PRE-PROCLAMATION CONTROVERSIES (page

711)
RA 7166

1. Section 17- Questions affecting the

composition or proceedings of the board of
canvassers may be initiated in the board of
canvassers or directly with the COMELEC.
Questions involving the election returns and
certificates of canvass shall be brought in the first
instance in the board of canvassers.

Section 20- The board of canvassers should rule

on the objections summarily.

Section 20- Any adverse party may appeal to the

COMELEC.

Article IX-A, Section 7- The decision of the

COMELEC may be brought by the aggrieved party
to the SC by certiorari.

Section 16- All pre-proclamation controversies

pending before the COMELEC shall be deemed
terminated at the beginning of the term of the
office involved and the rulings of the board of
canvassers shall be deemed affirmed without
prejudice to the filing of an election protest.
However, the proceedings may continue when on
the basis of the evidence presented so far, the
COMLELEC or the SC determines the petition
appears to be meritorious.

2. Section 15- No pre-proclamation controversies

regarding the appreciation of election returns and
certificate of canvass may be entertained in
elections for members of the House of
Representatives. The canvassing body may
correct manifest errors in the certificate of
canvass. The recourse is to file a regular election
protest to the HRET. No pre-proclamation cases
are allowed in the case of brgy. Elections.

3. Section 15- Pre-proclamation cases not allowed

in elections for President, Vice-President, Senator,
and the Members of the House of Representatives

For purposes of the elections for President, Vice-

President, Senator, and the Members of the
House of Representatives, no pre-proclamation
cases shall be allowed on matters relating to the
preparation, transmission, receipt, custody and
appreciation of the election returns or the
certificates of canvass as the case may be.
However, this does not preclude the authority of
the appropriate canvassing body motu proprio or
upon written complaint of an interested person to
correct manifest errors in the certificate of
canvass or election returns before it.

Questions affecting the composition or

proceedings of the board of canvassers may be
initiated in the board or directly with COMELEC in
accordance with Section 19 hereof.

Any objection on the election returns before the

city or municipal board of canvassers or on the
municipal certificated of canvass before the
provincial board of canvassers or district board of
canvassers in Metro Manila Area, shall be
specifically notices in the minutes of their
proceedings.
ELECTION CONTEST (page 715)

1. A loser may still bring an election contest

concerning the election, returns and qualifications
of the candidate proclaimed.

An election contest is initiated by filing a protest

containing the following allegations:

i. The protestant is a candidate who duly filed a

certificate of candidacy and was voted for in the
election.
ii. The protestant has been proclaimed.
iii. The date of proclamation.

The following have jurisdiction over election

contest:

i. Brgy. Officials- Inferior Court

ii. Municipal Officials- RTC
iii. Regional, Provincial and City Officials-
COMELEC
iv. Congressmen- HRET
v. Senators- SET
vi. President Vice-President- PET/SC

The decision of the inferior court in election

contests involving brgy. Officials and of the RTC
involving municipal officials are appealable to the
RTC. The decision of COMELEC may be brought to
the SC on certiorari on questions of law.

The decision of COMELEC in election contests

involving regional, provincial and city officials
may be brought to the SC on certiorari.

The decision of the SET and of the HRET may be

elevated to the SC on certiorari if there was grave
abuse of discretion.
QUO WARRANTO IN ELECTIVE OFFICE vs.
QUO WARRANTO IN APPOINTIVE OFFICE

In quo warranto in elective office, the issue is the

ineligibility of the elected candidate. If he is
ineligible, the candidate who got the second
number highest of votes cannot be proclaimed
elected. A voter may file for quo warranto against
an elected candidate. The petition may be filed
within 10 days after the proclamation of the
elected candidate.

In quo warranto in appointive office, the issue is

the legality of the appointment. The court will
decide who between the parties has the legal title
to the office.

It is the Solicitor General, a public prosecutor or a

person claiming to be entitled to public office can
file a petition for quo warranto against an
appointive official. The petition should be file
within one year after the cause of action accrued.

ELECTION PROTEST vs. QUO WARRANTO

CASE

1. An election protest may be filed by a losing

candidate for the same office for which the
winner filed his certificate of candidacy.

A quo warranto case may be filed by any voter

who is registered in the constituency where the
winning candidate sought to be disqualified ran
for office.

In an election contest, the issues are:

i. who received the majority or plurality of the

votes which were legally cast
ii. whether there were irregularities in the conduct
of the election which affected its results.

In a quo-warranto case, the issue is whether the

candidate who was proclaimed elected should be
disqualified because of ineligibility or disloyalty to
the Philippines.

2. An election protest is an action filed by a

defeated candidate on the ground of fraud or
irregularity in the casting of the ballots or in the
preparations of the returns. It raises the question
of who actually obtained the plurality of the votes
and is entitled to hold the office.

A petition for quo warranto is a petition filed by

any registered voter in the constituency of the
winning candidate to unseat him on the ground of
his disloyalty or ineligibility. It does not result in
installing the petitioner in his place.
ARTICLE IX- CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS
1. For the effective operation of the rotational
scheme of the Constitutional Commissions, the
first Commissioner should start on a common
date and any vacancy before the expiration of
term, should be filled only for the unexpired
balance of the term.
2. The rotational scheme of appointments refers
to the scheme in which there is a regular
recurrence of a two-year interval between the
expiration of terms of the Chairman and the
Commissioners.
i. the terms of the first Chairman and
Commissioners should start on a common date,
irrespective of variation of dates of their
appointments and qualifications.
ii. any vacancy due to the death, resignation and
disability before expiration of the term should be
filled only for the unexpired balance of the term.
It is applicable to the JBC, COMELEC, CSC, and
COA (Constituonal Commissions)

The two conditions in the workability of the

rotational scheme of appointments are the
following: