ELECTION LAWS | Atty.
Ferdinand Gujilde | Notes by Tanya Ibanez | Updated by EH407 2016-17
PART II SUFFRAGE
SUFFRAGE
SUFFRAGE DEFINED
Nolasco v. Comelec
One-liner: Suffrage is the bedrock of republicanism. It is the means by
which the people express their sovereign judgment. Its free exercise
therefore must be protected especially against the purchasing power of
the peso.
Facts:
The proclamation of mayoralty candidate was voided after he was
disqualified for vote-buying but he obtained the highest number of
votes. The second placer insists he should be proclaimed winner.
Held:
The candidate who obtains the second highest number of votes may not
be proclaimed winner in case the winning candidate is disqualified. The
second placer is not the choice of the people. The dispute involves not
only the mayoralty, it concerns suffrage which is the bedrock of
republicanism.
People v. San Juan
One-liner: Every unlawful obstacle, by whatever means or method,
interposed to the free entry of a voter into the polling place to cast his
vote, strikes at the very heart of the right of suffrage.
Facts:
A couple was charged with an election offense for preventing a voter
from entering the polling place. But the information was quashed for
insufficiency because it failed to negate the exception that there were
more than 40 voters waiting inside the polling place.
Held:
The exception does not form part of the offense hence need not be
alleged in the information. It is a matter of defense. The validity of this
view is affirmed when we realize that the case involves no less than
suffrage, which is the bedrock of all institutions.
Indeed, each time the enfranchised citizen goes to the polls to assert
this sovereign will, that abiding credo of republicanism is translated into
living reality. If that will must remain undefiled at the starting level of
its expression and application, every assumption must be indulged in
and every guarantee adopted to assure the unmolested exercise of the
citizen's free choice. For to impede, without authority valid in law, the
free and orderly exercise of the right of suffrage, is to inflict the ultimate
indignity on the democratic process.
CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS OF SUFFRAGE
Article V, Section 1, 1987 Constitution
Suffrage may be exercise by all citizens of the Philippines, not otherwise
disqualified by law, who are at last 18 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 6 months immediately preceding the
election. No literacy, property or other substantive requirement shall be
imposed on the exercise of suffrage.
TN:
 All citizens of the Philippines, not otherwise disqualified by law
 At least 18 years old
 Resident of the Philippines for at least 1 year immediately
preceding the elections
 Resident of the place where he proposes to vote at least 6
months immediately preceding the election
The requirement of 6 months residence is not
necessarily prior to registration; it is only necessary
prior to election. This is because registration is
1|U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N C A R L O S S L G
merely a proposal to vote (so you do not need to
comply with the 6 month residency yet during
registration, provided that on the day of election,
the 6 month requirement has already been
complied)
 No literacy, property and other substantive requirement shall
be imposed on the exercise of suffrage
HISTORY OF SUFFRAGE
HISTORY OF SUFFRAGE IN THE PHILIPPINES
Q. Is suffrage an obligation or a right?
1. Section 1, Article V, 1935 Constitution
Suffrage may be exercise by male citizens. Suffrage for women
may be extended by the National Assembly through a plebiscite
affirmed by at least 300,000 women qualified to vote.
2. Section 1, Article VI, 1973 Constitution - mandatory
Suffrage shall be exercised by citizens of the Philippines not
otherwise disqualified by law.
3. Section 4, Omnibus Election Code - mandatory
It shall be the obligation of every citizen qualified to vote to register
and cast his vote.
4. Section 261, Omnibus Election Code
Any person who, having all the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications as a voter, fails without justifiable cause to register
as a voter in an election, plebiscite or referendum in which he is
qualified to vote.
Penalty for failure to register and vote:
 Imprisonment of not less than 1 year but not more than 6
years without probation (because it is classified as an
election offense)
 Disqualified to hold public office
 Deprivation of suffrage
5. Section 1, Article V, 1987 Constitution - discretionary
Suffrage may be exercise by all citizens of the Philippines not
otherwise disqualified by law.
SUFFRAGE FOR OVERSEAS ABSENTEE VOTERS
SUFFRAGE FOR OVERSEAS ABSENTEE VOTERS
Section 2, Article V, 1987 Constitution
The Congress shall provide a system for securing the secrecy and
sanctity of the ballot as well as a system for absentee voting by qualified
Filipinos abroad.
TN: “Secrecy and sanctity of the ballot” – no one should know who you
voted for while you are inside the polling place.
Section 5 (d), RA 9189 Overseas Absentee Voting Act
GR: An immigrant or permanent resident who is recognized as such in
the host country is disqualified from voting under this Act
 Immigrant or permanent resident outside Phils =
abandonment of domicile. For purposes of election, domicile
and residence are the same. Residence is a req for registration
XPN:
Unless he executes an affidavit upon registration that:
1. He shall resume actual permanent residence in the country
within 3 years from approval of registration
2. He has not applied for citizenship in another country
3. Failure to return results in the removal of the name from the
National Registry of Absentee voters (but vote remains valid)
4. Permanent disqualification to vote in absentia.
ELECTION LAWS | Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde | Notes by Tanya Ibanez | Updated by EH407 2016-17
Macalintal v. Comelec
Facts:
Section 5 of the Absentee Voting Act was assailed as unconstitutional
based on the following grounds:
1. It violates the Constitution which requires that a voter must
be a resident of the country
2. In Caasi v. CA, it was held that a green card holder immigrant
to the US is deemed to have abandoned his domicile and
residence in the Philippines
3. The Constitution does not allow provisional registration or a
promise by a voter to perform a condition precedent to be
qualified to vote
4. Congress should not circumvent the Constitutional
requirement on suffrage by providing a condition which
amends the residence requirement
5. Suffrage should only be granted to persons possessing
qualifications on the day of election
Issue:
Does Section 5(d) of RA No. 9189 allowing the registration of voters who
are immigrants or permanent residents in other countries by their mere
act of executing an affidavit expressing their intention to return to the
Philippines, violate the residency requirement in Section 1 of Article V of
the Constitution?
Held:
No. Absentee voting is an exception to the regular system of voting. It
is intended to accommodate soldiers and sailors and other qualified
voters who, on election day, are absent from the place where they are
residents or registered. The execution of the affidavit is not the enabling
or enfranchising act. It is not only proof of intention to return, but more
importantly, it serves as an express declaration that the domicile was
not abandoned.
Section 5 (d) does not circumvent the Constitution. Instead, it complies
with a constitutional mandate which requires that Congress legislate
absentee voting that presupposes the qualified citizen abroad is not
physically present in the country.
SUFFRAGE FOR LOCAL ABSENTEE VOTERS
SUFFRAGE FOR LOCAL ABSENTEE VOTERS
Q. Who are qualified?
1. EO 157 - Any person who, by reason of public functions and
duties, is not in his place of registration on election day, may vote
in a city or municipality where he is assigned on election day.
2. Members of the AFP and PNP and other government officers and
employees who, on election day, may be temporarily assigned to
perform election duties in a place where they are not registered
voters.
 It does not mean that all AFP and PNP can avail of
this, there is a requirement that they should be
prevented in voting in the area where they are
registered because of their election duties
3. Members of the Board of Election Inspectors – they may vote in
the polling place where they are assigned on election day,
provided they are registered voters in the city, municipality or
province and their voting is noted in the minutes.
 Teachers
4. Members of media, media practitioners, including the technical
and support staff, who are duly registered voters and who, on
election day, may not be able to vote due to the performance of
their functions in covering and reporting on the elections.
2|U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N C A R L O S S L G
Q. Who can they vote for?
1. EO 157 – For the 1987 election, they can vote only for senators
2. RA 7166 – President, Vice-President and Senators
3. RA 10380 – President, Vice-President, Senators and Party-list
They can only vote for national positions, exactly because they are
not in the locality where they reside and are registered to vote.
SUFFRAGE FOR DISABLED AND ILLITERATE VOTERS
SUFFRAGE FOR DISABLED AND ILLITERATE VOTERS
Section 2, Article V, 1987 Constitution
The Congress shall also design a procedure for the disabled and the
illiterates to vote without the assistance of other persons. Until then,
they shall be allowed to vote under existing laws and such rules as the
Comelec may promulgate to protect the secrecy of the ballot.
Q. Who may be assisted?
1. A person with disability
2. A senior citizen who is illiterate or physically unable to
personally prepare the ballot
Provided:
A. Such physical inability is of such nature as to prevent the voter
from personally accomplishing the ballot.
 You lost one leg, ofc you are a person with disability.
But your disability does not prevent you from voting,
thus you are not entitled an assistor
 An assistor would mean that there is another person
who knows of your vote, thus should be the last
resort.
B. Such physical inability or illiteracy is indicated in the
registration record.
 If not indicated in the registration record, you shall not
be treated as PWD/Illiterate
 But what if disability occurred after registration? You
still can avail of the privileges of PWD If the physical
inability is manifest upon day of election.
 However, rules are strict when it comes to illiteracy
because this is prone to abuse/modus operandi
Q. Who can assist?
1. Relative by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree
2. If none, person of confidence who belong to the same household.
3. By any member of the Board of Election Inspectors
Provided: That the assistor be of voting age, but not necessarily
registered
Q. How do the assistors vote?
1. Assistor votes inside the voting booth
2. Declared under oath to fill out the ballot strictly according to the
instructions of the voter and not to reveal the contents of the
ballot
Limitation: Assistor cannot assist more than 3 times.
Except: The Board of Election Inspectors
WON the assistor voted for who the person intended is between the
both of them, COMELEC cannot intervene. That is why the person is
given the choice who shall assist him as it should be founded on trust
and confidence.
Section 9.
Creation of Precincts for Persons with Disabilities and Senior
Citizens
 an accessible polling place is created, usually in the ground floor
 with assistive devices
 manned by people trained to provide assistance to PWD and
illiterates
ELECTION LAWS | Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde | Notes by Tanya Ibanez | Updated by EH407 2016-17
CONTINUING REGISTRATION OF PWDS AND ILLITERATE
Q. Who may be assisted in voter’s registration?
1. Illiterate persons
2. Persons with disability
Q. Who can assist?
1. Illiterate – Election officer or member of the accredited
citizen’s arm
2. PWDs – Election officer or member of the accredited citizen’s
arm or relative within the 4th civil degree of consanguinity or
affinity
Q. How assisted?
1. Illiterate or PWD is under oath
2. Interviewed and answers are recorded
3. Contents of the form is read aloud
 Divulging of information is allowed because unlike
voting, registration is not within the purview of secrecy
of the ballot – registration lang man.
4. The accomplished form shall be subscribed by the applicant
5. Attested by the majority of the members of the Board
VOTER’S REGISTRATION
VOTER’S REGISTRATION DEFINED
Q. What is meant by voter’s registration?
Section 3, RA 8189
The act of accomplishing and filing of a sworn application for registration
by a qualified voter before the election officer of the city or municipality
wherein he resides and including the same in the book of registered
voters upon approval by the Election Registration Board.
 Personal presence is necessary because of the need for
biometrics
Yra v. Abano
One-liner: Registration regulates the exercise of the right of suffrage.
It is not a qualification for such right.
Facts: An aspiring lawyer from the province went to the city to study
law where he also registered as a voter. When he became a lawyer, he
returned to the province, ran for and won as municipal president.
However, he was not able to register as a voter in the municipality
because he failed to cancel his registration in the city on time. Thus, his
election was challenged on the ground that being not registered, he is
ineligible to run and be elected.
It was established however that the municipal president was a resident
of the municipality but is not registered as a voter there.
Issue: Whether he is eligible to run and be elected.
Held: Yes. It is true that one of the qualifications required by law of a
person who announces his candidacy is that he must be a duly qualified
elector. However, “qualified elector” meant a person who had all of the
qualifications provided by law to be a voter and not a person registered
in the electoral list.
Eligibility is not affected by failure to register. Registration is a mere step
to voting, not an element to it. Registration does not confer suffrage but
a mere condition precedent to its exercise. Registration merely
regulates, not qualifies suffrage.
Caveat. Today, you cannot run for public office without registration.
This case is only cited in your answers in the ruling that registration as
mere regulation, not qualification to suffrage.
3|U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N C A R L O S S L G
SYSTEM OF CONTINUING REGISTRATION
SYSTEM OF CONTINUING REGISTRATON
Period of Registration
The personal filing of application of registration of voters shall be
conducted daily in the office of the Election Officer during regular office
hours. No registration shall, however, be conducted during the period
starting one hundred twenty (120) days before a regular election and
ninety (90) days before a special election.
GR: Daily in the Office of the Election Officer during office hours, even
on Saturdays and holidays
XPNs:
1. 120 days before a regular election
2. 90 days before a special election
 Necessary so COMELEC can attend to other duties
necessary for preparation of elections
Akbayan Youth v. Comelec (2001)
One-liner: The right of suffrage is not at all absolute. It is subject to
existing substantive and procedural requirements embodied in the
Constitution and statute books. The act of registration is an
indispensable precondition to the right of suffrage, for it is part and
parcel of the right to vote and an indispensable element in the election
process.
Facts:
The Comelec conducted voter’s registration until December 27, 2000.
Petitioners, who claim to represent the youth sector, asked it conduct
registration February 17 and 18, 2001. They said that around 4 million
youth voters aged 18 to 21 failed to register on or before the deadline,
hence, the need for extension. It was also anchored on the renewed
political awareness and interest among the youth to participate in the
political process generated by the recent political events in the country.
The Comelec refused on the ground that it will affect its preparations
for the elections. Contrary to popular belief, voter’s registration is not
limited to the act of going to the election officer and writing down the
names. Applications for registration are subject to hearing, notice and
action of the Election Registration Board.
The following pre-election acts need to be done:
 Complete the project of precincts
 Constitution of the Board of Election Inspectors
 Inspection, verification and sealing of book of voters
 Finalization of computerized voter’s list
 Preparation, bidding, printing and distribution of the voter’s
information sheets, among many others
It was argued that the Comelec is endowed with standby or residual
powers to designate other dates for certain pre-election acts.
Held:
Suffrage is not absolute, it is subject to substantive and procedural
requirements. It is regulated by measures like voters registration which
is not a mere statutory requirement. The State, in the exercise of its
inherent police power, may then enact laws to safeguard and regulate
the act of voter’s registration for the ultimate purpose of conducting
honest, orderly and peaceful election. The law aids the vigilant and not
those who slumber on their rights.
While voter’s registration is a pre-election act, we cannot ask the
Comelec to do the impossible. The designation of other dates should be
premised on the capability of reasonable performance.
ELECTION LAWS | Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde | Notes by Tanya Ibanez | Updated by EH407 2016-17
Kabataan Party List v. Comelec (2009)
One-liner: Comelec’s rule-making power should be exercised in
accordance with the prevailing law. The right of suffrage lies at the heart
of our constitutional democracy. The right of every Filipino to choose
the leaders who will lead the country and participate, to the fullest
extent possible, in every national and local election is so zealously
guarded by the fundamental law.
Facts:
The Comelec resolved to register voters from December 2, 2008 to
December 15, 2009 as the period of continuing voter registration using
the biometric process for the purpose of the May 10, 2010 national and
local elections. It is however resolved to adjust the deadline from
December 15, 2009 to October 31, 2009 to afford it more time to
prepare for the automated elections.
It was argued that based on the NSO date, the projected voting
population from age group 18024 is 12.5 million which could be
disenfranchised for failure to register. It encroaches on the legislative
power by amending Section 8 of RA 8189 to expand the prohibitive
period of registration. But Comelec argued that it is empowered to fix
other periods and dates for pre-election activities.
Issue:
Whether Comelec can cut short the registration and accordingly adjust
the deadline.
Held:
No. The clear text of the law decrees that voters be allowed to register
daily during regular office hours, except during the period starting 120
days before a regular election and 90 days before a special election. The
period outside the 120 day prohibition is sufficient for Comelec to
prepare for the elections. While Comelec has the rule-making, it must
be exercised in accordance with prevailing law. The power to fix other
periods can be used only if the activities cannot be reasonably held
within the period provided by law.
Q. What is the difference between the Akbayan and Kabataan
rulings?
In Akbayan, the petition was filed during the prohibited period and the
extension prayed for falls on the prohibitive period. In Kabataan, the
petition and the period prayed for were both outside of the 120 day
prohibitive period.
QUALIFICIATIONS AND DISQUALIFICATIONS
REGISTRATION, QUALIFICATION, DISQUALIFICATION
Q. Who may register as a voter?
1. Filipino citizen not disqualified by law
 Requisite of natural-born is only for those seeking
election
2. At least 18 years old on or before election
3. Resident of the Philippines for at least 1 year immediately
preceding the elections
4. Resident of the place where he proposes to vote at least 6
months immediately preceding the election
 6 months prior to election, not registration
Q. Who are otherwise disqualified by law to register?
1. Sentenced by final judgment to suffer imprisonment of not
less than 1 year.
Unless:
A. Removed by plenary pardon or amnesty
B. 5 years have lapsed after service of sentence
2. Sentenced by final judgment for any crime involving
disloyalty to the government, such as rebellion, sedition,
4|U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N C A R L O S S L G
violation of firearms law or any crime against national
security.
Unless:
A. Restored to full civil & political rights in accordance with
law
B. 5 years have lapsed after service of sentence
3. Insane or incompetent persons declared as such by
competent authority
Unless:
Subsequently declared by competent authority that such
person is no longer insane or incompetent
Q. What should the application for registration contain?
Guji: Don’t memorize this
1. Name, surname and middle name
2. Date and place of birth
3. Citizenship
4. Civil status, if married, name of spouse
5. Periods of residence in the Philippines and in the place
6. Exact address
7. Statement that applicant possesses all qualifications of a voter
8. Statement that applicant is not a registered voter of another
precinct
9. Such information or date as may be required by the
Commission
RESIDENCE
Romualdez v. RTC
Facts:
A natural-born Filipino constructed his house in a place where he
became its Punong barangay. When the regime of President Marcos was
about to end, he and his family fled the country and sought asylum in
the United States which was granted.
Five years later however, he received a letter from the US Immigration
and Naturalization Service that he should depart on or before a certain
date, otherwise he will be deported.
Thus, he was forced to leave even without any government document.
When he arrived in the country, he returned to his barangay and
registered as a voter. But it was sought to be excluded in the MTC on
the following grounds:
1. He is a resident of , practices his profession and works in the
USA
2. He just arrived in the country
3. As such, he did not have the 1 year residency in the country
and 6-month residency in the place where her registered.
He argued that he has been a resident of the barangay and he never
abandoned it. The MTC denied the exclusion. On appeal to the RTC
however, it reversed the denial and ordered the exclusion. Hence, this
petition where he alleged that:
1. MTC and RTC have no jurisdiction because it was filed by one
who did not allege he was a registered voter of the place.
2. The RTC erred in deciding that he voluntarily left the country
and abandoned his residence.
Held: While it is true that jurisdiction may be assailed any time, it is
deemed waived by the active participation where he even prayed that
the decision of the MTC be affirmed. Residence and domicile are
synonymous in election cases. Domicile imports not only intention to
reside in a fixed place but also personal presence in that place, coupled
with conduct indicative of such intention.
ELECTION LAWS | Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde | Notes by Tanya Ibanez | Updated by EH407 2016-17
To acquire a new domicile of choice, the following requisites must
concur:
1. Residence or bodily presence in the new locality
2. Intention to remain there or animus manendi
3. Intention to abandon the old domicile or animus non
revertendi
The purpose to remain must be for an indefinite period of time. The
change of residence must be voluntary.
The political situation brought by people power must have caused great
apprehension and serious concern over the safety of the family that
forced them to self-exile. Thus, their sudden departure from the country
cannot be deemed voluntary or abandonment of residence.
Pungutan v. Abubakar
It must be emphasized that the right to vote is a most precious political
right, as well as a bounden duty of every citizen, enabling and requiring
him to participate in the process of government so as to ensure that the
government can truly be said to derive its power solely from the consent
of the governed.
DEACTIVTION & CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION
DEACTIVATION OF REGISTRATION
Q. What are the grounds for deactivation of registration?
1. Final judgment to suffer imprisonment for not less than 1 year
2. Final judgment for any crime involving disloyalty to the
government
3. Insane or incompetent persons declared as such by
competent authority
4. Failure to vote for 2 successive regular elections
5. Court order in exclusion proceedings
6. Loss of Filipino citizenship
7. Failure to validate
Q. What is the remedy for deactivation?
Reactivation.
Q: Is mandatory biometrics constitutional?
Kabataan Party-List v COMELEC
One-liner: Biometrics is a mere regulation, not an added qualification
to the right of suffrage
Premise: It is an additional substantive requirement expressly prohibited
by the Constitution
Held: Unless it is shown that a registration requirement rises to a level
of a literacy, property or other substantive requirement as contemplated
by the framers of the Constitution, one which propagates a socio-
economic standard bereft of any rational basis to a person’s ability to
intelligently cast his or her vote and to further the public good, it cannot
be struck down as unconstitutional.
The objective of cleansing the national voter registry so as to eliminate
electoral fraud and ensure that election results are reflective of the will
of the electorate constitute a compelling state interest of establishing a
clean, complete, permanent, and updated list of voters, and was
demonstrably the least restrictive means to promote that interest.
Guji: But actually, the effects are the same as if biometrics is an added
qualification. However, the SC justified that it is merely a regulation.
CANCELATTION OF REGISTRATION
Q. Is cancellation and deactivation the same?
No. If deactivation, you still have the remedy of reactivation. But in
cancellation, no more remedy.
5|U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N C A R L O S S L G
Q. What is the ground for cancellation of registration?
Death.
Q. How to establish death?
1. Certification by the LCR
2. Submission by the LCR a certified list of those who died during
the previous month to the election officer of the place where
the deceased is registered
Otherwise, COMELEC cannot cancel registration even if there is personal
knowledge of the death of the registrant.
TRANSFER OF REGISTRATION
Gi skip-an ra ni ni Guji na discussion
Q. What are the modes of transfer?
1. Change of residence to another city or municipality
 The registered voter may apply with the election officer of
his new residence.
2. Change of address within the same city or municipality
 Immediately notify the election officer in writing
 If change of address involves change of precinct, the Board
shall transfer the registration and notify the voter of the
new precinct.
INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION PROCEEDINGS
EXCLUSION THROUGH INADVERTENCE OR REGISTERED WITH
AN ERRONEOUS OR MISPELLED NAME
Q. What is the remedy in case of exclusion thru inadvertence or
registered with an erroneous or misspelled name?
Apply for exclusion or reinstatement and correction of entry. If denied
or not acted by the Election Registration Board, petition the Municipal
Trial Court for entry or correction, as the case may be.
ELECTION REGISTRATION BOARD
Q. Who compose the Election Registration Board?
1. Chair: Election Officer
2. Members:
A. Public school official most senior in rank
B. Local Civil Registrar
Disqualification
Relationship within the fourth civil degree to each other and to any
incumbent elective official of the city or municipality
Powers:
A. Acts on all applications for registration, transfer, reactivation,
correction of entry
B. Deactivates registration
C. Cancels registration
D. Decides challenges on the right to register quarterly
TN: The grounds on challenges on the right to register are not
specified.
Q. Who can challenge?
Any voter, candidate or representative of a registered political party.
INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION PROCEEDINGS
Common rules for inclusion and exclusion proceedings and
correction of names – Guji: Nevermind this this is too specific already
A. Petition refers to one precinct, impleads the ERB
B. Any voter, candidate or party may intervene
C. Decision is based on evidence and not on stipulation of facts
D. Heard and decided within 10 days from filing
E. Appeal is decided within 10 days from receipt
F. Not later than 15 days before election day
G. Decision is final and executory
ELECTION LAWS | Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde | Notes by Tanya Ibanez | Updated by EH407 2016-17
H. If the question is whether the voter is real, non-appearance Held: Exclusion merely removes a name from the voter’ list, it does not
on the day set for hearing is prima facie evidence that the include transfer. It is summary in nature hence the rule of res judicata
voter is fictitious. – but gi emphasize ni niya does not apply. The subject matter of exclusion is removal from list
whereas quo warranto involves expulsion from office. It does not
Inclusion Exclusion preclude the Comelec from inquiring into the residence and citizenship
qualification of a candidate.
Grounds (1) Disapproval of Not specified
application for NATURE OF VOTER’S REGISTRATION RECORDS
registration by the
ERB Confidentiality of voter’s registration records
(2) Removal of name
Section 41 Continuing Registration Act
from list of voters
 Open to public examination during regular office hours
Who can file Any person whose (1) Any registered
 Legitimate inquiries on election-related matters
application was voter
disapproved or name (2) Representative of  Law enforcement agencies
was removed. a political party  Upon prior authority and subject to regulations by the Commission
(3) Election officer  Access registration records necessary or in aid of their
Where to file MTC MTC investigative functions
When to include or Anytime, except: Anytime, except:
exclude (1) 105 days prior to (1) 100 days prior to Database security
the regular election regular election Section 9 RA 1037
(2) 75 prior to special (2) 65 days before  Not used under any circumstance except for electoral exercises
election special election
Time decided 15 days from filing 10 days from filing Minute Res. No. 13-1132, October 17, 2013
What to attach to the Certificate of Proof of notice to the Acted on the request of the BSP
petition disapproval and ERB and voter For use in application for tax identification numbers in connection with
proof of service consolidation of titles to properties acquired by BSP
Proof of service of ERB ERB and challenged
petition voter Acted on the request Office of the President
Notice to former employees with unliquidated cash advances
Challenge to right to register distinguished from inclusion and
exclusion proceedings Both requests were politely declined by the COMELEC.

Challenge to right to Inclusion and exclusion
register
Administrative Judicial
Involves the right to Involves the right to vote
register
Pungutan v. Abubakar
Facts:
The Comelec excluded election returns on the ground that they are
spurious and/or manufactured or no returns at all as these were
prepared through massive violence, terrorism and fraud.
Voting was done by persons other than the registered voters while
armed men went from one polling place to another, prepared the ballots
and dictated how the election returns should be returned.
It was argued that since the Comelec has no jurisdiction to decide the
right to vote, it cannot exclude election returns because it
disenfranchises votes which is purely judicial.
Held:
It is true that inclusion or exclusion from the list of voters is a purely
judicial power to the exclusion of the Comelec. But to determine whether
an election was held is purely within the administrative jurisdiction of
the Comelec. The disenfranchisement is only provisional, subject to the
final determination of the validity of votes in an election protest.
Request for voter’s registration record may be granted only if done by:
1. The voter or his/her authorized representative
2. Court order
 exclusively for use only in electoral cases pending before it.
Therefore if ordered pursuant to civil cases only, records cannot
be inspected
ANNULMENT OF LIST OF VOTERS
Q. What are the grounds for annulment of list of voters?
1. Not prepared in accordance with the provisions of the
Continuing Registration Act
2. Prepared through fraud, bribery, forgery, impersonation,
intimidation, force or any similar irregularity
3. Contains statistically improbable date
Q. Who annuls?
The Commission upon verified petition by:
1. Any voter
2. Election officer
3. Duly registered political party
Q. What is the limitation on annulment of list of voters?
No ruling, order or decision annulling the book of voters shall be
executed within 90 days before an election.
Ututalum v. Comelec

Any question involving suffrage is removed from the jurisdiction of the
Comelec. However, exclusion of election returns from canvassing
pertains to the administrative jurisdiction of the Comelec.
Domino v. Comelec
Facts: The MTC excluded a voter in one place and transferred his
registration to another.
Facts:
In a special election for district representative, there were 39,801
registered voters in one municipality. One candidate obtained 482 votes
while the other got 35,581 votes. During canvassing, he objected to the
returns of that municipality on the ground that they appeared to be
tampered with or falsified owing to the great excess of votes.
In that municipality, there were only 42 polling places, which if multiplied
by 300 results in 12,600 voters only, way below the 36,663 who cast
their votes, or a difference of 23,947 ghost voters.

6|U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N C A R L O S S L G
ELECTION LAWS | Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde | Notes by Tanya Ibanez | Updated by EH407 2016-17
In his petition however, he admitted that there was an error because
the municipality had 148 polling places. But he said that if the returns
from the municipality are excluded, he will win by 5,301 votes. But the
objections were denied for being filed out of time.
The other candidate was proclaimed. He then petitioned to annul the
proclamation and prayed for his proclamation. While these were pending
however, a candidate for governor petitioned to annul the list of voters
of the municipality. It was opposed by the proclaimed congressional
candidate.
The Comelec annulled the list of voters on the ground of massive
irregularities committed in its preparation and for being statistically
improbable.
Another list was prepared yielding only 12,555 names. He then filed a
supplemental pleading to entreat the annulment in his pending petitions
to annul proclamation of the other candidate and for his proclamation.
But the Comelec dismissed it on the ground that while there may be
padding of the list of voters, it cannot annul the elections otherwise it
disenfranchises the good or valid votes. Padding of voter’s list, like fraud
and terrorism, is not a proper issue to be raised in a pre-proclamation
controversy, but in an election protest.
He now contends that the issue he raised refers to obviously
manufactured returns, hence a proper pre-proclamation issue. Comelec
held that the election returns in the municipality should be excluded in
the canvass because the list of voters has been finally annulled. There
is no need to re-litigate in an election protest the matter of annulment
because it is already a “fait accompli”.
Held:
There is no great excess of votes since only 36,000 voted out of 39,000
registered voters. The Lagumbay case heavily relied on by petitioner
deals with the preparation of manufactured returns while this case deals
with the preparation of the list of voters, a matter which is not reflected
in the face of the election returns.
Padding of list of voters is not a proper ground in a pre-proclamation
controversy. The new list of voters cannot be applied to determine the
number of votes in a previous election. The Comelec is not empowered
to annul a previous election on the basis of a subsequent annulment of
voter’s list. It has no retroactive effect.
Bashier v. Comelec
The subsequent annulment of a voter’s list in a separate proceedings
where the protagonists are not parties, cannot retroactively and without
due process annul the previous election.
Ututalum v. Comelec
The voter’s list in the previous elections is valid and unquestioned prior
to and on the day of election. It was the only legitimate roster used as
basis for voting. In the absence of prior petition to set it aside, it is
considered conclusive evidence of persons who could vote in that
particular election.
Since the winning candidate was already proclaimed, the pre-
proclamation case dies, the next remedy is an election protest before a
proper forum, which is the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal.
Sarangani v. Comelec
Facts:
Way back in the 1950s and during the martial law era, the dead, the
birds and he bees voted in Lanao. Several precincts and their books of
votes were sought to be annulled on the ground that they contained
ghost voters. It was opposed by the incumbent mayor and the 23
7|U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N C A R L O S S L G
Punong barangays on the ground that the move is merely intended to
diminish bailiwicks.
The Comelec investigated and found that:
1. The supposed barangay Padian Tarogan does not exist
2. The area has only two structures, one a concrete house
without a roof and the other a wooden structure without walls
and roof.
3. The name Padian Tarogan means a cemetery and not a
residential place
4. When the people around the area were asked who among
them is registered in Padian, none of them answered in the
affirmative
5. Based on this report, the Comelec ruled that Padian is a ghost
precinct and should be excluded in the special election.
Held:
It is erroneous for Comelec to rule that Padian is a ghost precinct
because it is a barangay which should have at least one precinct. But
since it is a factual matter to be determined by Comelec in the exercise
of its administrative power, the Court refuses to review.
It is not impossible for a barangay not to have actual inhabitants
because people migrate. A barangay may officially exist on record and
the fact that nobody resides there does not result in its automatic
cessation as a unit of local government.
Under the LGC, abolition of a LGU may be done by Congress if it involves
a province, city or municipality. If it involves a barangay, it may be done
by the Panglungsod concerned subject to plebiscite, except in Metro
Manila and cultural communities.
The findings of the Comelec being an administrative agency, cannot be
reversed on appeal on certiorari especially when no significant facts and
circumstances are shown to have been overlooked or disregarded which
when considered would have substantially affected the outcome of the
case.
No voter is disenfranchised because no such voter exists. Suffrage is not
tampered with when a list of fictitious voters is excluded from election.
Suffrage is conferred by the Constitution only on citizens who are
qualified to vote and who are not otherwise disqualified by law.
The exclusion of non-existent voters all the more protects the validity
and credibility of the electoral process as well as suffrage because the
sovereign will is not rendered nugatory by the inclusion of some good
voters.