Bugarin, Cortez, Doria, Guarin, Maat, Saplan Et. Al. Reviewer - Bawal Chi Ming Tsoi Dito Gago

BUGARIN, CORTEZ, DORIA, GUARIN, MAAT, SAPLAN Et. Al.
REVIEWER –BAWAL CHI MING TSOI DITO GAGO-

ELECTION LAW SYLLABUS (2016-17)
I. Election and Suffrage
1. Definition 
Suffrage - the right to vote in the election of officers chosen by the people and in the determination of questions submitted to the
people. Includes within its scope: election, plebiscite, initiative and referendum.
Election - the people choose the representatives to whom they will entrust the exercise of powers of government.
1. Regular - is an election participated in by those who possess the right of suffrage and not disqualified by law and who are
registered voters
2. Special - is one which is held when there is failure of election on the scheduled date of regular election in a particular place or
which is conducted to fill up certain vacancies, as provided by law
Plebiscite - the people ratify any amendment to or revision of the Constitution and may introduce amendments to the constitution.
Initiative - the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject any law or part thereof passed by the
Congress or local legislative body.
Recall - a method of removing a local official from office before the expiration of his term because of loss of confidence.
Referendum – the people can approve or reject a law or an issue of national importance.
- the legal process whereby the registered voters of the local government units may approve, amend or reject any ordinance
enacted by the sanggunian.
2. History
3. Readings:
Moya v. Del Fierro, 69 Phil. 199 (1930) It is sufficient to observe, however, in this connection that whatever might have
been said in cases heretofore decided, no technical rule or rules should be permitted
WRONG SPELLING RULE. to defeat the intention of the voter, if that intention is discoverable from the ballot
itself, not from evidence aliunde. This rule of interpretation goes to the very root of
the system. Rationally, also, this must be the justification for the suggested
liberalization of the rules on appreciation of ballots which are now incorporated in
section 144 of the Election Code (Commonwealth Act No. 357).
BUGARIN, CORTEZ, DORIA, GUARIN, MAAT, SAPLAN Et. Al. REVIEWER –BAWAL CHI MING TSOI DITO GAGO-
Badelles v. Cabili, G.R. No.L-29333, 27 It would follow then that if the grievance relied upon is the widespread irregularities
February 1969 and the flagrant violations of the election law, the proper remedy is the one availed
of here, the protest. If there be a failure to observe the mandates of the Election
Code, the aggrieved parties should not be left remediless. Under the law as it
Election Officers failed to observe election stands, it is precisely an election protest that fitly serves that purpose. It was sought
law thus making illegitimate voters vote to be thus utilized in these two cases, perhaps in a rather awkward and far from
entirely satisfactory manner. Than itself is no reason for the courts to slam the door
against any opportunity for redress. Yet, that is what would happen if the order of
dismissal complained of were not set aside.
Dissenting Opinion of Justice Puno in Informing the electorate on the issues and conduct of an election is a prerequisite to
Tolentino v.COMELEC, a free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections. Free elections does not
G.R. No. 148334, 21 January 2004, 465 only mean that the voter is not physically restrained from going to the polling booth,
but also that the voter is unrestrained by the bondage of ignorance. We should be
Original Ruling: Valid; Gregorio Honasan resolute in affirming the right of the electorate to proper information. The Court
validly won in the special elections ranking should not forfeit its role as gatekeeper of our democratic government run by an
the 13th gihest number of votes as the lack of informed majority. Let us not open the door to ignorance.
notice to the public of special elections does
not affect the result of such election
PHIL 385-476
II. Commission on Elections
1. History
2. Composition
- Composed of 1 Chairman, and 6 Commissioners
3. Qualifications
Sec. 54. Qualifications. - Only members of the Philippines Bar shall be eligible for appointment to the position of regional director,
assistant regional director, provincial election supervisor and election registrar: Provided, however, That if there are no members of the
Philippine Bar available for appointment as election registrar, except in cities and capital towns, graduates of duly recognized schools of
law, liberal arts, education or business administration who possess the appropriate civil service eligibility may be appointed to said
position.
4. Powers and Functions (1987 Constitution, Omnibus Election Code)

Sec. 52. Powers and (a) Exercise direct and immediate supervision and control over national and local
functions of the Commission officials or employees, including members of any national or local law enforcement
on Elections. - In addition to agency and instrumentality of the government required by law to perform duties
the powers and functions relative to the conduct of elections. In addition, it may authorize CMT cadets eighteen
conferred upon it by the years of age and above to act as its deputies for the purpose of enforcing its orders.
Constitution, the Commission The Commission may relieve any officer or employee referred to in the preceding
shall have exclusive charge of paragraph from the performance of his duties relating to electoral processes who
the enforcement and violates the election law or fails to comply with its instructions, orders, decisions or
administration of all laws rulings, and appoint his substitute. Upon recommendation of the Commission, the
relative to the conduct of corresponding proper authority shall suspend or remove from office any or all of such
elections for the purpose of officers or employees who may, after due process, be found guilty of such violation or
ensuring free, orderly and failure.
honest elections, and shall:
(b) During the period of the campaign and ending thirty days thereafter, when in any area
of the country there are persons committing acts of terrorism to influence people to
vote for or against any candidate or political party, the Commission shall have the
power to authorize any member or members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines,
the National Bureau of Investigation, the Integrated National Police or any similar
agency or instrumentality of the government, except civilian home defense forces, to act
as deputies for the purpose of ensuring the holding of free, orderly and honest elections.
(c) Promulgate rules and regulations implementing the provisions of this Code or other
laws which the Commission is required to enforce and administer, and require the payment
of legal fees and collect the same in payment of any business done in the Commission, at
rates that it may provide and fix in its rules and regulations.
Rules and regulations promulgated by the Commission to implement the provisions of this
Code shall take effect on the sixteenth day after publication in the Official Gazette or in at
least daily newspapers of general circulation. Orders and directives issued by the
Commission pursuant to said rules and regulations shall be furnished by personal delivery to
accredited political parties within forty-eight hours of issuance and shall take effect
immediately upon receipt.
In case of conflict between rules, regulations, orders or directives of the Commission in
the exercise of its constitutional powers and those issued by any other administrative
office or agency of the government concerning the same matter relative to elections, the
former shall prevail.
(d) Summon the parties to a controversy pending before it, issue subpoena and subpoena
duces tecum, and take testimony in any investigation or hearing before it, and delegate
such power to any officer of the Commission who shall be a member of the Philippine Bar.
In case of failure of a witness to attend, the Commission, upon proof of service of the
subpoena to said witnesses, may issue a warrant to arrest witness and bring him before
the Commission or the officer before whom his attendance is required.
Any controversy submitted to the Commission shall, after compliance with the
requirements of due process, be immediately heard and decided by it within sixty days
from submission thereof. No decision or resolution shall be rendered by the Commission
either en banc or by division unless taken up in a formal session properly convened for
the purpose.
The Commission may, when necessary, avail of the assistance of any national or local law
enforcement agency and/or instrumentality of the government to execute under its
direct and immediate supervision any of its final decisions, orders, instructions or rulings.
(e) Punish contempts provided for in the Rules of Court in the same procedure and with
the same penalties provided therein. Any violation of any final and executory decision,
order or ruling of the Commission shall constitute contempt thereof.
(f) Enforce and execute its decisions, directives, orders and instructions which shall have
precedence over those emanating from any other authority, except the Supreme Court
and those issued in habeas corpus proceedings.
(g) Prescribe the forms to be used in the election, plebiscite or referendum.
(h) Procure any supplies, equipment, materials or services needed for the holding of the
election by public bidding: Provided, That, if it finds the requirements of public bidding
impractical to observe, then by negotiations or sealed bids, and in both cases, the
accredited parties shall be duly notified.
(i) Prescribe the use or adoption of the latest technological and electronic devices, taking
into account the situation prevailing in the area and the funds available for the purpose:
Provided, That the Commission shall notify the authorized representatives of accredited
political parties and candidates in areas affected by the use or adoption of technological
and electronic devices not less than thirty days prior to the effectivity of the use of such
devices.
(j) Carry out a continuing and systematic campaign through newspapers of general
circulation, radios and other media forms to educate the public and fully inform the
electorate about election laws, procedures, decisions, and other matters relative to the
work and duties of the Commission and the necessity of clean, free, orderly and honest
electoral processes.
(k) Enlist non-partisan group or organizations of citizens from the civic, youth,
professional, educational, business or labor sectors known for their probity, impartiality
and integrity with the membership and capability to undertake a coordinated operation
and activity to assist it in the implementation of the provisions of this Code and the
resolutions, orders and instructions of the Commission for the purpose of ensuring free,
orderly and honest elections in any constituency. Such groups or organizations shall
function under the direct and immediate control and supervision of the Commission and
shall perform the following specific functions and duties:
A. Before Election Day: 1. Undertake an information campaign on salient features of this Code and help in the
dissemination of the orders, decisions and resolutions of the Commission relative to the
forthcoming election.
2. Wage a registration drive in their respective areas so that all citizens of voting age, not
otherwise disqualified by law may be registered.
3. Help cleanse the list of voters of illegal registrants, conduct house-to-house canvass if
necessary, and take the appropriate legal steps towards this end.
4. Report to the Commission violations of the provisions of this Code on the conduct of the
political campaign, election propaganda and electoral expenditures.
B. On Election Day: 1. Exhort all registered voters in their respective areas to go to their polling places and cast
their votes.
2. Nominate one watcher for accreditation in each polling place and each place of canvass
who shall have the same duties, functions and rights as the other watchers of political
parties and candidates. Members or units of any citizen group or organization so designated
by the Commission except its lone duly accredited watcher, shall not be allowed to enter
any polling place except to vote, and shall, if they so desire, stay in an area at least fifty
meters away from the polling place.
3. Report to the peace authorities and other appropriate agencies all instances of
terrorism, intimidation of voters, and other similar attempts to frustrate the free and
orderly casting of votes.
4. Perform such other functions as may be entrusted to such group or organization by the
Commission.
The designation of any group or organization made in accordance herewith may be revoked
by the Commission upon notice and hearing whenever by its actuations such group or
organization has shown partiality to any political party or candidate, or has performed acts
in excess or in contravention of the functions and duties herein provided and such others
which may be granted by the Commission.
(l) Conduct hearings on controversies pending before it in the cities or provinces upon
proper motion of any party, taking into consideration the materiality and number of
witnesses to be presented, the situation prevailing in the area and the fund available for
the purpose.
(m) Fix other reasonable periods for certain pre-election requirements in order that voters
shall not be deprived of their right of suffrage and certain groups of rights granted them in
this Code.
Unless indicated in this Code, the Commission is hereby authorized for fix the appropriate
period for the various prohibited acts enumerated herein, consistent with the requirements
of free, orderly, and honest elections.
5. Field Offices
Sec. 53. Field offices of the Commission. - The Commission shall have the following field offices:
A. Regional Election Office, headed by the Regional Election Director and assisted by the Assistant Regional Director and such other
subordinate officers or employees as the Commission may appoint.
B. Provincial Election Office, headed by the Provincial Election Supervisor and assisted by such other subordinate officers or employees
as the Commission may appoint.
C. City/Municipal Election Office, headed by the City/Municipal Registrar who shall be assisted by an election clerk and such other
employees as the Commission may appoint.
The Commission may delegate its powers and functions or order the implementation or enforcement of its orders, rulings, or
decisions through the heads of its field offices.
6. Readings:
The Omnibus Election Code;

Purisima v. Salanga, 15 SCRA 704 (1965) Interpretation of election laws should give effect to the expressed will of the
electorate. Patent erasures and superimpositions in words and figures of the votes
stated in the election returns strike at the reliability of said returns as basis for
canvass and proclamation. A comparison with the other copies, and, in case of
discrepancy, a recount, is the only way to remove grave doubts as to the correctness
of said returns as well as of ascertaining that they reflect the will of the people.
Cauton v. COMELEC, 19 SCRA 911 the Commission on Elections simply performed a function as authorized by the
Constitution, that is, to "have exclusive charge of the enforcement and administration
of all laws relative to the conduct of elections and ... exercise all other functions
which may be conferred upon it by law." The Commission has the power to decide all
administrative questions affecting elections, except the question involving the right to
vote.
It is in this proceedings that the Commission on Elections exercises its supervisory and
administrative power in the enforcement of laws relative to the conduct of elections,
by seeing to it that the canvass is based on the election returns as actually certified
by the members of the board of inspectors. Once the Commission on Elections is
convinced that the elections returns in the hands of the board of canvassers do not
constitute the proper basis in ascertaining the true result of the elections, it should be
its concern, nay its duty, to order the taking of such steps as may be necessary in
order that the proper basis for the canvass is obtained or made available.
Roque v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 188456, 10 Sec. 6 of RA 8436 may be broken into three essential parts,
September 2009 (see “ponencia” and the first partaking of the nature of a general policy declaration: that Comelec is
separate concurring opinion of CJ Puno) and authorized to automate the entire elections.
10 February 2010 (Motion for The second part states that for the regular national and local elections that shall be
Reconsideration) held in May 2007, Comelec shall use the AES, with an option, however, to undertake
automation, regardless of the technology to be selected, in a limited area or, to be
more precise, in at least two highly urbanized cities and two provinces each in Luzon,
Visayas, and Mindanao to be chosen by the Comelec.
the last part, phrased sans reference to the May 2007 elections, commands thus:
[I]nsucceeding regular national or local elections, the [automated election system]
shall be implemented. Taken in its proper context, the last part is indicative of the
legislative intent for the May 2010 electoral exercise to be fully automated, regardless
of whether or not pilot testing was run in the 2007 polls.
Arroyo v. DOJ and Comelec, G.R. No. 199082, the Comelec is granted the power to investigate, and where appropriate, prosecute
18 September 2012 and 23 July 2013 cases of election offenses. This is necessary in ensuring free, orderly, honest, peaceful
and credible elections. On the other hand, the DOJ is mandated to administer the
Constitutionality of DOJ-COMELEC Joint criminal justice system in accordance with the accepted processes thereof consisting
Committee in the investigation of the crimes, prosecution of offenders and administration of the
correctional system. Undoubtedly, it is the Constitution, statutes, and the Rules of
Court and not the assailed Joint Order which give the DOJ and the Comelec the power
to conduct preliminary investigation. No new power is given to them by virtue of the
assailed order. As to the members of the Joint Committee and Fact-Finding Team, they
perform such functions that they already perform by virtue of their current positions
as prosecutors of the DOJ and legal officers of the Comelec. Thus, in no way can we
consider the Joint Committee as a new public office.
Ongsioko Reyes v. Comelec, G.R. No. 207264, The Court has invariably held that once a winning candidate has been proclaimed,
25 June 2013 and 22 October 2013 taken his oath, and assumed office as a Member of the House of Representatives, the
COMELEC’s jurisdiction over election contests relating to his election, returns, and
Requisites for HRET to Acquire Jusrisdiction: qualifications ends, and the HRET’s own jurisdiction begins.
From the foregoing, it is then clear that to be considered a Member of the House of
Representatives, there must be a concurrence of the following requisites:
(1) a valid proclamation,
(2) a proper oath, and
(3) assumption of office.
Here, the petitioner cannot be considered a Member of the House of
Representatives because, primarily, she has not yet assumed office. To repeat what
has earlier been said, the term of office of a Member of the House of Representatives
begins only "at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election." Thus,
until such time, the COMELEC retains jurisdiction.
III. Voters
1. Qualifications for suffrage

- “Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the Philippines not otherwise disqualified by law, who are at least eighteen
years of age, and who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one year and in the place wherein they propose to
vote for at least six months immediately preceding the election. No literacy, property, or other substantive requirement shall
be imposed on the exercise of suffrage [Sec. 1, Art. V, Constitution].
2. Disqualifications
A. Any person sentenced by final judgment to suffer imprisonment for not less than one year (unless granted a plenary pardon or
an amnesty); but right is reacquired upon the expiration of 5 years after service of sentence.
B. Any person adjudged by final judgment of having committed any crime involving disloyalty to the government or any crime
against national security (unless restored to full civil and political rights in accordance with law); but right is reacquired upon
the expiration of 5 years after service of sentence.
C. Insane or incompetent persons as declared by competent authority.
3. Local Absentee Voters
4. Overseas Absentee Voters

A. QUALIFIED All citizens of the Philippines abroad, who are not otherwise
disqualified by law, at least eighteen (18) years of age on the
day of elections, may vote for president, vice-president,
senators and party-list representatives. (Sec. 4 R.A. 9189)
B. DISQUALIFIED Those who have lost their Filipino citizenship in accordance

with Philippine laws;
2. Those who have expressly renounced their Philippine
citizenship and who have pledged allegiance to a foreign
country;
3. Those who have committed and are convicted in a final
judgment by a court or tribunal of an offense punishable by
imprisonment of not less than one (1) year, including those
who have committed and been found guilty of Disloyalty as
defined under Article 137 of the Revised Penal Code, such
disability not having been removed by plenary pardon or
amnesty; Provided, however, That any person disqualified to
vote under this subsection shall automatically acquire the right
to vote upon expiration of five (5) years after service of
sentence; Provided, further, That the Commission may take
cognizance of final judgments issued by foreign courts or
tribunals only on the basis of reciprocity and subject to the
formalities and processes prescribed by the Rules of Court on
execution of judgments;
An immigrant or a permanent resident who is recognized as

such in the host country, unless he/she executes, upon
registration, an affidavit prepared for the purpose by the
Commission declaring that he/she shall resume actual physical
permanent residence in the Philippines not later than three (3)
years from approval of his/her registration under this Act. Such
affidavit shall also state that he/she has not applied for
citizenship in another country. Failure to return shall be the
cause for the removal of the name of the immigrant or
permanent resident from the National Registry of Absentee
Voters and his/her permanent disqualification to vote in
absentia.
5. Any citizen of the Philippines abroad previously declared

insane or incompetent by competent authority in the
Philippines or abroad, as verified by the Philippine embassies,
consulates or foreign service establishments concerned, unless
such competent authority subsequently certifies that such
person is no longer insane or incompetent. (Section 5. R.A.
9189)
5. Detainee, PWDs, IPs, Media

- The application for registration of a physically disabled person may be prepared by any relative within the fourth civil degree
of consanguinity or affinity or by the Election Officer or any member of an accredited citizen’s arm using the data supplied by
the applicant [Sec. 14, R.A. 8189]
6. Readings:
The Omnibus Election Code (Sec. 118)
E.O. No. 157 (Local Absentee Voting Law)
R.A. No. 7166 (Sec. 12)
RA No. 10380 (Local Absentee Voting for Media)

R.A. No. 9189 (Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003), as amended R.A. No. 10590 (The OverseasVoting Act of 2013.)
Macalintal v. COMELEC, G.R. No. The qualified Filipino abroad who executed an affidavit is deemed to have retained
157013, July 10, 2003 his domicile in the Philippines and presumed not to have lost his domicile by his
physical absence from this country. Section 5 of RA No. 9189 does not only require the
Absentee Voting Act. Issue: Residency. promise to resume actual physical permanent residence in the Philippines not later
than 3 years after approval of registration but it also requires the Filipino abroad,
WON he is a green card holder, a temporary visitor or even on business trip, must
declare that he/she has not applied for citizenship in another country. Thus, he/she
must return to the Philippines otherwise consequences will be met according to RA No.
9189.
People v. Corral, 62 Phil. 945 (1936) The right of the State to deprive persons to the right of suffrage by reason of their
having been convicted of crime, is beyond question. "The manifest purpose of such
restrictions upon this right is to preserve the purity of elections. The presumption is
that one rendered infamous by conviction of felony, or other base offense indicative
of moral turpitude, is unfit to exercise the privilege of suffrage or to hold office. The
exclusion must for this reason be adjudged a mere disqualification, imposed for
protection and not for punishment, the withholding of a privilege and not the denial
of a personal right.
IV. Registration of Voters

- In order that a qualified elector may vote in any election, plebiscite or referendum, he must be registered in the Permanent
List of Voters for the city or municipality in which he resides [Sec. 115, BP 881]
1. Qualification of Voters
A. Filipino Citizen
B. Age of majority at the date of the election
C. Residency: 1 year in the Philippines, 6 months in the locality he’s registered
D. Non of the disqualifications
- The same grounds as the disqualifications for suffrage.
3. Election Registration Board

- The Board shall be composed of the Election Officer as chairman, and as members, the public school official most senior in
rank and the local civil registrar, or in his absence, the city or municipal treasurer. No member of the Board shall be related
to each other or to any incumbent city or municipal elective official within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or
affinity. Every registered party and such organizations as may be authorized by the Commission shall be entitled to a watcher
in every registration board.
4. Deactivation, Reactivation, Cancellation

Sec. 123. Cancellation and exclusion in the transfer of names. - In transferring the names of the voters of the precinct from the list
used in the preceding election to the current list, the board shall exclude those who have applied for the cancellation of their
registration, those who have died, those who did not vote in the immediately preceding two successive regular elections, those who
have been excluded by court orders issued in accordance with the provisions of this Code, and those who have been disqualified, upon
motion of any member of the board or of any elector or watcher, upon satisfactory proof to the board and upon summons to the voter in
cases of disqualification. The motion shall be decided by the board without delay and in no case beyond three days from its filing.
Should the board deny the motion, or fail to act thereon within the period herein fixed, the interested party may apply for such
exclusion to the municipal or metropolitan trial court which shall decide the petition without delay and in no case beyond three days
from the date the petition is filed. The decision of the court shall be final. The poll clerk shall keep a record of these exclusions and
shall furnish three copies thereof to the election registrar who shall, in turn keep one copy and send the two other copies thereof to the
provincial election supervisor and the Commission, to be attached by them to the permanent list under their custody.
5. Inclusion and Exclusion Proceedings ; Jurisdiction

Proceedings:
a) Petition for inclusion, exclusion or correction of names of voters shall be filed during office hours.
b) Notice of the place, date and time of the hearing of the petition shall be served upon the members of the Board and the challenged
voter upon filing of the petition.
c) A petition shall refer only to one precinct and shall implead the Board as respondents.
d) No costs shall be assessed agaipst any party in these proceedings. However, if the court finds that the application has been filed
solely to harass the adverse party and cause him to incur expenses, it shall order the culpable party to pay the costs and incidental
expenses.
e) Any voter, candidate or political party affected by the proceedings may intervene and present his evidence.
f) The decision shall be based on the evidence presented and in no case rendered upon a stipulation of facts. If the question is whether
or not the voter is real or fictitious, his non-appearance on the day set for hearing shall be prima facie evidence that the challenged
voter is fictitious.
g) The petition shall be heard and decided within 10 days from the date of its filing. Cases appealed to the RTC shall be decided within
10 days from receipt of the appbal. In all cases, the court shall decide these petitions not later than 15 days before the election and
the decision shall become final and executory.
Jurisdiction:
- MTC
- Appealable to RTC
6. Readings: Omnibus Election Code; R.A. No. 8189 (The Voters Registration Act of 1996)
Yra v. Abano, G.R. No. 30187, 15 November The Election Law, as amended, in section 404 provides that "No person shall
1928 be eligible . . . for any elective . . . municipal office unless, within the time
fixed by law, he shall file a duly sworn certificate of candidacy. Said certificate
Qualified Elector = Voter, not Candidate shall declare . . . that he is a resident of the . . . municipality, . . . in which his
candidacy is offered; that he is a duly qualified elector therein, and that he is
eligible to the office."
It should not be forgotten that the people of Meycauayan have spoken and
their choice to be their local chief executive is the respondent. The will of the
electorate should be respected
Akbayan Youth v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 147066, a citizen in order to be qualified to exercise his right to vote, in addition to the
26 March 2001 minimum requirements set by the fundamental charter, is obliged by law to
register, at present, under the provisions of Republic Act No. 8189, otherwise
known as the Voters Registration Act of 1996.
Stated differently, the act of registration is an indispensable precondition to
the right of suffrage. For registration is part and parcel of the right to vote and
an indispensable element in the election process. Thus, contrary to petitioners
argument, registration cannot and should not be denigrated to the lowly
stature of a mere statutory requirement.
Kabataan Party-list v. Comelec, G.R. No. The Court held that biometrics validation is not a “qualification” to the
221318, 16 December 2015 exercise of the right of suffrage, but a mere aspect of the registration
NoBio-NoBoto procedure, of which the State has the right to reasonably regulate.
Thus, unless it is shown that a registration requirement rises to the
level of a literacy, property or other substantive requirement as contemplated
by the Framers of the Constitution -that is, one which propagates a socio-
economic standard which is bereft of any rational basis to a person’s ability to
intelligently cast his vote and to further the public good -the same cannot be
struck down as unconstitutional, as in this case.
V. Candidates
1. Qualifications
Qualification for Philippine 1. natural born citizen of the Philippines 

President and Vice-President: 2. registered voter 
(63 OEC)  3. able to read and write 
4. at least 40 years of age on the day of election 
5. resident of the Philippines for at least 10 years immediately preceding the
election.
Qualifications for Philippine  
Senators: 1. natural born citizen of the Philippines 
2. at least 35 years old on the day of the election 
3. able to read and write 
4. registered voter 
5. resident of the Philippines for not less than 2 years immediately preceding the day
of the election
Qualification for Philippine  

Congressmen (District 1. natural born citizen of the Philippines 
Representative): 2. on the day of the election at least 25 years old 
3. able to read and write 
4. registered voter in the district in which he shall be elected 
5. resident thereof a period of not less than 1 year immediately preceding the day of
the election.
Qualification for Philippine  

Party-List Representative 1. natural born citizen of the Philippines 
(Sectoral representative): 2. able to read and write 
3. registered voter 
4. resident of the Philippines for a period not less than 1 year immediately
preceeding the day of the election 
5. bona fide member of the sector he seeks to represent 
6. on the day of the election is at least 25 years old BUT in case of youth sectoral
representative, at least 25 years and not more than 30 years old at the day of the
election
Qualifications for Philippine  

Local Officials: 1. citizen of the Philippines 
2. on the day of election at least 23 years old for Governor, Vice-Governor, member
of sangguniang panlalawigan, mayor, vice-mayor, sangguniang panglungsond in highly
urbanized cities; while at least 21 years old for the said officials in component cities
and municipalities; at least 18 years old for members of the sangguniang
panglungsod, sangguniang bayan and sangguniang barangay and punong barangay; at
least 15 years old and not more than 21 years of age for Sangguniang kabataan. 
3. able to read and write FIlioini or any other local language or dialect 
4. registered voter in the constituency in the locality 
5. resident thereof for a period of not less than 1 year immediately preceding the
day of the election
OMNIBUS ELECTION CODE 1. Any person who has been declared by competent
Sec. 12. Disqualifications. – authority insane or incompetent,
2. or has been sentenced by final judgment for
subversion, insurrection, rebellion
3. orfor any offense for which he has been sentenced
to a penalty of more than eighteen months or for a
crime involving moral turpitude,
- shall be disqualified to be a candidate and to hold
any office, unless he has been given plenary pardon
or granted amnesty.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE (a) Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving
moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one (1) year or
more of imprisonment, within two (2) years after serving
Section 40. Disqualifications. - The following persons are sentence;
disqualified from running for any elective local position:
(b) Those removed from office as a result of an administrative
case;
(c) Those convicted by final judg ment for violating the oath of
allegiance to the Republic;
(d) Those with dual citizenship;
(e) Fugitives from justice in criminal or non-political cases here
or abroad;
(f) Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who have
acquired the right to reside abroad and continue to avail of the
same right after the effectivity of this Code; and
(g) The insane or feeble-minded.
3. Certificate of Candidacy
4. Nuisance Candidate
Sec. 69. Nuisance candidates. - The Commission may motu proprio or upon a verified petition of an interested party, refuse to
give due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy if it is shown that:
1. said certificate has been filed to put the election process in mockery or disrepute or
2. to cause confusion among the voters by the similarity of the names of the registered candidates or
Poe-Llamanzares v. FOUNDLING ISSUE

Commission on Elections, domestic laws on adoption also support the principle that foundlings are Filipinos. These laws do not
G.R. Nos. provide that adoption confers citizenship upon the adoptee. Rather, the adoptee must be a Filipino in
the first place to be adopted. The most basic of such laws is Article 15 of the Civil Code sum, all of the
221697 & 221698-700, international law conventions and instruments on the matter of nationality of foundlings were designed
08 March 2016 to address the plight of a defenseless class which suffers from a misfortune not of their own making.
We cannot be restrictive as to their application if we are a country, which calls itself civilized, and a
member of the community of nations.
RESIDENCY ISSUE
the COMELEC refused to consider that petitioner's domicile had been timely changed as of 24 May 2005.
In this connection, the COMELEC also took it against petitioner that she had entered the Philippines
visa-free as a balikbayan. Balikbayans are not ordinary transients. The COMELEC, by its own admission,
disregarded the evidence that petitioner actually and physically returned here on 24 May 2005 not
because it was false, but only because COMELEC took the position that domicile could be established
only from petitioner's repatriation under R.A. No. 9225 in July 2006. However, it does not take away
the fact that in reality, petitioner had returned from the U.S. and was here to stay permanently, on 24
May 2005.
COMELEC’s JURISDICTION
The prior determination of qualification may be by statute, by executive order or by a judgment of a
competent court or tribunal.
Article IX-C, Sec 2 of the Constitution provides for the powers and functions of the COMELEC,
and deciding on the qualifications or lack thereof of a candidate is not one among them.
Clearly, the amendment done in 2012 is an acceptance of the reality of absence of an authorized
proceeding for determining before election the qualifications of candidate. Such that, as presently
required, to disqualify a candidate there must be a declaration by a final judgment of a competent
court that the candidate sought to be disqualified "is guilty of or found by the Commission to be
suffering from any disqualification provided by law or the Constitution."
Maquiling v. Comelec (G.R. Arnado failed to comply with the second requisite of Section 5 (2) of RA 9225 on April 3, 2009 Affidavit
No. 195649, April 16, 2013) of Renunciation was deemed withdrawn when he used his US passport after executing said affidavit.
Consequently, at the time he filed his CoC on October 1, 2012 for purposes of the May 13, 2013
elections, Arnado had yet to comply with said second requirement. The Comelec also noted that while
Arnado submitted an affidavit dated May 9, 2013, affirming his April 3, 2009 Affidavit of Renunciation,
the same would not suffice for having been belatedly executed.
Arnado v. Comelec, G.R. while in this case Arnado won by landslide majority during the 2013 elections, garnering 84% of the
No. 210164, 18 August total votes cast, the same "cannot override the constitutional and statutory requirements for
2015 qualifications and disqualifications."
Caballero v. Commission on RA 9225 does not provide for residency requirement for the reacquisition or retention of Philippine
Elections, G.R. No. citizenship; nor does it mention any effect of such reacquisition or retention of Philippine citizenship
209835, on the current residence of the concerned natural-born Filipino. 
RA No. 9225 treats citizenship independently of residence. This is only logical and consistent with the
22 September 2015 general intent of the law to allow for dual citizenship. Since a natural-born Filipino may hold, at the
same time, both Philippine and foreign citizenships, he may establish residence either in the
Philippines or in the foreign country of which he is also a citizen.
Frivaldo v. Comelec, G.R. (P.D. 725) which is to be given retroactive effect, but even the repatriation granted under said law to
No. 120295, 28 June 1996 Frivaldo on June 30, 1995 is to be deemed to have retroacted to the date of his application therefor,
August 17, 1994. The reason for this is simply that if, as in this case, it was the intent of the legislative
authority that the law should apply to past events i.e., situations and transactions existing even before
the law came into being in order to benefit the greatest number of former Filipinos possible thereby
enabling them to enjoy and exercise the constitutionally guaranteed right of citizenship, and such
legislative intention is to be given the fullest effect and expression, then there is all the more reason
to have the law apply in a retroactive or retrospective manner to situations, events and transactions
subsequent to the passage of such law.
Mercado v. Manzano, G.R. ISSUE OF DUAL CITIZENSHIP there was a valid election of citizenship.
No. 135083, 26 May 1999
It should suffice that upon filing of certificates for candidacy, such persons with dual citizenship
have elected their Philippine citizenship to terminate their dual citizenship. In private respondent’s
certificate of candidacy, he made these statements under oath on March 27, 1998: “I am a Filipino
citizen…Natural-born”. “I am not a permanent resident of, or immigrant to, a foreign country.” “I am
eligible for the office I seek to be elected. I will support and defend the Constitution of the Philippines
and will maintain true faith and allegiance thereto…”The filing of such certificate of candidacy sufficed
to renounce his American citizenship, effectively removing any disqualification he might have as a
dual-citizen.
Villaber v. COMELEC, G.R. “moral turpitude,” have consistently adopted the definition in Black’s Law Dictionary as “an act of
No. 148326, 15 November baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private duties which a man owes his fellow men, or to society in
2001 general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and woman, or
conduct contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals.”
a conviction for violation of B.P. Blg. 22 “imports deceit” and “certainly relates to and affects the good
moral character of a person….”Thus, paraphrasing Black’s definition, a drawer who issues an unfunded
check deliberately reneges on his private duties he owes his fellow men or society in a manner contrary
to accepted and customary rule of right and duty, justice, honesty or good morals. 
In fine, we find no grave abuse of discretion committed by respondent COMELEC in issuing the assailed
Resolutions. 
WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED.
Lonzanida v. COMELEC, 1) that the official concerned has been elected for three consecutive terms in the same local
G.R. No. 135150, 28 July government post and 2) that he has fully served three consecutive terms.
1999 First, the petitioner cannot be considered as having been duly elected to the post in the May 1995
elections, and second, the petitioner did not fully serve the 1995-1998 mayoral term by reason of
involuntary relinquishment of office. After a re-appreciation and revision of the contested ballots
the COMELEC itself declared by final judgment that petitioner Lonzanida lost in the May 1995 mayoral
elections and his previous proclamation as winner was declared null and void. His assumption of office
as mayor cannot be deemed to have been by reason of a valid election but by reason of a void
proclamation.
Abundo v. COMELEC, G.R. Same same same
No. 201716, 08 January
2013
Marquez v. COMELEC, 243 Article 73 of the Rules and Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991, to the
SCRA 538 extent that it confines the term "fugitive from justice" to refer only to a person (the fugitive) "who has
been convicted by final judgment." is an inordinate and undue circumscription of the law.
Unfortunately, the COMELEC did not make any definite finding on whether or not, in fact, private
respondent is a "fugitive from justice" as such term must be interpreted and applied in the light of the
Court's opinion. The omission is understandable since the COMELEC dismissed outrightly the petition
for quo warranto on the basis instead of Rule 73 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated by the
Oversight Committee.
Dela Cruz v. COMELEC, NUISSANCE CANDIDATE (SIMILAR LAST NAME)

G.R. No. 192221, 13
November 2012 As far as COMELEC is concerned, the confusion caused by similarity of surnames of candidates for the
same position and putting the electoral process in mockery or disrepute, had already been rectified by
the new voting system where the voter simply shades the oval corresponding to the name of their
chosen candidate. However, as shown in this case, COMELEC issued Resolution No. 8844 on May 1, 2010,
nine days before the elections, with sufficient time to delete the names of disqualified candidates not
just from the Certified List of Candidates but also from the Official Ballot.
The possibility of confusion in names of candidates if the names of nuisance candidates remained on
the ballots on election day, cannot be discounted or eliminated, even under the automated voting
system especially considering that voters who mistakenly shaded the oval beside the name of the
nuisance candidate instead of the bona fide candidate they intended to vote for could no longer ask for
replacement ballots to correct the same.
Atty. Risos-Vidal v. YES. Former President Estrada was granted an absolute pardon that fully restored all his civil and
Comelec and Estrada, G.R. political rights, which naturally includes the right to seek public elective office, the focal point of this
No. controversy. The wording of the pardon extended to former President Estrada is complete,
unambiguous, and unqualified. It is likewise unfettered by Articles 36 and 41 of the Revised Penal
206666, January 21, 2015) Code.
Aratea vs. COMELEC, 683 We hold that Antipolo, the alleged "second placer," should be proclaimed Mayor because Lonzanida’s
SCRA 1 (2012) certificate of candidacy was void ab initio. In short, Lonzanida was never a candidate at all. All votes
for Lonzanida were stray votes. Thus, Antipolo, the only qualified candidate, actually garnered the
highest number of votes for the position of Mayor.
Jalosjos vs. COMELEC, 683 The perpetual special disqualification against Jalosjos arising from his criminal conviction by final
SCRA 1 (2012) judgment is a material fact involving eligibility which is a proper ground for a petition under Section 78
of the Omnibus Election Code. Jalosjos’ certificate of candidacy was void from the start since he was
not eligible to run for any public office at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy. Jalosjos was
never a candidate at any time, and all votes for Jalosjos were stray votes. As a result of Jalosjos’
certificate of candidacy being void ab initio, Cardino, as the only qualified candidate, actually
garnered the highest number of votes for the position of Mayor.
Quinto vs. COMELEC, 606 In considering persons holding appointive positions as ipso facto resigned from their posts upon the
SCRA 258, December 1, filing of their CoCs, but not considering as resigned all other civil servants, specifically the elective
ones, the law unduly discriminates against the first class.
2009 the provision pertains to all civil servants holding appointive posts without distinction as to whether
they occupy high positions in government or not. Certainly, a utility worker in the government will also
be considered as ipso facto resigned once he files his CoC for the 2010 elections.
Quinto vs. COMELEC, 613 2009 Ruling is INVALID!

SCRA 385, Feb. 22, 2010 Substantial distinctions clearly exist between elective officials and appointive officials. The former
occupy their office by virtue of the mandate of the electorate. They are elected to an office for a
definite term and may be removed therefrom only upon stringent conditions. On the other hand,
appointive officials hold their office by virtue of their designation thereto by an appointing authority.
Some appointive officials hold their office in a permanent capacity and are entitled to security of
tenure while others serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority.
By repealing Section 67 but retaining Section 66 of the Omnibus Election Code, the legislators
deemed it proper to treat these two classes of officials differently with respect to the effect on their
tenure in the office of the filing of the certificates of candidacy for any position other than those
occupied by them. Again, it is not within the power of the Court to pass upon or look into the wisdom
of this classification.
Mendoza vs. COMELEC, The failure of the COMELEC En Banc to muster the required majority vote even after the 15 February
G.R. No. 191084, March 2010 re-hearing should have caused the dismissal of respondents Election Protest. Promulgated on 15
25, February 1993 pursuant to Section 6, Article IX-A and Section 3, Article IX-C of the Constitution,
the COMELEC Rules of Procedure is clear on this matter.Without any trace of ambiguity, Section 6,
2010 Rule 18 of said Rule categorically provides as follows:
Socrates vs. COMELEC, 391

SCRA 457, Nov. 12, 2002
Pamatong v. Commission No. What is recognized in Section 26, Article II of the Constitution is merely a privilege subject to
on Elections, G.R. No. limitations imposed by law. It neither bestows such a right nor elevates the privilege to the level of an
161872, enforceable right. There is nothing in the plain language of the provision which suggests such a thrust
or justifies an interpretation of the sort.
April 13, 2004
Timbol v. Commission on In election cases, due process requirements are satisfied when the parties are afforded fair and
Elections, G.R. No. 206004 reasonable opportunity to explain their side of the controversy at hand.  
(Resolution), [February 24, Ø COMELEC declared Timbol a nuisance candidate without giving him a chance to explain his bona fide
2015]) intention to run for office. It issued Resolution No. 9610 when Timbol appeared before Valencia in a
clarificatory hearing. This was an ineffective opportunity to be heard.
Rulloda v. Commission on GEN RULE: SUBSTITUTION OF IND. CANDIDATE IS NOT ALLOWED 

Elections, G.R. No. EXEMPTION: SUBSTITUTION OF AN INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO BRGY OFFICIAL
154198,
The absence of a specific provision governing substitution of candidates in barangay elections can not
[January 20, 2003], 443 be inferred as a prohibition against said substitution. Such a restrictive construction cannot be read
PHIL 649-656 into the law where the same is not written. Indeed, there is more reason to allow the substitution of
candidates where no political parties are involved than when political considerations or party
affiliations reign, a fact that must have been subsumed by law.
The substitute for a candidate who died or suffered permanent incapacity or disqualified by final
Federico v. Commission on judgment, may file his certificate of candidacy up to mid-day of election day. If the death or
Elections, G.R. No. permanent disability should occur between the day before the election and mid-day of election day,
199612, the substitute candidate may file the certificate with any board of election inspectors in the political
subdivision where he is a candidate, or in the case of a candidate for President, Vice-President or
[January 22, 2013], 702 Senator, with the Law Department of the Commission on Elections in Manila.
PHIL 68-92 The rule being cited by the Law Department that the substitute for a candidate who withdrew may file
his certificate of candidacy as herein provided for the office affected not later than December 14,
2009, is far from germane considering that the vacancy arose by reason of the death of Governor
Sanchez. (LATE SUBSTITUTION RULE)
Without question, the votes garnered by Edna could not be credited to Federico as he was never a
legitimate candidate. As there was an invalid substitution, there could not be a valid proclamation. In
effect, the second COCVP in his name had no legal basis. Granting that those who voted for Edna had in
mind to vote for Federico, nonetheless, the fact that there was no compliance with the rules cannot be
ignored.
Engle v. Commission on LATE RESOLUTION BY THE COMELEC POLPAR MEMBERS APPLICABLE TO ALL, MAY BE SUBSTITUTED EVEN IF
Elections, G.R. No. INDEPENDENT
215995,
COMELEC En Banc rendered a formal ruling on their status as independent candidates, months before
[January 19, 2016] the election, such that the Liberal Party was officially notified that its candidates in Camiguin can no
longer be substituted in the event of their death, withdrawal or disqualification. Thus, the mandatory
application of the rules was justified. In petitioner's case, no official pronouncement was made by the
COMELEC regarding her husband's status as an independent candidate and the validity of her filing a
COC as his substitute until July 5, 2013, long after the elections were held. Indeed, it behooved the
COMELEC to similarly resolve petitioner's case prior to the elections had it wanted to treat all political
parties equally.
by other circumstances or acts which clearly demonstrate that the candidate has no bona fide intention to run for the office for
which the certificate of candidacy has been filed and thus prevent a faithful determination of the true will of the electorate.
RA No. 10742 aka Sangguniang Kabataan Reform Act of 2015
VI. Campaign, Election Propaganda, etc.
1. Concept, Campaign
An act designed to promote the election or defeat of a particular candidate or candidates to public office. Public expressions or
opinions or discussions of probable issues in a forthcoming election or on attributes of or criticism against probable candidates
proposed to be nominated in a forthcoming political party convention shall not be construed as part ofany election campaign or
partisan political activity
2. Campaign Period; Election Period (SEC 3 OEB)
Sec. 3. Election and campaign periods. - Unless otherwise fixed in special cases by the Commission on Elections, which
hereinafter shall be referred to as the Commission, the election period shall commence ninety days before the day of the
election and shall end thirty days thereafter.
The period of campaign shall be as follows:
1. Presidential and Vice-Presidential Election - 90 days;
2. Election of Members of the Batasang Pambansa and Local Election - 45 days; and
3. Barangay Election - 15 days.
The campaign periods shall not include the day before and the day of the election.
However, in case of special elections under Article VIII, Section 5, Subsection (2) of the Constitution, the campaign period
shall be forty-five days.
3. Lawful election propaganda (4)
Sec. 82. Lawful election propaganda. - Lawful election propaganda shall include
(a) Pamphlets, leaflets, cards, decals, stickers or other written or printed materials of a size not more than eight and
one-half inches in width and fourteen inches in length;
(b) Handwritten or printed letters urging voters to vote for or against any particular candidate;
(c) Cloth, paper or cardboard posters, whether framed or posted, with an area exceeding two feet by three feet, except
that, at the site and on the occasion of a public meeting or rally, or in announcing the holding of said meeting or rally,
streamers not exceeding three feet by eight feet in size, shall be allowed: Provided, That said streamers may not be
displayed except one week before the date of the meeting or rally and that it shall be removed within seventy-two hours
after said meeting or rally; or
(d) All other forms of election propaganda not prohibited by this Code as the Commission may authorize after due notice
to all interested parties and hearing where all the interested parties were given an equal opportunity to be heard:
Provided, That the Commission's authorization shall be published in two newspapers of general circulation throughout the
nation for at least twice within one week after the authorization has been granted.
4. Prohibited election propaganda (4)

Sec. 85. Prohibited forms of election propaganda. - It shall be unlawful:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(a) To print, publish, post or distribute any poster, pamphlet, circular, handbill, or printed matter urging voters to vote for
or against any candidate unless they bear the names and addresses of the printer and payor as required in Section 84
hereof;
(b) To erect, put up, make use of, attach, float or display any billboard, tinplate-poster, balloons and the like, of
whatever size, shape, form or kind, advertising for or against any candidate or political party;
(c) To purchase, manufacture, request, distribute or accept electoral propaganda gadgets, such as pens, lighters, fans of
whatever nature, flashlights, athletic goods or materials, wallets, shirts, hats, bandanas, matches, cigarettes and the
like, except that campaign supporters accompanying a candidate shall be allowed to wear hats and/or shirts or T-shirts
advertising a candidate;
(d) To show or display publicly any advertisement or propaganda for or against any candidate by means of
cinematography, audio-visual units or other screen projections except telecasts which may be allowed as hereinafter
provided; and
(e) For any radio broadcasting or television station to sell or give free of charge air time for campaign and other political
purposes except as authorized in this Code under the rules and regulations promulgated by the Commission pursuant
thereto.
Any prohibited election propaganda gadget or advertisement shall be stopped, confiscated or torn down by the
representative of the Commission upon specific authority of the Commission.
5. Prohibited contributions (8)
Sec. 95. Prohibited contributions. - No contribution for purposes of partisan political activity shall be made directly or
indirectly by any of the following:
(a) Public or private financial institutions: Provided, however, that nothing herein shall prevent the making of any loan to
a candidate or political party by any such public or private financial institutions legally in the business of lending money,
and that the loan is made in accordance with laws and regulations and in the ordinary course of business;
(b) Natural and juridical persons operating a public utility or in possession of or exploiting any natural resources of the
nation;
(c) Natural and juridical persons who hold contracts or sub-contracts to supply the government or any of its divisions,
subdivisions or instrumentalities, with goods or services or to perform construction or other works;
(d) Natural and juridical persons who have been granted franchises, incentives, exemptions, allocations or similar
privileges or concessions by the government or any of its divisions, subdivisions or instrumentalities, including
government-owned or controlled corporations;
(e) Natural and juridical persons who, within one year prior to the date of the election, have been granted loans or other
accommodations in excess of P100,000 by the government or any of its divisions, subdivisions or instrumentalities
including government-owned or controlled corporations;
(f) Educational institutions which have received grants of public funds amounting to no less than P100,000.00;
(g) Officials or employees in the Civil Service, or members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines; and
(h) Foreigners and foreign corporations.
It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or receive any contribution from any of the persons or entities enumerated
herein.
Sec. 96. Soliciting or receiving contributions from foreign sources. - It shall be unlawful for any person, including a
political party or public or private entity to solicit or receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or contribution of whatever
form or nature from any foreign national, government or entity for the purposes of influencing the results of the election.
6. Lawful expenditures; Limitations on Expenses
Sec. 101. Limitations upon expenses of political parties. - A duly accredited political party may spend for the
election of its candidates in the constituency or constituencies where it has official candidates an aggregate
amount not exceeding the equivalent of one peso and fifty centavos for every voter currently registered therein.
Expenses incurred by branches, chapters, or committees of such political party shall be included in the
computation of the total expenditures of the political party.
Expenses incurred by other political parties shall be considered as expenses of their respective individual
candidates and subject to limitation under Section 100 of this Code.
Sec. 102. Lawful expenditures. - To carry out the objectives of the preceding sections, no candidate or treasurer
of a political party shall, directly or indirectly, make any expenditure except for the following
purposes:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(a) For travelling expenses of the candidates and campaign personnel in the course of the campaign and for
personal expenses incident thereto;
(b) For compensation of campaigners, clerks, stenographers, messengers, and other persons actually employed in
the campaign;
(c) For telegraph and telephone tolls, postage, freight and express delivery charges;
(d) For stationery, printing and distribution of printed matters relative to candidacy;
(e) For employment of watchers at the polls;
(f) For rent, maintenance and furnishing of campaign headquarters, office or place of meetings;
(g) For political meetings and rallies and the use of sound systems, lights and decorations during said meetings and
rallies;
(h) For newspaper, radio, television and other public advertisements;
(i) For employment of counsel, the cost of which shall not be taken into account in determining the amount of
expenses which a candidate or political party may have incurred under Section 100 and 101 hereof;
(j) For copying and classifying list of voters, investigating and challenging the right to vote of persons registered in
the lists the costs of which shall not be taken into account in determining the amount of expenses which a
candidate or political party may have incurred under Sections 100 and 101 hereof; or
(k) For printing sample ballots in such color, size and maximum number as may be authorized by the Commission
and the cost of such printing shall not be taken into account in determining the amount of expenses which a
candidate or political party may have incurred under Sections 100 and 101 hereof.
7. Statement of Contributions and Expenses (RA 9476, RULE 8 SEC 2)

Section 2. When and where to file statements. - Not later than thirty (30) days after the clay of election, every candidate shall file
in triplicate with the offices of the Commission where he filed his certificate of candidacy except for national positions which should
be filed with the Campaign Finance Unit, a full, true and itemized statement of all contributions and expenditures in connection with
the elections. Within the same period, the treasurer of every party that participated in the elections shall file with the Campaign
Finance Unit of the COMELEC the party's statement of election contributions and expenditures. If the statement is sent by mail, it
shall be by registered mail, and the date on which it was registered with the post office may be considered as the filing date thereof
if confirmed on the same date by telegram or radiogram addressed to the office or official with whom the statement should be filed,
which telegram or radiogram shall indicate the registry receipt number of such registered mail.
The Regional Election Director of the National Capital Region, Provincial Election Supervisors and Election Officers concerned shall,
not later than fifteen (15) days after the last day for the filing of the Statements of Contributions and Expenditures, send to the
Campaign Finance Unit, Commission on Elections, Manila, duplicate copies of all statements filed with them. [OEC, Sec. 108]
8. Readings: Fair Elections Act of 2007 (R.A. No. 9006)
R.A. No. 7166, Secs. 13 & 14

Chavez v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 162777, 31 ENDORSMENT

August 2007 petitioner cannot claim that the subject billboards are purely product endorsements
and do not announce nor solicit any support for his candidacy. Under the Omnibus
Election Code, election campaign or partisan political activity is defined as an act
designed to promote the election.
(5) Directly or indirectly soliciting votes, pledges or support for or against a candidate.
(underscoring ours)
When he filed his certificate of candidacy for Senator, the billboards featuring his
name and image assumed partisan political character because the same indirectly
promoted his candidacy. Therefore, the COMELEC was acting well within its scope of
powers when it required petitioner to discontinue the display of the subject
billboards. If the subject billboards were to be allowed, to the disadvantage of other
candidates who do not have the same chance of lending their faces and names to
endorse popular commercial products as image models. This, without a doubt, would
be a circumvention of the rule against premature campaigning.
Penera v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 181614, 11 PREMATURE CAMPAIGNING

September a candidate may already be liable for premature campaigning after the filing of the
certificate of candidacy but even before the start of the campaign period. From the
2009 and 25 November 2009 filing of the certificate of candidacy, even long before the start of the campaign
period, the Decision considers the partisan political acts of a person so filing a
certificate of candidacy "as the promotion of his/her election as a candidate." Thus,
such person can be disqualified for premature campaigning for acts done before the
start of the campaign period.
In short, the Decision considers a person who files a certificate of candidacy already a
"candidate" even before the start of the campaign period.
The assailed Decision is contrary to the clear intent and letter of the law.
The essential elements for violation of Section 80 of the Omnibus Election Code are:
(1) a person engages in an election campaign or partisan political activity; (2) the act
is designed to promote the election or defeat of a particular candidate or candidates;
(3) the act is done outside the campaign period.
The second element requires the existence of a "candidate." Under Section 79(a), a
candidate is one who "has filed a certificate of candidacy" to an elective public office.
Unless one has filed his certificate of candidacy, he is not a "candidate." The third
element requires that the campaign period has not started when the election
campaign or partisan political activity is committed.
PENERA DOCTRINE
. Any person who files his certificate of candidacy within this period shall only be
considered as a candidate at the start of the campaign period for which he filed his
certificate of candidacy
this means that a candidate is liable for an election offense only for acts done during
the campaign period, not before. The law is clear as daylight — any election offense
that may be committed by a candidate under any election law cannot be committed
before the start of the campaign period. In ruling that Penera is liable for premature
campaigning for partisan political acts before the start of the campaigning, the
assailed Decision ignores the clear and express provision of the law.
SWS v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 147571, 05 May To implement 5.4, Resolution 3636, 24(h), dated March 1, 2001, of the COMELEC
2001 enjoins
Surveys affecting national candidates shall not be published fifteen (15) days before
an election and surveys affecting local candidates shall not be published seven (7)
days before an election.
5.4 is invalid because (1) it imposes a prior restraint on the freedom of expression, (2)
it is a direct and total suppression of a category of expression even though such
suppression is only for a limited period, and (3) the governmental interest sought to
be promoted can be achieved by means other than the suppression of freedom of
expression.
GMA Network Inc. v. Comelec, G.R. No. “aggregate-based” airtime limits is unreasonable and arbitrary as it unduly restricts
205357, 02 September 2014 and constrains the ability of candidates and political parties to reach out and
communicate with the people. “Freedom of speech, of expression, and of the press
are at the core of civil liberties and have to be protected at all costs for the sake of
democracy.
We refuse to believe that the advertising contracts between ABSCBN Corporation and
Emilio Ramon “E.R.” P. Ejercito v. Comelec, Scenema Concept International, Inc. were executed without Ejercito’s knowledge and
G.R. No. consent. As found by the COMELEC First Division, the advertising contracts submitted
in evidence by San Luis as well as those in legal custody of the COMELEC belie his
212398, 25 November 2014 hollow assertion. His express conformity to the advertising contracts is actually a must
because noncompliance is considered as an election offense.
The inclusion of the amount contributed by a donor to the candidate’s allowable limit
of election expenses does not trample upon the free exercise of the voters’ rights of
speech and of expression under Section 4, Article III of the Constitution. As a content-
neutral regulation, the law’s concern is not to curtail the message or content of the
advertisement promoting a particular candidate but to ensure equality between and
among aspirants with "deep pockets" and those with less financial resources
The Court held that every citizen’s expression with political consequences enjoys a
The Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec, G.R. No. high degree of protection.
205728, Moreover, the respondent’s argument that the tarpaulin is election
propaganda, being petitioners’ way of endorsing candidates who voted against the RH
21 January 2015 Law and rejecting those who voted for it, holds no water.
Political speech refers to speech “both intended and received as a contribution to
public deliberation about some issue,” “fostering informed and civic minded
deliberation.” On the other hand, commercial speech has been defined as speech that
does “no more than propose a commercial transaction.” The expression resulting from
the content of the tarpaulin is, however, definitely political speech.
Doctrine of benevolent neutrality
With religion looked upon with benevolence and not hostility, benevolent
neutrality allows accommodation of religion under certain circumstances.
Accommodations are government policies that take religion specifically into account
not to promote the government’s favored form of religion, but to allow individuals and
groups to exercise their religion without hindrance. Their purpose or effect therefore
is to remove a burden on, or facilitate the exercise of, a person’s or institution’s
religion.
Lemon test
A regulation is constitutional when:
1. It has a secular legislative purpose;
2. It neither advances nor inhibits religion; and
3. It does not foster an excessive entanglement with religion.
1-UTAK v. Comelec, G.R. No. 206020, 14 April The prohibition of posting campaign materials in PUV and terminals constitutes a
2015 clear prior restraint on the right to free expression of the owners of PUVs and
transport terminals. As a result of the prohibition, owners of PUVs and transport
terminals are forcefully and effectively inhibited from expressing their preferences
under the pain of indictment for an election offense and the revocation of their
franchise or permit to operate.
VII. Political Party; Party-List Organization
1. Definitions: PP, PLO
"political party" as "an organized group of citizens advocating an ideology or platform, principles and policies for the general conduct
of government and which, as the most immediate means of securing their adoption, regularly nominates and supports certain of its
leaders and members as candidates for public office."
2. Groups which cannot be registered as political parties

A. religious denominations or sects;
B. those who seek to achieve their goals through violence or unlawful means;
C. those who refuse to uphold and adhere to the Constitution; and
D. those supported by foreign governments [Sec. 2(5), Art IX-C].
3. Grounds for cancellation of registration

A. It is a religious sect or denomination, organization or association organized for religious purposes;
B. It advocates violence or unlawful means to achieve its goal;
C. It is a foreign party or organization;
D. It is receiving support from any foreign government, foreign political party, foundation, organization, whether directly or
indirectly or through its officers or members or indirectly through third parties for partisan election purposes;
E. It violates or fails to comply with laws, rules or regulations relating to elections;
F. It has made untruthful statements in its petition; and
G. It has ceased to exist for at least one (1) year from the time the petition is filed.
4. Registration; Manifestation to participate in the party-list system

Sec. 61. Registration. - Any organized group of persons seeking registration as a national or regional political party may file with the
Commission a verified petition attaching thereto its constitution and by-laws, platform or program of government and such other
relevant information as may be required by the Commission. The Commission shall, after due notice and hearing, resolve the petition
within ten days from the date it is submitted for decision.
No religious sect shall be registered as a political party and no political party which seeks to achieve its goal through violence shall be
entitled to accreditation.
5. Refusal and/or cancellation of registration (RA 7941)

Section 6. Removal and/or Cancellation of Registration. - The COMELEC may motu proprio or upon verified complaint of any
interested party, remove or cancel, after due notice and hearing, the registration of any national, regional or sectoral party,
organization or coalition on any of the following grounds:
1. It is a religious sect or denomination, organization or association organized for religious purposes;
2. It advocates violence or unlawful means to seek its goal;
3. It is a foreign party or organization;
4. It is receiving support from any foreign government, foreign political party, foundation, organization, whether directly or
through any of its officers or members or indirectly through third parties for partisan election purposes;
5. It violates or fails to comply with laws, rules or regulations relating to elections;
6. It declares untruthful statements in its petition;
7. It has ceased to exist for at least one (1) year; or
8. It fails to participate in the last two (2) preceding elections or fails to obtain at least two percentum (2%) of the votes cast
under the party-list system in the two (2) preceding elections for the constituency in which it has registered.
6. Nomination of party-list nominees (RA 7941)

Section 8. Nominations of Party-List Representatives. - Each registered party, organization or coalition shall submit to the
COMELEC not later than forty-five (45) days before the election a list of names, not less than five (5) from which party-list
representatives shall be chosen in case it obtains the required number of votes.
A person may be nominated in one (1) list only. Only persons who have given their consent in writing may be named in the list. The
list shall not include any candidate for any elective office or person who has lost his bid for an elective office in the immediately
preceding election. No change of names or alteration of the order of nominees shall be allowed after the same shall have been
submitted to the COMELEC except in cases where the nominee dies, or withdraws in writing, his nomination, becomes
incapacitated in which case the name of the substitutes nominee shall be placed last in the list. Incumbent sectoral
representatives in the House of Representatives who are nominated in the party-list system shall not be considered resigned.
7. Qualifications of party-list nominees

A. A natural-born citizen of the Philippines; A registered voter;
B. A resident of the Philippines for a period of not less than one (1) year immediately preceding the election day;
C. Able to read and write;
D. A bona fide member of the party he seeks to represent for at least ninety (90) days preceding election day; and
E. At least twenty-five (25) years of age on election day.
8. Manner of Voting; Number; Raffle (RA. 7941)

Section 10. Manner of Voting. - Every voter shall be entitled to two (2) votes. The first is a vote for candidate for member of the
House of Representatives in his legislative district, and the second, a vote for the party, organization, or coalition he wants
represented in the House of Representatives: provided, that a vote cast for a party, sectoral organization, or coalition not entitled
to be voted for shall not be counted: provided, finally that the first election under the party-list system shall be held in May 1998.
The COMELEC shall undertake the necessary information campaign for purposes of educating the electorate on the matter of the
party-list system.
9. Readings:
Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC, G.R. Article VI of the Constitution, easily conveys the equally simple message that Congress
No. was vested with the broad power to define and prescribe the mechanics of the party-
list system of representation. The Constitution explicitly sets down only the
136781, 06 October 2000 percentage of the total membership in the House of Representatives reserved for
party-list representatives.
The two percent threshold is consistent not only with the intent of the framers of the
Constitution and the law, but with the very essence of "representation." Under a
republican or representative state, all government authority emanates from the
people, but is exercised by representatives chosen by them. But to have meaningful
representation, the elected persons must have the mandate of a sufficient number of
people. Otherwise, in a legislature that features the party-list system, the result
might be the proliferation of small groups which are incapable of contributing
significant legislation, and which might even pose a threat to the stability of Congress.
Thus, even legislative districts are apportioned according to "the number of their
respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio" to ensure
meaningful local representation.
Ang Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC, G.R. No. The foregoing provision mandates a state policy of promoting proportional
147589, 26 representation by means of the Filipino-style party-list system, which will "enable" the
election to the House of Representatives of Filipino citizens,
June 2001 1. who belong to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and
parties; and
2. who lack well-defined constituencies; but
3. who could contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation
that will benefit the nation as a whole.
The key words in this policy are "proportional representation," "marginalized and
underrepresented," and "lack of well-defined constituencies."
The party-list organization or party must factually and truly represent the
marginalized and underrepresented constituencies mentioned in Section 5. 36
Concurrently, the persons nominated by the party-list candidate-organization must be
"Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors,
organizations and parties."
While the enumeration of marginalized and underrepresented sectors is not exclusive,

it demonstrates the clear intent of the law that not all sectors can be represented
under the party-list system. It is a fundamental principle of statutory construction
that words employed in a statute are interpreted in connection with, and their
meaning is ascertained by reference to, the words and the phrases with which they
are associated or related. Thus, the meaning of a term in a statute may be limited,
qualified or specialized by those in immediate association.
The 80-20 rule is observed in the following manner: for every 5 seats allotted for
B a r a n g a y A s s o c i a t i o n f o r N a t i o n a l legislative districts, there shall be one seat allotted for a party-list representative.
Advancement and Originally, the 1987 Constitution provides that there shall be not more than 250
members of the lower house. Using the 80-20 rule, 200 of that will be from legislative
Transparency (BANAT) v. Commission on districts, and 50 would be from party-list representatives. However, the Constitution
Elections, G.R. also allowed Congress to fix the number of the membership of the lower house as in
No. 179271, 179295, [April 21, 2009], 604 fact, it can create additional legislative districts as it may deem appropriate. As can
PHIL 131-184) be seen in the May 2007 elections, there were 220 district representatives, hence
applying the 80-20 rule or the 5:1 ratio, there should be 55 seats allotted for party-list
representatives.
How did the Supreme Court arrive at 55? This is the formula:

(Current Number of Legislative DistrictRepresentatives ÷ 0.80) x (0.20) = Number of
Seats Available to Party-List Representatives
Atong Paglaum v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 203766, 1. Three different groups may participate in the party-list system: (1) national parties
02 April or organizations, (2) regional parties or organizations, and (3) sectoral parties or
organizations.
2013 2. National parties or organizations and regional parties or organizations do not need
to organize along sectoral lines and do not need to represent any "marginalized and
underrepresented" sector.
3. Political parties can participate in party-list elections provided they register under
the party-list system and do not field candidates in legislative district elections. A
political party, whether major or not, that fields candidates in legislative district
elections can participate in party-list elections only through its sectoral wing that
can separately register under the party-list system. The sectoral wing is by itself an
independent sectoral party, and is linked to a political party through a coalition.
4. Sectoral parties or organizations may either be "marginalized and
underrepresented" or lacking in "well-defined political constituencies." It is enough
that their principal advocacy pertains to the special interest and concerns of their
sector. The sectors that are "marginalized and underrepresented" include labor,
peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, handicapped,
veterans, and overseas workers. The sectors that lack "well-defined political
constituencies" include professionals, the elderly, women, and the youth.
5. A majority of the members of sectoral parties or organizations that represent the
"marginalized and underrepresented" must belong to the "marginalized and
underrepresented" sector they represent. Similarly, a majority of the members of
sectoral parties or organizations that lack "well-defined political constituencies"
must belong to the sector they represent. The nominees of sectoral parties or
organizations that represent the "marginalized and underrepresented," or that
represent those who lack "well-defined political constituencies," either must belong
to their respective sectors, or must have a track record of advocacy for their
respective sectors. The nominees of national and regional parties or organizations
must be bona-fide members of such parties or organizations.
6. National, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations shall not be disqualified if
some of their nominees are disqualified, provided that they have at least one
nominee who remains qualified.
Palparan v. HRET, G.R. No. 189506, 11 Sec. 9. Qualification of Party-List Nominees. – No person shall be nominated as
February 2012 party-list representative unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, a
registered voter, a resident of the Philippines for a period of not less than one (1)
year immediately preceding the day of the election, able to read and write, bona
fide member of the party or organization which he seeks to represent for at least
ninety (90) days preceding the day of the election, and is at least twenty-five (25)
years of age on the day of the election.
In case of a nominee of the youth sector, he must at least be twenty-five (25) but
not more than thirty (30) years of age on the day of the election. Any youth
sectoral representative who attains the age of thirty (30) during his term shall be
allowed to continue until the expiration of his term.
In the cases before the Court, those who challenged the qualifications of petitioners
Abayon and Palparan claim that the two do not belong to the marginalized and
underrepresented sectors that they ought to represent. The Party-List System Act
provides that a nominee must be a "bona fide member of the party or organization
which he seeks to represent."7
It is for the HRET to interpret the meaning of this particular qualification of a nominee
—the need for him or her to be a bona fide member or a representative of his party-
list organization—in the context of the facts that characterize petitioners Abayon and
Palparan’s relation to Aangat Tayo and Bantay, respectively, and the marginalized and
underrepresented interests that they presumably embody.
VIII. Automated Elections (* ALL ON R.A. 9369)
1. History
2. Automated Election System

- a system using appropriate technology for voting and electronic devices to count votes and canvass/consolidate results
3. Paper-based Election System
4. Minimum System Capabilities

"SECTION 6. Minimum System Capabilities. - "The automated election system must at least have the following functional capabilities
(a) Adequate security against unauthorized access;
(b) Accuracy in recording and reading of votes as well as in the tabulation, consolidation/canvassing, electronic transmission, and
storage of results;
(c) Error recovery in case of non-catastrophic failure of device;
(d) System integrity which ensures physical stability and functioning of the vote recording and counting process;
(e) Provision for voter verified paper audit trail;
(f) System auditability which provides supporting documentation for verifying the correctness of reported election results;
(g) An election management system for preparing ballots and programs for use in the casting and counting of votes and to
consolidate, report and display election results in the shortest time possible;
(h) Accessibility to illiterates and disabled voters;
(i) Vote tabulating program for election, referendum or plebiscite;
(j) Accurate ballot counters;
(k) Data retention provision;
(l) Provide for the safekeeping, storing and archiving of physical or paper resource used in the election process;
(m)Utilize or generate official ballots as herein defined;
(n) Provide the voter a system of verification to find out whether or not the machine has registered his choice; and
(o) Configure access control for sensitive system data and functions.
"In the procurement of this system, the Commission shall develop and adopt an evaluation system to ascertain that the above
minimum system capabilities are met. This evaluation system shall be developed with the assistance of an advisory council."
5. Continuity Plan
SECTION 13. Continuity Plan. - The AES shall be so designed to include a continuity plan in case of a systems breakdown or any
such eventuality which shall result in the delay, obstruction or nonperformance of the electoral process. Activation of such
continuity and contingency measures shall be undertaken in the presence of representatives of political parties and citizens' arm of
the Commission who shall be notified by the election officer of such activation.
"All political parties and party-lists shall be furnished copies of said continuity plan at their official addresses as submitted to the
Commission. The list shall be published in at least two newspapers of national of circulation and shall be posted at the website of
the Commission at least fifteen (15) days prior to the electoral activity concerned.”
6. Advisory Council; Joint Congressional Oversight Committee

"SECTION 8. The Advisory Council. - The Commission shall create an Advisory Council, hereafter referred to as the Council, which
shall be convened not later than eighteen (18) months prior to the next scheduled electoral exercise, and deactivated six months
after completion of canvassing: Provided, for purposes of the 2007 elections, the Advisory Council shall be immediately convened
within ten (10) days after the effectivity of this Act.
"The Council shall be composed of the following members, who must be registered Filipino voters, of known independence,
competence and probity;
"(a) The Chairman of the Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT) who shall act as the chairman of
the Council;
"(b) One member from the Department of Science and Technology;
"(c) One member from the Department of Education;
"(d) One member representing the academe, to be selected by the chair of the Advisory Council from among the list of
nominees submitted by the country's academic institutions;
"(e) Three members representing ICT professional organizations to be selected by the chair of the Advisory Council from among
the list of nominees submitted by Philippine-based ICT professional organizations. Nominees shall be individuals, at least one of
whom shall be experienced in managing or implementing large-scale IT projects.
"(f) Two members representing non-governmental electoral reform organizations, to be selected by the chair of the Advisory
Council from among the list of nominees submitted by the country's non-governmental electoral reform organizations.
"A person who is affiliated with any political party or candidate for any national position, or is related to a candidate for any
national position by affinity or consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, shall not be eligible for appointment or designation to
the Advisory Council. Should any such situation arise at any time during the incumbency of a member, the designation or
appointment of that member shall ipso facto be terminated.
"Any member of the Advisory Council is prohibited from engaging, directly or indirectly, with any entity that advocates, markets,
imports, produces or in any manner handles software, hardware or any equipment that may be used for election purposes for
personal gain.
"Any violation of the two immediately preceding paragraphs shall disqualify said member from the Advisory Council and shall be
punishable as provided in this Act and shall be penalized in accordance with the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and other
related laws.
"The council may avail itself of the expertise and services of resource persons who are of known independence, competence and
probity, are nonpartisan, and do not possess any of the disqualifications applicable to a member of the Advisory Council as
provided herein. The resource persons shall also be subject to the same prohibitions and penalties as the members of the Advisory
Council.
"The Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT) shall include in its annual appropriation the funds
necessary to enable the Council to effectively perform its functions.”
"SECTION 33. Joint Congressional Oversight Committee. - An Oversight Committee is hereby created composed of seven
members each from the Senate and the House of Representatives, four of whom shall come from the majority and three from the
minority, to monitor and evaluate the implementation of this Act. A written report to the Senate and the House of Representatives
shall be submitted by the Advisory Council within six months from the date of election. The oversight committee shall conduct a
mandatory review of this Act every twelve (12) months from the date of the last regular national or local elections."
"The oversight committee shall conduct a comprehensive assessment and evaluation of the performance of the different AES
technologies implemented and shall make appropriate recommendations to Congress, in session assembled, specifically including
the following:
"1. An assessment and comparison of each of the AES technologies utilized, including their strengths, weakness, applicability or
inapplicability in specific areas and situations;
"2. An evaluation of their accuracy through a comparison of a random sample of the AES election results with a manual
tabulation, and the conduct of similar tests;
"3. As to the scope of AES implementation in the subsequent elections, provide for recommendations as to whether any of the
following should be adopted:
"a. Further test application of the AES or a particular AES technology used in the 2007 elections, whether in the same or
others areas;
"b. An increase or enlargement of areas for implementation of the AES or an AES technology and not a full implementation; or
"c. A full implementation of the AES.
"4. As to the kind of AES technology, provide for proposals as to whether:
"a) A particular AES technology should no longer be utilized for being obsolete, inapplicable, inaccurate or with a defect
which cannot be remedied;
"b) An enhancement or improvement is needed to an AES technology which was used in the 2007 elections to make it more
functional, appropriate and accurate;
"c) A particular AES technology is already appropriate and should be utilized fully for subsequent elections; or
"d) The testing or adoption of new technologies which may have emerged after the 2007 elections is needed.”
7. National Board of Canvassers

Sec. 22. Canvassing Committees. - The board of canvassers may constitute such number of canvassing committees as may be
necessary to enable the board to complete the canvass within the period prescribed under Section 231 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881:
Provided, That each committee shall be composed of three members, each member to be designated by the chairman and
members of the board and that all candidates shall be notified in writing, before the election, of the number of committees to be
constituted so that they can designate their watchers in each committee. The committees shall be under the direct supervision
and control of the board.
8. Readings: R.A. No. 9369
Roque v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 188456, 10 September The Comelec is an independent constitutional body with a
distinct and pivotal role in our scheme of government. In the
2009 discharge of its awesome functions as overseer of fair
elections, administrator and lead implementor of laws relative
AUTOMATED ELECTIONS ISSUE to the conduct of elections, it should not be stymied with
restrictions that would perhaps be justified in the case of an
organization of lesser responsibility.
There is nothing in Art 3.3 of the automation contract, even if
read separately from other stipulations and the provisions of
the bid documents and the Constitution itself, to support the
simplistic conclusion of abdication of control pressed on the
Court.
Capalla v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 201112, 13 June 2012 A winning bidder is not precluded from modifying or amending
certain provisions of the contract bidded upon. However, such
changes must not constitute substantial or material
amendments that would alter the basic parameters of the
contract and would constitute a denial to the other bidders
of the opportunity to bid on the same terms. The
determination of whether or not a modification or amendment
of a contract bidded out constitutes a substantial amendment
rests on whether the contract, when taken as a
whole, would contain substantially different terms and
conditions that would have the effect of altering the technical
and/or financial proposals previously submitted by the
other bidders. The modifications in the contract executed
between the government and the winning bidder must be such
as to render the executed contract to be an entirely different
contract from the one bidded upon.
IX. Recall
- “Recall” is the termination of official relationship of a local elective official for loss of confidence prior to the expiration of his term
through the will of the electorate.
1. Grounds
- Loss of confidence
2. Procedure
A. A written petition for recall duly signed before the election registrar or his representative, and in the presence of a representative
of the petitioner and a representative of the official sought to be recalled, and in a public place in the province, city,
municipality, or barangay, as the case may be, shall be filed with the Comelec through its office in the local government unit
concerned. The Comelec or its duly authorized representative shall cause the publication of the petition in a public and
conspicuous place for a period of not less than ten (10) days nor more than twenty (20) days, for the purpose of verifying.
B. Upon the lapse of the aforesaid period, the Comelec or its duly authorized representative shall announce the acceptance of
candidates to the position and thereafter prepare the list of candidates which shall include the name of the official sought to be
recalled.
3. Readings: R.A. No 7160, Secs. 69-74
R.A. No. 9244
COMELEC Resolution No. 7505

Claudio v. COMELEC, 331 SCRA 388

Recall is a process which involves the following steps:
(1) the convening of the preparatory assembly or gathering of
RECALL ELECTIONS the signatures of at least 25% registered voters in the LGU;
(2) the filing of the recall resolution or petition with the
COMELEC;
(3) the verification of the resolution or petition;
(4) fixing of the date of the recall election; and
(5) holding of the election.
That the word “recall” used in Sec. 74(b), LGC, refers

to the recall election itself is due to the following reasons:
(1) Sec. 69, LGC provides that the power of recall shall be
exercised by the registered voters of the LGU to which the
local elective official belongs. It is clear that the power of
recall referred to in Sec. 69 is the power to retain/replace
officials and not the power to initiate recall proceedings. Thus,
the limitations under Sec. 74 (Limitations on Recall) apply only
to the recall elections.
In Garcia v. COMELEC, the delegation of the power to initiate

recall proceedings from the electorate to the PRAs was
questioned. The Supreme Court held that what the
Constitution gave to the people is the power to recall and not
the power to initiate the recall proceedings. The holding of the
PRA is not the recall itself.
Garcia v. COMELEC, 227 SCRA 100 Under Sec. 32(a) of RA No. 6735 it provided the 3 systems of
initiative, namely:
1. Initiative on the Constitution – petition to amend the
Constitution
2. Initiative on statutes – petition proposing to enact a
national legislation
3. Initiative on local legislation – petition proposing to
enact a regional, provincial, city, municipal, or barangay law,
resolution or ordinance
Under its Sec.16(a), it provided the limitations on local

initiatives, which is “the power of local initiative shall not be
exercised more than once a year.”
Goh v. Bayron, G.R. No. 212584, [November 25, 2014]) YES. IT CAN AUGMENT FROM SAVINGS ITS APPROPRIATIONS FOR
PERSONNEL SERVICES, MAINTENANCE AND OTHER OPERATING
EXPENSES. RECALL ELECTIONS ONLY NEED OPERATING
COMELEC MAY AUGMENT FUNDS EXEPENSES BECAUSE THE EXISTING PERSONNEL ARE THE SAME
PERSONNEL WHO WILL EVALUATE THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE
RECALL PETITIONS.
However, contrary to the COMELEC’s assertion, the

appropriations for personnel services and maintenance and
other operating expenses falling under “Conduct and
supervision of elections, referenda, recall votes and
plebiscites” constitute a line item which can be augmented
from the COMELEC’s savings to fund the conduct of recall
elections in 2014. The conduct of recall elections requires only
operating expenses, not capital outlays. The COMELEC’s
existing personnel in Puerto Princesa are the same personnel
who will evaluate the sufficiency of the recall petitions. and
conduct the recall elections.
X. Failure of Elections, Postponement of Elections, Special Elections
1. Grounds
FAILURE:
A. the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed] OR
B. suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting] OR
C. after the voting and during the preparation and the transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass, such
election results in a failure to elect]
D. Because of (Sec. 6, BP 881)
• force majeure
• violence
• terrorism
• fraud
• other analogous causes
POSTPONEMENT:
A. Any serious causes: (examples)
B. Violence
C. Terrorism
D. Loss or destruction of election paraphernalia or records
E. Force majeure
F. Analogous causes of such a nature that the holding of a free, orderly and honest election should become impossible in any
political subdivision  
SPECIAL:
A. In case a permanent vacancy shall occur in the Senate or House of Representatives at least 1 year before the expiration of the
term
B. Elections to be held not earlier than 60 days nor longer than 90 days after the occurrence of the vacancy
C. Vacancy in the Senate: simultaneously with the succeeding regular election (Sec. 4, RA 7166)  
2. Call of Special Elections

Called by COMELEC
- for above mentioned grounds
COMELEC role:
• send sufficient copies of resolution for the holding of the election to its provincial election supervisors and election registrars for
dissemination  
Who in turn: post copies in at least 3 conspicuous places preferably where public meetings are held in each city or municipality
affected (Sec. 7, BP 881)
4. Readings: OEC, Article I, Secs. 6-7
Sison v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 134096, 03 March 1999 Under the pertinent codal provision of the Omnibus Election
Code, there are only three (3) instances where a failure of
elections may be declared, namely:
(a) the election in any polling place has not been held on the
date fixed on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism,
fraud, or other analogous causes;
(b) the election in any polling place had been suspended
before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting on
account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other
analogous causes; or
(c) after the voting and during the preparation and
transmission of the election returns or in the custody or
canvass thereof such election result in a failure to elect on
account of force majeure, violence, terrorism , fraud, or other
analogous causes. We have painstakingly examined
petitioner's petition before the COMELEC but found nothing
therein that could support an action for declaration of failure
of elections. He never alleged at all that elections were either
not held or suspended. Furthermore, petitioner's claim of
failure to elect stood as a bare conclusion bereft of any
substantive support to describe just exactly how the failure to
elect came about.
Ampatuan v. COMELEC, 375 SCRA 503 Elucidating on the concept of failure of election, we held that:
―xxx before Comelec can act on a verified petition seeking
to declare a failure of election, two (2) conditions must
concur:
first, no voting has taken place in the precincts concerned on
the date fixed by law or, even if there was voting, the election
nevertheless resulted in a failure to elect; and
second, the votes cast would affect the result of the election.
In Loong vs. Commission on Elections, this Court added that
the cause of such failure of election should have been any of
the following: force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or
other analogous cases.‖
In another case, we ruled that ―while it may be true that

election did take place, the irregularities that marred the
counting of votes and the canvassing of the election returns
resulted in a failure to elect.
Certificate of Counting and

Registra)on Election Period Campaign Period Election Day Other Offenses
Candidacy Canvassing of Votes
Threats, intimidation,
terrorism, use of
fraudulent devices or
other forms of

coercion to compel

Transfer by any or induce:
Continued
public official of (a) registration or
misrepresentation or
officers and refraining from
holding out as a
employees in the registration of  
candidate of a
civil service without any voter  
disqualified Engaging in an
the prior approval or (b) participation in a
candidate or a election campaign or Failure to complete
Failure to register sanction by Vote-buying and campaign or
nuisance candidate, partisan political canvass within the
and vote may be said COMELEC (Sec. 261h, vote-selling (Sec. refraining or
declared so by final activity outside the required period (Sec.
to be no BP 881)   261a, B.P. 881) desistance from any
and executory campaign period 231, BP 881)
campaign  
judgment (Sec. 27(f), (Sec. 80, BP 881)
unless done to (c) the casting of any
RA 6646)  
promote efficiency in vote or omission to
the government vote  
Knowingly inducing
service (d) any promise of
or abetting such
(PeoplevReyes)   such registration,
misrepresentation  
campaign,  
vote, or omission
(Sec. 261e, B.P. 881)  
In a special election,
in order to
discourage any other
person or persons
from filing a
certificate of

candidacy in order to

eliminate all other
Suspension by any
longer an offense. potential candidates:
public official of an Tampering,
Art. V, Sec. 1 of the (Sec. 5, RA 8295)
elective   Failure by the BEI increasing,
1987 Constitution (a) coercion
local official without Appointment or use Chairman to affix his decreasing votes, or
states that suffrage (b) bribery   Coercion of election
prior approval of the of special policemen, signature on the refusal to correct
"may" be exercised (c) threats   officials and
COMELEC (Sec. 261x, special agents or the back of the ballot tampered votes after
by qualified citizens (d) harassment   employees
B.P. 881)   like (Sec. 261(m), BP before delivering it proper verification
of the Philippines; he (e) intimidation  
881) to the voter (Sec. 24, and hearing by any
1935 and 1973 (f) terrorism  
unless for purposes RA 7166) member of the BEI
Constitutions used (g) actually causing /
of applying the Anti- (Sec. 27b, R.A. 6646)
"shall." inflicting / producing:
Graft and Corrupt
(i) violence 
Practices Act
(ii) injury 
(iii) punishment
(iv) torture  
(v) damage 
(vi) loss 
(vii)
disadvantage
Undue influence
which may induce
one:
Violation by assistor (a) to vote or
of any or both of withhold his vote, or  
Refusal by any
duties to prepare the (b) to vote for or
member of the BEI to
Organization or voter’s ballot and to against any
issue to duly
Failure of the BEI to maintenance of take formal oath to candidate in any  
Use of armored land, accredited watchers
post the list of voters reaction forces, strike do so in accordance election, or any
water or aircraft (Sec. the Certificate of
in each precinct (Sec. forces, or similar with the instructions aspirant for the
261r, B.P. 881) Votes cast and the
9, RA 7166) forces (Sec. 261u, of the voter without nomination or
announcement of
B.P. 881) revealing the selection of an
the election (Sec.
contents of such official candidate in a
27c, R.A. 6646)
ballot (Sec. 196, BP convention of a
881) political party (Sec.
261j, B.P. 881)  

Conspiracy to bribe
voters (Sec. 261b,
B.P. 881)
Disputable
presumption of such Carrying deadly
Unlawful
conspiracy =   weapons in the
electioneering:
proof that at least 1 polling place and
solicitation of votes
voter in different within a radius of
Refusal by a public or undertaking any
Change or alteration precincts 100 meters thereof
utility or propaganda on the Failure by BOC
or transfer of a representing at least (Sec. 261p, B.P. 881) 
transportation day of registration Chairman to give
voter's precinct 20% of the total
company operating before the BEI and notice of meeting to
assignment in the precincts in any unless peace officer
under a certificate of on the day of other members of
permanent list of municipality, city or or public officer
public convenience election, for or the BOC or to a
voters without his province has been authorized
to carry official against any candidate or political
express written offered, promised or by COMELEC to
election mail matters candidate or any party as required
consent (Sec. 4, RA given money, supervise the
free of charge (Sec. political party within (Sec. 27e, R.A. 6646)
8189) valuable election, in cases
261dd (4), B.P. 881) the polling place and
consideration or of affray, turmoil, or
a radius of 30 meters
other expenditure by disorder 
thereof (Sec. 261k,
a candidate's
B.P. 881)
relatives, leaders
and/or sympathizers
for the purpose of
promoting the
election of such
candidate (Sec. 28,
RA 6646)
Carrying firearms
outside residence or
place of business,
although possessing
a permit therefor
(Sec. 261q, B.P. 881) 
Within 45 days
unless cashier or
Acceptance of before a regular
disbursing officer,
appointment, election and 30 days
Policemen and Until proclamation, while in the
assumption of office, before a special Coercion of
provincial guards failure to preserve performance of their
and/or actual service election, subordinates to vote
acting as private and secure ballot duties, or person
as member of the appointment of new for or against any
bodyguards or boxes by BOCs and who by nature of his
Election Registration employees, creation candidate (Sec. 261d,
security (Sec. 261t, local treasurers (Sec. official duties,
Board although of new positions, B.P. 881)
B.P. 881) 18, BP 881) profession, business
ineligible thereto promotion, or giving
or occupation
(Sec. 45d, RA 8189) salary increases (Sec.
habitually carries
261g, B.P. 881)
large sums of money
or valuables
not applicable to
motor vehicle, water
or air craft
Unjustified
Within 45 days
discrimination
before a regular Unauthorized
against any political Dismissal of
election and 30 days printing of official
party, coalition or employees, laborers,
before a special ballots and election
also, knowingly aggroupment of or tenants for
election, release, returns with printing
appointing such parties or any refusing or failing to
disbursement or establishments not
ineligible person candidate in the sale vote for any
expenditure of public under contract with
of air time by any candidate (Sec.
funds for most kinds the COMELEC (Sec.
operator of a radio or 261d(2), B.P. 881)
of public works (Sec. 27a, R.A. 6646)
TV station (Sec.
261v, B.P. 881)
261dd (5), B.P. 881)
Within 45 days
before a regular Removal, Being a “flying
election and 30 days destruction, voter”: voting more
before a special obliteration, or than once in the
Wagering upon the
election, undertaking tampering of lawful same election, or,
results of elections
the construction of election propaganda, not being a
(Sec. 261c, B.P. 881)
public works or or preventing the registered voter,
issuance or use of distribution thereof voting at all (Sec.
treasury warrants (Sec. 83, BP 881) 261z (2), B.P. 881)
(Sec. 261w, B.P. 881)
Intervention by
Within 60 days
public officers and
before and 30 days Sale, etc. of
employees in the
after election day, intoxicating liquor on
civil service in any Holding fairs,
illegal release of the day for voter
partisan political cockfights, jai-alai,
prisoners by person/ registration, or the
activity except to etc. (Sec. 261dd (3),
s required by law to day before or on
vote or, if he is a B.P. 881)
keep them in their election day (Sec.
peace officer, to
custody (Sec. 261n, 261dd (1), B.P. 881)
preserve public order
B.P. 881)
(Sec. 261i, B.P. 881)
Use for an election
campaign or any
partisan political
activity of:
(a) public funds or
money deposited
Opening booths or
with, or held  
stalls for the sale,
in trust by, public Feigning of illness by
dispensing or display
financing institutions any member of the
of wares,
or by   BOC in order to be
merchandise or
government offices, substituted on
refreshments in any
banks, or agencies   election day until
polling place or
(b) facilities owned proclamation (Sec.
within 30 meters
or controlled by the   224, BP 881)
thereof (Sec, 261dd
government, incl.
(2), B.P. 881)
GOCCs and the AFP  
(c) equipment
owned or controlled
by the  
government (Sec.
261o, B.P. 881)
Use of prohibited
forms of election
propaganda  
(Sec. 27, RA 6646)  
XI. Election Offenses
1. Vote-buying, vote-selling, electoral sabotage, etc.
2. Persons criminally liable

Section 263. Persons criminally liable. - The principals, accomplices, and accessories, as defined in the Revised Penal Code, shall
be criminally liable for election offenses. If the one responsible be a political party or an entity, its president or head, the officials
and employees of the same, performing duties connected with the offense committed and its members who may be principals,
accomplices, or accessories shall be liable, in addition to the liability of such party or entity.
3. Penalties
For an Individual For a Foreigner For a Political Party
(1) Imprisonment 1-6 years, without probation (Sec.
264, BP 881) (1) Imprisonment 1-6 years, without probation
(2) Disqualification to hold public office   (Sec. 264, BP 881)   Fine not less than P10,000 after a criminal
(3) Deprivation of the right of suffrage   (2) Deportation after service of sentence   conviction
(4) Where stated, cancellation or revocation of  
certificate of public convenience or franchise  
(5) Where stated, other penalties
4. Prosecution
- COMELEC has exclusive power to investigate and prosecute cases involving violations of election laws. (Sec. 2(6), Art. IX-C,
Constitution; Sec. 268, BP 881; De Jesus v People).
- However:
• This power may be validly delegated to the Provincial Prosecutor or to the Ombudsman.
• It is not the duty of the COMELEC to gather proof in support of a complaint field before it (Kilosbayan v COMELEC, 1997).
• Should COMELEC fail to act on any complaint within 4 months from its filing, the complainant may instead file the
complaint with the fiscal or the Department of Justice, if warranted (Sec. 265, B.P. 881).
- Investigation and prosecution of election offenses shall be given priority by the COMELEC. The investigating officer shall
resolve the case within 5 days from submission.
5. Prescription
- 5 years from date of commission
- If the offense be discovered in an election contest proceeding, the period of prescription shall commence on the date on
which the judgment in such proceedings becomes final and executory. (Sec. 267, B.P. 881)
6. Jurisdiction
- RTCs have exclusive original jurisdiction to try and decide any criminal actions or proceedings for violation of election laws
(Sec. 268, BP 881; Juan v People, 2000).
- The courts shall give preference to election cases over all other cases, except petitions for writ of habeas corpus. Their trial
shall be commenced without delay and shall be conducted continuously until terminated. The case shall be decided within 30
days from its submission for decision (Sec. 269, BP 881).  
7. Readings: OEC, Article CCII, Secs. 261-268
R.A. No. 9369

People v. Ferrer, 54 O.G. 1348 The trial court is of the opinion that causing cigareies or pamphlets to
be distributed to the people who aiended a polijcal meejng does
not consjtute a violajon of sec 51 of the Revised Elecjon Code,
because it is not giving "food" for tobacco is not food; nor does it
consjtute a violajon of that part of secjon 51 which makes
unlawfully the contribujng or giving, directly or indirectly, of money
or things of value, because the informajon merely charges the
defendant with-having caused cigareies, etc. to be distributed.
True, cigareies are not food, but they have and are of value and the
charge that the defendant caused cigareies and pamphlets
concerning the Liberal Party to be distributed to the people who
aiended a polijcal meejng menjoned in the informajon is a
sufficient allegajon that he gave or contributed things of value for
elecjoneering purposes.
Mappala v. Nunez, 240 SCRA 600 To support a convicjon under Secjon 261(p) of the Omnibus elecjon
Code, it is not necessary that the deadly weapon should have been
seized from the accused while he was in the precinct or within a radius
of 100 meters therefrom. It is enough that the accused carried the
deadly weapon "in the polling place and within a radius of one
hundred meters thereof" during any of the specified days and hours.
Amer respondent himself had found that the prosecujon had
established these facts, it is difficult to understand why he acquiied
Alejandro of the charge of violajon of Secjon 261(p) of the Omnibus
elecjon Code.
People v. Bayona, 181 Phil. 186 Desiderio who had been designated to supervise the elecjons in the
Province of Capiz, contented that he could not leave his revolver in his
automobile without the risk of losing it because he was alone.
The law which the defendant violated is a statutory provision, and the
intent with which he violated it is immaterial. It may be conceded that
the defendant did not intend to injmidate any elector or to violate the
law in any other way, but when he got out of his automobile and
carried his revolver inside of the fence surrounding the polling place,
he commiied the act complained of, and he commiied it willfully.
The act prohibited by the Elecjon Law was complete.
Lozano v. Yorac, G.R. No. 94521, 94626, 28 October in dismissing the pejjon for the disqualificajon of respondent Binay.
No clear and convincing proof exists to show that respondent Binay
1991 was indeed engaged in vote buying. The tradijonal gim-giving of the
Municipality of Makaj during the Christmas season is not refuted.
That it was implemented by respondent Binay as OIC Mayor of Makaj
at that jme does not sufficiently establish that respondent was trying
to influence and induce his consjtuents to vote for him.The charge
against respondent Binay for alleged malversajon of public funds
should be threshed out and adjudicated in the appropriate proceeding
and forum having jurisdicjon over the same. Consequently, it was
properly dismissed by the Commission on Elecjons
Ong v. Martinez, G.R. No. 87743, 21 August 1990 The permanent vacancy for councilor exists and its filling up is
governed by the Local Government Code while the appointment
Ban on Appointment during election period referred to in the elec)on ban provision is covered by the Civil
Service Law.
For having sajsfied the formal requisites and procedure for
appointment as Councilor, which is an official posijon outside the
contemplajon of the elecjon ban, respondent's appointment is
declared valid.
The issue on the alleged discrepancy between the dates of pejjoner's
oath and his residence cerjficate need not be tackled now because it
will not anymore affect the recalled appointment of pejjoner. If ever,
the maier casts a doubt on pejjoner's credibility and honesty.
Regalado v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 115962, 15 February First. The two elements of the offense prescribed under 261(h) of the
Omnibus Elecjon Code, as amended, are:
2000 (1) a public officer or employee is transferred or detailed within the
elecjon period as fixed by the COMELEC, and
(2) the transfer or detail was effected without prior approval of the
Transfer During Election Period COMELEC in accordance with its implemenjng rules and regulajons.
The transfer may be from one department or agency to another or
from one organizajonal unit to another in the same department or
agency: Provided, however, That any movement from the non-career
service to the career service shall not be considered a transfer.
Thus, contrary to pejjoners claim, a transfer under 24(c) of P.D. No.
807 in fact includes personnel movement from one organizajonal unit
to another in the same department or agency.
Aquino v. Commission on Elections, G.R. Nos. 211789-90, 17 Read in the light of this ruling, we affirm the COMELEC’s interpretajon
March 2015 of the phrase "transfer or detail whatever" as we find the Regalado
interpretajon consistent with the legislajve intent. Indeed, as used in
Secjon 261(h) of BP 881, the term whatever should be not be read
strictly in conjuncjon with only either the term transfer or the term
detail; nor should the phrase transfer or detail whatever be read in
isolajon from the purpose of the legal prohibijon. Rather, consistent
with our rules in reading provisions of law, the term – whatever – as
well as the phrase – transfer or detail whatever– should be
understood within the broader context of the purpose of BP881. They
should likewise be understood within the context of all other laws that
the COMELEC is required to administer and enforce. This is the proper
approach that anyone, including this Court, should take when reading
Secjon 261(h), as well as all other provisions of BP 881 and other
elecjon laws.
, we reiterate our observajon in Regalado that any personnel acjon,
when caused or made during the elecjon period, can be used for
elecjoneering or to harass subordinates with different polijcal
persuasions. This possibility – of being used for elecjoneering
purposes or to harass subordinates – created by any movement of
personnel during the elecjon period is precisely what the transfer ban
seeks to prevent.
COMELEC v. Tagle, 397 SCRA 618 (2003) At the jme when the complaint for vote-selling was filed with the
office of the Provincial Prosecutor, the respondents had already
executed sworn statements aiesjng to the corrupt pracjce of vote-
buying. It cannot then be denied that they had already voluntarily
given informajon in the vote-buying case.
The giver, offeror, the promissory as well as the solicitor, acceptor,
recipient and conspirator referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of
Secjon 261 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881 shall be liable as principals:
Provided, that any person, otherwise guilty under said paragraphs
who voluntarily gives informajon and willingly tesjfies on any
violajon thereof in any official invesjgajon or proceeding shall be
exempt from prosecujon and punishment for the offenses with
reference to which his informajon and tesjmony were given:
Provided, further, that nothing herein shall exempt such person from
criminal prosecujon for perjury or false tesjmony.
Tapispisan v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 157950, [June To be considered as a qualified next-in-rank the employee should have been
appointed permanent to a posijon previously determined to be next-in-rank, and
8, 2005], 498 PHIL 733-751 should meet the requirements for appointment thereto as previously determined by
the appoinjng authority and approved by the Commission
Sec. 47. Dismissal of Protest. A protest shall be dismissed on any of the following
grounds:

(d) No appointment has actually been issued to the protestee .
The CSC, in its Resolujon No. 972501 dated April 14, 1997 dismissing pejjoner
Tapispisans protest, declared that only appointments/promojons and not designajon
can be the subject of a protest. Designajon, being temporary in nature, does not
amount to the issuance of an appointment, but is a mere imposijon of addijonal
dujes. This construcjon given by the CSC should be given great weight and respect.
As  
this Court has jme and again ruled: [a]lthough technically not binding and controlling
on the courts, the construcjon given by the agency or enjty charged with the
enforcement of a statute should be given great weight and respect, parjcularly so if
such construcjon has been observed and acted on for a long period of jme.
Causing v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 199139, 09 Obviously, the movement involving Causing did not equate to either a transfer or a
September 2014 detail within the contemplajon of the law if Mayor Biron only thereby physically
transferred her office area from its old locajon tothe Office of the Mayor "some liile
Petitioner was transferred to another office steps" away. We cannot accept the pejjoner’s argument, therefore, that the phrase
"any transfer or detail whatsoever" encompassed "any and all kinds and manner of
personnel movement,” including the mere change in office locajon.
Equally material is that Mayor Biron’s act of transferring the office space of Causing
was rooted in his power of supervision and control over the officials and employees
serving in his local government unit, in order to ensure the faithful discharge of their
dujes and funcjons.
XII. Election Adjudication System
1. Jurisdiction of Municipal Trial Courts

2. Jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts
3. Jurisdiction of COMELEC
Electoral Tribunals of the

Supreme Court RTC MTC COMELEC
Senate and HoR
• Each electoral tribunal
has 9 members: 
3 Supreme Court
MTCs have jurisdiction over
the sole judge of all Justices, and 
cases involving • exclusive original
contests relating to the 6 members of the Senate
exclusive original qualifications of candidates jurisdiction over all
election, returns, and or House, chosen on the
jurisdiction over municipal for the Sangguniang election contests relating
disqualifications of the basis of proportional
and barangay officials, Kabataan filed after the to the elections, returns,
President and Vice- representation from the
respectively   election.  and qualifications of all
President (Sec. 4, Art. VII, political parties and the
Where filed before the elective (1) regional, (2)
Constitution)   parties or organizations
election, these are decided provincial, and (3) city
registered under the
by the Election Officer. officials.
party-list system
(Nachura)
represented therein.
(Sec. 17, Art. VI,
Constitution)
• The rules of procedure of
such tribunals shall  
prevail over the
appealable to the SC
provisions of the Omnibus  
ElectionCode
(LazatinvHRET)
• Judicial review of a
decision of the Electoral  
Tribunal is possible only appellate jurisdiction over
in the exercise of all contests decided by
supervisory or trial courts of general
extraordinary jurisdiction (i.e. RTCs)
jurisdiction, and only involving elective
upon showing that the municipal officials, or
Tribunal’s error results decided by trial courts of
from a whimsical, limited jurisdiction (i.e.
capricious, unwarranted, MTCs) involving elective
arbitrary or despotic barangay officials.
exercise of power
(PuzonvHRET,1989).
Final, executory, and not
appealable. However, this
does not preclude a
recourse to the Supreme
Court by way of a special
civil action for certiorari
(Galido v COMELEC) where
COMELEC’s factual
determination is marred by
grave abuse of discretion
(Alvarez v COMELEC).
An order regarding the
revision of ballots is an
interlocutory order
because it still requires a
party to perform certain
acts leading to the final
adjudication of the case
(Bulaong v COMELEC).
4. Procedure in election contests: Courts, COMELEC

5. Procedure in HRET, SET, PET
COMELEC COURTS HRET SET PET

1. filing of a verified petition
and payment of docket fees
2. within 3 days from filing of
the petition, issuance of
summons by Clerk of Court
of the COMELEC or its
1. filing of verified petition
division
2. filing of Answer within 5 days
3. filing of Answer, including
from receipt of notice of
counter-protest or
filing of petition
counterclaim if any, within 5
3. hearing; reception of
days from service of
evidence to be completed
summons
within 30 days from its 1. Summons
4. filing of Reply or Answer to
commencement 2. Answers and counter 1. Summons 1. Summons
the Counter- Protest or
4. decision protest 2. Answers and counter protest 2. Answers and counter protest
Counterclaim within 5 days
• as to who among the parties 3. motions 3. motions 3. motions
from receipt of Answer
has been elected, or, in a 4. filling fees and cash 4. filling fees and cash deposits 4. filling fees and cash deposits
5. hearing and reception of
proper case, that none of deposits 5. Production and custody of 5. Production and custody of
evidence
them has been legally elected 5. Production and custody of ballot boxes and election ballot boxes and election
6. decision by COMELEC
• within 30 days from date of ballot boxes and election document document
• If by a Division, within 10
submission for decision and   document 6. preliminary conference 6. preliminary conference
days; becomes final and
within 60 months after filing 6. preliminary conference 7. revision of ballots 7. revision of ballots
executory after 15 days
of protest becomes final 5 7. revision of ballots 8. presentation of evidence 8. presentation of evidence
from promulgation. 
days from promulgation. No 8. presentation of evidence 9. decision 9. decision
The aggrieved party may
MFRs! (Veloria v COMELEC) 9. decision
file a timely MFR within 5
• appealable to COMELEC
days from promulgation,
• filing of a notice of appeal
on the grounds that the
within 5 days from
evidence is insufficient to
promulgation of the decision  
justify the decision, or that
the said decision is
contrary to law.
• If by the COMELEC en
banc, within 30 days;
becomes final and
executory after 30 days
from promulgation.
6. Readings: Article IX (c), Sec. 2, 1987 Constitution

Article XXI, Secs. 249-252, OEC 2010 Rules of Procedure in Election Contests
Rules of Procedure in Election Contests Before the Courts Involving Elective Municipal and Barangay Officials;
COMELEC Resolution No.9164
Jalosjos v. COMELEC, G.R.

No. 192474, 26 June 2012
Lokin v. COMELEC, G.R. Section 8 of R.A. No. 7941 enumerates only three instances in which the party- list organization
No. 179431-321, 22 June can substitute another person in place of the nominee whose name has been submitted to the
2010 COMELEC, namely:
(a) when the nominee dies;
(b) when the nominee withdraws in writing his nomination; and
(c) when the nominee becomes incapacitated.
The enumeration is exclusive, for, necessarily, the general rule applies to all cases not falling under
any of the three exceptions.
Pimentel III v. COMELEC, According to Section 30 of Republic Act No. 7166, as amended by Republic Act No. 9369, Congress
G.R. No. 178413, 13 March and the COMELEC en banc, acting as the NBC, shall determine the authenticity and due execution
of the certificates of canvass for President, Vice- President and Senators, respectively, as
2008 accomplished and transmitted to them by the local boards of canvassers. For the province of
Maguindanao, it is the PBOC which transmits the PCOC to the NBC. For the 14 May 2007 senatorial
elections, the NBC excluded from the national canvass the Bedol PCOC submitted by the PBOC-
Maguindanao after it found the same to be tainted by irregularities and statistical improbabilities.
Thereafter, the SPBOC-Maguindanao was created, which re- canvassed the Maguindanao MCOCs and
prepared and submitted to the NBC the second Maguindanao PCOC.
Hence, the four criteria enumerated in Section 30 of Republic Act No. 7166, as amended by
Republic Act No. 9369, must be applied by the NBC to the secondMaguindanao PCOC.
Tan v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos. The COMELEC correctly dismissed the Petitions for Declaration of Failure of Election since the electoral
166143-47, 166891, 20 anomalies alleged in the petitions should have been raised in an election protest, not in a petition to declare
a failure of election. Under Republic Act No. 7166, otherwise known as The Synchronized Elections Law of
November 2006 1991,[68] the COMELEC en banc is empowered to declare a failure of election under Section 6 of the Omnibus
Election Code. From the above-cited proviso, three (3) instances justify the declaration of failure of
election, to wit:
A. the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed on account of force majeure,
FAILURE OF ELECTION violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes;
REQUISITES B. the election in any polling place had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the
voting on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes; or
C. after the voting and during the preparation and transmission of the election returns or in the custody or
canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect on account of force majeure, violence,
terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes.
XIII. Appeal and Other Election Issues
1. Quo Warranto
- It is a proceeding to unseat an ineligible person from office. An election protest more than seeks to oust the winner. It is
strictly a contest between the winning candidate and the defeated candidate.
- Who may File: any registered voter in the constituency
- Grounds:
A. ineligibility, or
B. disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines
- When to File: within 10 days from proclamation of the results of the election
2. Substitution
- Any candidate may withdraw his/her candidacy anytime before election day.
- Substitution is only allowed in the following instances:
1. death
2. withdrawal
3. disqualification
- No substitution is allowed for an independent candidate. Only candidates who are members of and are nominated by a party
can be substituted.
- Substitute candidate may file his/her certificate of candidacy not later than mid day of election day
- No person who has withdrawn his/her candidacy for a position shall be eligible as a substituted candidate for any other
position.
- The filing of the withdrawal shall not affect the civil, criminal, or administrative liabilities the substituted candidate may
have already incurred.
- In case of valid substitutions, votes cast for substituted candidates are considered stray, except if the substitute candidate
has the same surname. Official ballots shall provide spaces where voters may write the names of the substitute candidates.
(Fair Election Act)
3. Withdrawal of COC
4. Execution of Pending Appeal
5. Appeal fee/Filing fee
6. Readings: Secs. 73, 76, 253, OEC

Dumayas v. COMELEC v. As a general rule, the filing of an election protest or a petition for quo warranto precludes the
357 SCRA 358 subsequent filing of a pre-proclamation controversy or amounts to the abandonment of one earlier
filed, thus depriving the COMELEC of the authority to inquire into and pass upon the title of the
protestee or the validity of his proclamation. Nevertheless, the general rule is not absolute. It
admits of certain exceptions, as where:
(a) the board of canvassers was improperly constituted;
(b) quo warranto was not the proper remedy;
(c) what was filed was not really a petition for quo warranto or an election protest but a petition to
annul a proclamation;
(d) the filing of a quo warranto petition or an election protest was expressly made without
prejudice to the pre-proclamation controversy or was made ad cautelam; and
(e) the proclamation was null and void
the quo warranto petition brought by Vice-Mayor Betita is a petition to annul petitioners
proclamation over which COMELEC exercises original exclusive jurisdiction. Consequently, it could
not be deemed as a proper remedy in favor of respondent Bernal, Jr. even if his name was included
in the title of said petition.
Miranda v. Abaya, G.R. No. There was a valid substitution. The COMELEC may not, by itself, without the proper proceedings,
136351, 28 July 1999 deny due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy filed in due form. In Sanchez v. Del Rosario,
the Court ruled that the question of eligibility or ineligibility of a candidate for non-age is beyond
the usual and proper cognizance of the COMELEC.
Luna v. COMELEC, G.R. There was a valid substitution. The COMELEC may not, by itself, without the proper proceedings,
No. 165983, 24 April 2007 deny due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy filed in due form. In Sanchez v. Del Rosario,
the Court ruled that the question of eligibility or ineligibility of a candidate for non-age is beyond
the usual and proper cognizance of the COMELEC.
Cerafica v. Commission on COMELEC has the ministerial duty to receive and acknowledge receipt of COCs. The question of
Elections, G.R. No. eligibility or ineligibility of a candidate is thus beyond the usual and proper cognizance of the
205136, COMELEC.
02 December 2014
Loreto-Go v. COMELEC, While it may be true that Section 12 of COMELEC Resolution No. 3253-A, adopted on 20 November
G.R. No. 147741, 10 May 2000, requires that the withdrawal be filed before the election officer of the place where the
2001 certificate of candidacy was filed, such requirement is merely directory, and is intended for
convenience. It is not mandatory or jurisdictional. An administrative resolution can not contradict,
much less amend or repeal a law, or supply a deficiency in the law. Hence, the filing of petitioner's
affidavit of withdrawal of candidacy for mayor of Baybay with the provincial election supervisor of
Leyte sufficed to effectively withdraw such candidacy.
Divinagracia v. COMELEC, The appeal to the COMELEC of the trial court’s
G.R. Nos. 186007 & decision in election contests involving municipal and barangay officials is perfected upon the filing
186016, of the notice of appeal and the payment of the P1,000.00 appeal fee tothe court that rendered the
decision within the five-day reglementary period. The non-payment or the insufficient payment of
27 July 2009 the additional appeal fee of P3,200.00 to the COMELEC Cash Division, in accordance with Rule 40,
Section 3 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, as amended, does not affect the perfection of the
appeal and does not result in outright or ipso facto dismissal of theappeal.
Payment of appeal fees
Santos v. COMELEC, G.R. The following constitute good reasons and a combination of two or more of them will suffice to
No. 155618, 26 March 2003 grant execution pending appeal:
(1) public interest involved or will of the electorate;
(2) the shortness of the remaining portion of the term of the contested office; and
(3) the length of time that the election contest has been pending.
Navarosa v. COMELEC, A supersedeas bond secures the performance of the judgment or order appealed from in case of its
G.R. No. 157957, 18 affirmation. Section 3 finds application in ordinary civil actions where the interest of the prevailing
September party is capable of pecuniary estimation, and consequently, of protection, through the filing of a
supersedeas bond. Thus, the penultimate sentence of Section 3 states: The bond thus given may be
2003 proceeded against on motion with notice to the surety. Consequently, it finds no application in
election protest cases where judgments invariably include orders which are not capable of
pecuniary estimation such as the right to hold office and perform its functions.
As applied to the present case, the supersedeas bond petitioner Navarosa filed can only answer for
that portion of the trial courts ruling ordering her to pay to respondent Esto actual damages,
attorneys fees and the cost of the suit. It cannot secure execution of that portion proclaiming
respondent Esto duly elected mayor of Libacao, Aklan by popular will of the electorate and
authorizing him to assume the office. This anomalous situation defeats the very purpose for the
filing of the supersedeas bond in the first place.

Bugarin, Cortez, Doria, Guarin, Maat, Saplan Et. Al. Reviewer - Bawal Chi Ming Tsoi Dito Gago

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Bugarin, Cortez, Doria, Guarin, Maat, Saplan Et. Al. Reviewer - Bawal Chi Ming Tsoi Dito Gago

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

BUGARIN, CORTEZ, DORIA, GUARIN, MAAT, SAPLAN Et. Al.

REVIEWER –BAWAL CHI MING TSOI DITO GAGO-

I. Election and Suffrage

II. Commission on Elections

4. Powers and Functions (1987 Constitution, Omnibus Election Code)

The Omnibus Election Code;

1. Qualifications for suffrage

3. Local Absentee Voters

4. Overseas Absentee Voters

B. DISQUALIFIED Those who have lost their Filipino citizenship in accordance

An immigrant or a permanent resident who is recognized as

5. Any citizen of the Philippines abroad previously declared

5. Detainee, PWDs, IPs, Media

The Omnibus Election Code (Sec. 118)

E.O. No. 157 (Local Absentee Voting Law)

R.A. No. 7166 (Sec. 12)

RA No. 10380 (Local Absentee Voting for Media)

IV. Registration of Voters

3. Election Registration Board

4. Deactivation, Reactivation, Cancellation

5. Inclusion and Exclusion Proceedings ; Jurisdiction

Qualification for Philippine 1. natural born citizen of the Philippines

Qualification for Philippine

Qualification for Philippine

Qualifications for Philippine

Poe-Llamanzares v. FOUNDLING ISSUE

Dela Cruz v. COMELEC, NUISSANCE CANDIDATE (SIMILAR LAST NAME)

Quinto vs. COMELEC, 613 2009 Ruling is INVALID!

Socrates vs. COMELEC, 391

Rulloda v. Commission on GEN RULE: SUBSTITUTION OF IND. CANDIDATE IS NOT ALLOWED

RA No. 10742 aka Sangguniang Kabataan Reform Act of 2015

VI. Campaign, Election Propaganda, etc.

2. Campaign Period; Election Period (SEC 3 OEB)

4. Prohibited election propaganda (4)

6. Lawful expenditures; Limitations on Expenses

7. Statement of Contributions and Expenses (RA 9476, RULE 8 SEC 2)

8. Readings: Fair Elections Act of 2007 (R.A. No. 9006)

R.A. No. 7166, Secs. 13 &amp; 14

Chavez v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 162777, 31 ENDORSMENT

Penera v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 181614, 11 PREMATURE CAMPAIGNING

1. Definitions: PP, PLO

2. Groups which cannot be registered as political parties

3. Grounds for cancellation of registration

4. Registration; Manifestation to participate in the party-list system

5. Refusal and/or cancellation of registration (RA 7941)

6. Nomination of party-list nominees (RA 7941)

7. Qualifications of party-list nominees

8. Manner of Voting; Number; Raffle (RA. 7941)

While the enumeration of marginalized and underrepresented sectors is not exclusive,

How did the Supreme Court arrive at 55? This is the formula:

VIII. Automated Elections (* ALL ON R.A. 9369)

2. Automated Election System

3. Paper-based Election System

4. Minimum System Capabilities

6. Advisory Council; Joint Congressional Oversight Committee

7. National Board of Canvassers

8. Readings: R.A. No. 9369

3. Readings: R.A. No 7160, Secs. 69-74

R.A. No. 9244

COMELEC Resolution No. 7505

Claudio v. COMELEC, 331 SCRA 388

That the word “recall” used in Sec. 74(b), LGC, refers

In Garcia v. COMELEC, the delegation of the power to initiate

Qualification for Philippine 1. natural born citizen of the Philippines 

Qualification for Philippine  

Qualification for Philippine  

Qualifications for Philippine  

Rulloda v. Commission on GEN RULE: SUBSTITUTION OF IND. CANDIDATE IS NOT ALLOWED 

R.A. No. 7166, Secs. 13 & 14