same precincts that were in the possession of the Liberal Party.

Sanidad thereupon filed a petition with the Commission on Elections praying for the opening of the ballot boxes in all the precincts of Candon, Santiago and Sta. Cruz in order to retrieve the election returns deposited therein so that those returns might be used in the canvass, and that in the meantime the Provincial Board of Canvassers be ordered to refrain from proclaiming the winning candidate. The Commission issued the restraining order prayed for and set the petition for hearing. After hearing, the Commission found that it had been clearly established that the copies of the election returns for the Municipal Treasurer, for the Commission on Elections and for the Provincial Treasurer for the municipality of Sta. Cruz had uniform alterations in the entries of the votes cast for representative, showing different numbers of votes compared with the Liberal Party copies, while the copies for the Commission on Elections and for the Provincial Treasurer for the municipalities of Candon and Santiago likewise had uniform alterations showing different numbers compared with the Liberal Party copies. The copies furnished the municipal treasurers of Candon and Santiago were never verified because those municipal treasurers did not comply with the subpoena duces tecum issued by the Commission directing them to bring the copies in their possession.

On December 22, 1965, the Commission issued an order providing, among others, that to enable the aggrieved party to establish discrepancy between copies of the election returns for the purpose of obtaining judicial remedy under Section 163 of the Revised Election Code, it resolved to direct immediately the opening of the ballot boxes of Candon, Sta. Cruz and Santiago, then impounded and under the custody of the Zone Commander of the 1st PC Zone in Camp Olivas, San Fernando, Pampanga, solely for the purpose of retrieving therefrom the corresponding election returns, copies for the ballot box, in all the precincts of those municipalities. Pursuant to those instructions, the ballot boxes from all the precincts were opened by the Chief of the Law Enforcement Division of the Commission, Atty. Fernando Gorospe, Jr., in the presence of witnesses, and the envelopes containing the election returns found inside were taken and brought to Manila on December 23, 1965.

On that same date Cauton filed before the SC a petition for certiorari and prohibition with preliminary injunction praying that the resolution of December 22, 1965 be annulled and set aside, that the Commission be restrained from opening the envelopes containing the election returns found in the ballot boxes, and that it be ordered to return those envelopes to the corresponding ballot boxes, alleging that the Commission had acted without or in excess of jurisdiction. The SC gave due course to the petition but did not issue the writ of preliminary injunction prayed for. Upon instructions of the Commission, on December 28, 1966, the envelopes taken from the ballot boxes were opened and the election returns taken out and their contents examined and recorded by a committee appointed by the Commission, in a formal hearing with notice to the parties concerned. Sanidad filed his answer on January 5, 1966, admitting some of the allegations and denying others and maintaining that the Commission had acted well within the bounds of its authority; the Commission filed its own answer the same day, maintaining that it has authority under the law to order the opening of the ballot boxes as stated in its resolution.

In the meantime, on the basis of the discrepancies in the entries of the votes for the candidates for Representative between the election returns taken out of the ballot boxes opened by order of the Commission and the election returns submitted by the Provincial Treasurer to the Provincial Board of Canvassers, Sanidad filed a petition with the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, docketed as Election Case No. 16-N, for a recount of the votes in all the precincts of Candon, Sta. Cruz and Santiago pursuant to Section 163 of the Revised Election Code. On February 14, 1966, Cauton filed before the SC an urgent motion praying for an order enjoining the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur (Branch II-Narvacan) from further proceeding with Election Case No. 16-N pending final decision of the instant case, upon the ground that the recount of the ballots in that case would render the instant case moot and academic; the SC denied the motion in a resolution dated February 17, 1966.

• Scope of Section 157, Revised Election Code: Petitioner argued that under Section 157 the Commission on Elections has authority to order the opening of the ballot boxes "only in connection with an investigation conducted for the purpose of helping the prosecution of any violation of the election laws or for the purely administrative purpose but not when the sole purpose is, as in this case, to assist a party in trying to win the election."
• Insufficiency of the Discrepancies: Petitioner contended that the mere fact that the copies of the returns in the precincts in question in the possession of the Liberal Party do not tally with the returns involving the same precincts in the possession of the Provincial Treasurer, the Commission on Elections and the Nacionalista Party does not legally support the validity of the resolution in question.

• Authority of the Commission: Respondent Sanidad maintained that the Commission on Elections had acted well within the bounds of its authority in issuing the order of December 22, 1965.
• Statutory Power to Order Opening: Respondent Commission on Elections maintained that it has authority under the law to order the opening of the ballot boxes as stated in its resolution of December 22, 1965.

• Jurisdiction of the Commission on Elections: Whether the Commission on Elections acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction in issuing the resolution of December 22, 1965 ordering the opening of the ballot boxes in all the precincts of Candon, Sta. Cruz and Santiago, Ilocos Sur, for the purpose of retrieving the election returns deposited therein.

• Jurisdiction of the Commission on Elections: No. The order was within the Commission's constitutional power of exclusive charge over the enforcement and administration of election laws, and within Section 157 of the Revised Election Code, which permits the opening of ballot boxes that are the subject of an official investigation by a competent authority.

• Jurisdiction of the Commission on Elections: The Commission's power rests on Article X, Section 2 of the Constitution, which gives it exclusive charge of the enforcement and administration of all laws relative to the conduct of elections and the power to decide all administrative questions affecting elections except those involving the right to vote. The SC had ruled in a line of decisions — Mintu vs. Enage, Ramos vs. Comelec, Abendante vs. Relato, Lacson vs. Comelec, Santos vs. Comelec, and Javier vs. Commission on Elections — that the Commission may investigate and act on the propriety or legality of the canvass of election returns made by a board of canvassers, and in Albano vs. Arranz it upheld the suspension of a proclamation pending an inquiry into irregularities brought to the Commission's attention. That power is administrative and supervisory, intended to secure the proclamation of the winning candidate based on the true count of the votes cast; the purpose is not to help a candidate win but to bring about a canvass of the true results as certified by the boards of election inspectors. Because the canvass must rest on true, genuine, correct, untampered returns, once the Commission is convinced that the returns in the hands of the board of canvassers do not constitute a proper basis for ascertaining the true result, it becomes its duty to order the taking of such steps as may be necessary so that the proper basis is obtained or made available.

The election law requires four copies of the return per precinct — one deposited in the ballot box, one to the municipal treasurer, one to the provincial treasurer, and one to the Commission — and for provincial or national offices the provincial treasurer's copies are those used in the canvass. If the Commission, duly informed and after appropriate proceedings, finds the provincial treasurer's copies tampered, it should afford the candidate adversely affected an opportunity to show that authentic copies exist, recourse being had first to the Commission's copies and to the municipal treasurer's copies. Where those copies are shown to be similarly tampered, all three copies outside the ballot box become an unreliable basis for the canvass, and the only copies left to be checked are those inside the ballot boxes. The Commission may then order the boxes opened, on its own initiative or upon petition by the proper party, to ascertain whether the ballot-box copy is likewise tampered; once the ballot-box copy is found untampered, the Commission accomplishes two things — it secures a basis for the prosecution of violations of the election laws, and it affords the party aggrieved by the alteration a basis for a judicial recount under Section 163 of the Revised Election Code.

Section 157 of the Revised Election Code, on which petitioner relied, authorizes the opening of the ballot box whenever it is the subject of an official investigation. Under that provision the boxes may be opened in an election contest, may be opened even without a contest when their contents have to be used as evidence in the prosecution of election frauds, and may be opened when they are the subject of any official investigation ordered by a competent court or other competent authority; the "competent authority" must include the Commission on Elections, which is charged with the administration and enforcement of the laws relative to the conduct of elections. Here the Commission found it clearly established that the returns outside the ballot boxes in all the precincts of the three municipalities had been tampered with, and the investigation of that anomaly — whether in connection with a prosecution or to ascertain the condition of the ballot-box copies as compared with those outside — is within its power. The opening may therefore be prayed for by a candidate prejudiced by the apparent falsification, and in ordering it the Commission's purpose is not to help a particular candidate win but to properly administer and enforce the election laws.

The provincial board of canvassers is enjoined by law to canvass the votes for Representatives on the basis of the election returns produced by the provincial treasurer, and the Commission has direct and immediate supervision over the provincial, municipal and city officials designated by law to perform election duties, including the members of the provincial board of canvassers. The Commission thus has the duty to see to it that the returns used for canvassing are genuine and authentic, not falsified or tampered with; where the returns produced by the provincial treasurer and all other copies outside the ballot boxes have been shown to be tampered, it is within the Commission's power to issue such order as would ascertain the existence of the genuine, authentic and untampered returns and thus open the way for the summary recount of the votes in accordance with law. Such an order does not affect the right to vote or the validity of any vote cast, so it is perfectly within the Commission's power in the exercise of its exclusive power to administer and enforce the election laws; it would be absurd to say that the Commission has a legal duty to perform and at the same time is denied the necessary means to perform it.

The purpose of the Revised Election Code is to protect the integrity of elections and to suppress all evils that may violate its purity and defeat the will of the voters, and the purity of elections is one of the most fundamental requisites of popular government. The Commission must be given considerable latitude in adopting means and methods that will insure the accomplishment of the great objective for which it was created, and the choice of means, unless clearly illegal or constitutive of grave abuse of discretion, should not be interfered with; technicalities that may defeat the will of the sovereign people should not be allowed to hamper it. Of all the copies prepared by the board of inspectors, the copy least susceptible to being tampered with is the one deposited in the ballot box, and where the three copies outside appear to have been uniformly altered there is no plausible reason why the ballot-box copy may not be used to determine whether discrepancies exist. Since the Commission has the right to determine whether discrepancies exist, it must also have the right to consult those returns, which cannot be done unless the boxes are opened; the Revised Election Code does not provide that it is the courts that have the power to order the opening of the ballot box in a situation like this. On the finding actually made — uniform alterations in the Sta. Cruz copies for the Municipal Treasurer, the Commission and the Provincial Treasurer, and in the Candon and Santiago copies for the Commission and the Provincial Treasurer, compared with the Liberal Party copies — indicating a clear violation of the election law and an attempt to procure a proclamation by the use of tampered returns, the Commission could not be remiss in the performance of its duties. The order of December 22, 1965 was therefore perfectly within its power to issue.

• Comelec's administrative and supervisory power over the canvass — The Commission on Elections has the power to investigate and act on the propriety or legality of the canvass of election returns made by a board of canvassers, a power that is administrative and supervisory and is intended to secure the proclamation of the winning candidate based on the true count of the votes cast, not to help any candidate win. The SC applied it to uphold the suspension of the canvass and the order opening the ballot boxes after the Commission found the returns outside the boxes uniformly altered.
• "Competent authority" under Section 157 includes the Commission on Elections — The ballot boxes may be opened (a) in an election contest; (b) even without a contest, when their contents have to be used as evidence in the prosecution of election frauds; and (c) when they are the subject of any official investigation ordered by a competent court or other competent authority. The SC held that the "competent authority" in the third situation includes the Commission on Elections, which is charged with the administration and enforcement of election laws.
• The ballot-box copy is the least tamperable return — Of the four copies of the election return prepared by the board of inspectors, the copy deposited in the ballot box is the least susceptible to tampering. Where the three copies outside the box appear uniformly altered, the ballot-box copy may be retrieved and consulted to determine whether discrepancies exist among the various copies, since the right to determine the existence of discrepancies carries with it the right to consult the returns.
• Two-fold purpose of retrieving the ballot-box copy — Once the copy inside the ballot box is found untampered, the Commission accomplishes two things: (1) it secures a basis for the prosecution of violations of the election laws, and (2) it affords the party aggrieved by the alteration of the returns outside the box a basis for a judicial recount of the votes under Section 163 of the Revised Election Code.
• Latitude in the choice of means — In the performance of its duties the Commission must be given considerable latitude in adopting means and methods that will insure free, orderly and honest elections; its choice of means, unless clearly illegal or constitutive of grave abuse of discretion, should not be interfered with, and technicalities that may defeat the will of the sovereign people should not be allowed to hamper it.

• "The power of the Commission on Elections in this respect is simply administrative and supervisory — intended to secure the proclamation of the winning candidate based on the true count of the votes cast." — This characterizes the nature of the power upheld, answering petitioner's claim that the Commission was acting to make a candidate win rather than to administer the election laws.
• "Of all the copies prepared by the board of inspectors the copy least susceptible to being tampered with is the one deposited in the ballot box." — The premise from which the SC concluded that the ballot-box copy had to be retrieved once all three copies outside the box were shown to be altered.
• "The 'competent authority' must include the Commission on Elections which is charged with the administration and enforcement of the laws relative to the conduct of elections." — The core statutory holding, construing Section 157 of the Revised Election Code to supply the authority petitioner denied the Commission.
• "The choice of means taken by the Commission on Elections, unless they are clearly illegal or constitute grave abuse of discretion, should not be interfered with." — States the standard of review the SC applied in declining to annul the resolution.

• Albano vs. Arranz, L-19260, January 31, 1962 — Controlling precedent, quoted at length; held that the suspension of a proclamation pending an inquiry into irregularities was well within the Commission's administrative jurisdiction, and that the Commission had the right to inquire whether discrepancies existed between the various copies of election returns.
• Mintu vs. Enage, L-1834, December 31, 1947 — Cited in the line of decisions holding that the Commission on Elections has the power to investigate and act on the propriety or legality of the canvass of election returns.
• Ramos vs. Comelec, 80 Phil. 722 — Same line of decisions on the Commission's power over the canvass.
• Lacson vs. Comelec, L-16261, December 28, 1959 — Same line of decisions on the Commission's power over the canvass.
• Santos vs. Comelec, L-16413, January 26, 1960 — Same line of decisions on the Commission's power over the canvass.
• Javier vs. Commission on Elections, L-22248, January 30, 1965 — Same line of decisions on the Commission's power over the canvass.
• Provincial Fiscal of Nueva Ecija vs. Gutierrez David, 59 Phil. 637 — Cited for the rule that the ballot boxes may be opened even without an election contest when their contents have to be used as evidence in the prosecution of election frauds.
• Board of Inspectors vs. Piccio, 81 Phil. 577 — Cited for the rule that the ballot boxes may be opened when they are the subject of any official investigation ordered by a competent court or other competent authority.

• Article X, Section 2, Constitution of the Philippines — Confers on the Commission on Elections the exclusive charge of the enforcement and administration of all laws relative to the conduct of elections, and the power to decide all administrative questions affecting elections except those involving the right to vote; the SC used it as the constitutional source of the power to order the opening of the ballot boxes.
• Section 157, Revised Election Code — Requires the municipal treasurer to keep the ballot boxes unopened for three months unless they are the subject of an official investigation, a competent court or tribunal demands them sooner, or the competent authority orders their preservation for a longer time; the SC construed "competent authority" to include the Commission on Elections, thereby sustaining the resolution.
• Section 163, Revised Election Code — Governs the judicial recount where discrepancies exist between copies of the election returns; the challenged resolution was issued precisely to enable the aggrieved party to establish discrepancy for the purpose of obtaining that remedy.
• Section 160, Revised Election Code — Enjoins the provincial board of canvassers to canvass the votes for Representatives on the basis of the election returns produced by the provincial treasurer; cited to establish the Commission's duty to see that the returns used are genuine and untampered.
• Section 3, Revised Election Code — Gives the Commission on Elections direct and immediate supervision over provincial, municipal and city officials designated by law to perform duties relative to the conduct of elections, including the members of the provincial board of canvassers.