January 20, 2004 ENGR. ERNESTO T. MATUGAS VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS Facts: Ernesto T. Matugas, candidate for Governor of Surigao del Norte, filed with the COMELEC a petition to disqualify his contender, Robert Lyndon S. Barbers. He alleged that Barbers was not a Filipino citizen. Matugas presented the photocopy of the following: (1) letterrequest by a confidential agent of the Bureau of Immigration with a certification issued by the said agency attesting that Barbers was naturalized on October 11, 1991 in Los Angeles, CA; (2) a certification issued by the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation (BID) containing his travel records and entries stating Barbers citizenship; and, (3) a certification of no pending or granted application for repatriation. Meantime, Barbers won and was proclaimed governor. The Second Division of the COMELEC and COMELEC en Banc concurred to dismiss Matugas Petition to Disqualify for lack of merit, since there was no other independent evidence to justify his claim. Thus, prompting a petition for certiorari claiming COMELEC has committed grave abuse of discretion. Issue: Whether or not there was a grave abuse of discretion committed by COMELEC. Held: No. Section 24, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court requires that if the public document or the public record is not kept in the Philippines, its official publication or its copy be duly attested by the officer in charge of the custody thereof. The basic in the law of evidence, provides that one who alleges a fact has the burden of proving it. This burden was not met. In an administrative case like this petition, quantum of proof required is substantial evidence. All of the documents submitted to COMELEC were photocopied and were not certified photocopy issued by the public officer in custody thereof. Although Matugas subsequently filed a Manifestation with Motion for Leave to Admit Original Documents in the Supreme Court the same cannot be entertained since this is beyond the courts certiorari powers. For if it will admit such would be tantamount to holding a new investigation and substituting the discretion of COMELEC. It would be absurd to hold COMELEC guilty of grave abuse of discretion for not considering evidence not presented before it. The patent unfairness of Matugas plea, prejudicing as it would public and private respondents alike, militates against the admission and consideration of the subject documents. Hence, petition was denied.