Rules For The Appreciation of Ballots

RULES FOR THE
APPRECIATION OF
BALLOTS
SEC. 211 OMNIBUS ELECTION CODE
SEC. 450, COMELEC RESOLUTION
NO. 10924, BOOK OF DIRECTOR
DENNIS L. AUSAN
WHAT IS BALLOT
APPRECIATION
• It is the act of ascertaining the real

intent of the voter to whom he is
casting his vote for, on the basis of
what is shown on the face of the ballot.
GOVERNING PRINCIPLES ON
BALLOT APPRECIATION
• 1. Will of voter is paramount

• 2. Ballot is always presumed valid
• 3. Technical rules are liberally
construed
• 4. Counting is Public and Uninterrupted
I. WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS PARAMOUNT
• A. Elections are all about people’s

sovereignty
• B. Cardinal Objective is to give effect to the

choice of the voter
• C. Results are not subject to the discretion of

the candidate
I. WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS PARAMOUNT
• A ballot is indicative of the will of the

voter. It is not required that it should be
nicely or accurately written or spelled
and the object should be to ascertain and
carry into effect the intention of the voter
if it can be determined with reasonable
certainty.
II. BALLOT IS ALWAYS
PRESUMED VALID
Every ballot shall be presumed

valid unless there is a clear and
good reason to justify its
rejection. Bearing in mind that
the object of the election is to
obtain the expression of the
voter’s will.
III. TECHNICAL RULES ARE
LIBERALLY CONSTRUED
• In the appreciation of ballots, it must
be liberally construed to the end that
the will of the electorate in the choice
of public officials may not be defeated
by technical infirmities.
• No watcher, candidate, or any other
person inside the polling place shall be
allowed to participate in the
appreciation of ballots, except that any
watcher may file a protest which shall
be recorded in the minutes.
• In the event that no protest is filed, the
decision of the board stands. While in the
performance of their duties, the board enjoys
the presumption of regularity. Thus in the
course of appreciating the ballots, nobody
can compel them to decide contrary to their
collegial position. Their decision is final. No
motion, observation, or comment from whom
ever can force them to reverse their
appreciation of ballots. They cannot even
reverse themselves and count again what has
already been counted.
SPECIFIC RULES ON THE
APPRECIATION OF BALLOTS
• 1. The Intent Rule 9. Rule
Involving Appellation of Affection or
Friendship
2. Equity of the Incumbent Rule 10. Special Cases
• 3. Rule on Primacy of Surname 11. Rule on Misplaced Votes
• 4. Rules on Married Women 12. Rule on Disqualified
Candidates
• 5. Idem Sonans Rule 13. Marked Ballots
• 6. Rules on the Use of Nicknames 14. Ballots Written by One
• 7. Rule on the Use of Initials 15. Written by Two or More
Persons
• 8. Rule on the Use of Prefixes 16. Miscellaneous Cases
RULE 1 - INTENT RULE
(A)
A.
Where only the first name of a
candidate or only his surname is
written, the vote for such candidate is
valid if there is no other candidate with
same first name or surname for the
same office.
Candidate for Punong Barangay
1. ALFARO, Renato “Nato” APPRECIATION:
The vote “Renato” shall be counted in favor of the

Candidate for Kagawad candidate Renato Alfaro, while the vote “Hanay” shall
be counted in favor of the candidate for kagawad Alvin
Hanay.
1. HANAY, Alvin “Ben”
(AA)
If there is another candidate with the
same first name or surname, it shall be
considered as a stray vote
Candidates for Punong Barangay
1. CRUZ, Teodoro “Ted”
2. CRUZ, Uldarico “Toto”
Candidates for Kagawad
1. MARQUEZ, Elena “Elen”
2. RAMOS, Elena “Inday Lena”
Appreciation
(I)
When in a space in the ballot there
appears a name of a candidate that is
erased and another clearly written, the
vote is valid for the latter.
1. CORDERO, Bethel “Neneng”
2. TIU, Arlene “Inday Dako”
Appreciation
The vote “TIU” shall be counted for

(U)
Circles, crosses, or lines put on the spaces
on which the voter has not voted shall be
considered as signs to indicate his
desistance from voting and shall not
invalidate the ballot.
1. VILLA, Erlinda “Linda”
Candidate for Kagawad
1. CERCADO, Eugene “Gene”
Appreciation
The ballot is deemed valid. The big “X”

written on blank spaces does not affect the
•RULE 2
• _____________________________________________________________________
•EQUITY OF INCUMBENT
RULE
(B)
Where only the first name of a candidate is written on the ballot
which when read has a sound similar to the surname of another
candidate, the vote shall be counted in favor of the candidate with
such surname. If there are two (2) or more candidates with the
same full name, first name or surname and one of them is the
incumbent, and on the ballot is written only such full name or
surname, the vote shall be counted in favor of the incumbent.
1. ENRIQUEZ, Joy “Inday Joy”

2. LEDESMA, Joy “Nene” - (incumbent)
1. JOCSON, Alberto “Bert” Appreciation

2. JOCSON, Glenn “Yoyong” - (incumbent)
The vote “Joy” shall be appreciated in favor of the
incumbent Punong Barangay Joy Ledesma and the vote
“EQUITY OF THE INCUMBENT RULE” “Jocson” shall be counted in favor of candidate Glenn
Jocson who is the incumbent Barangay Kagawad.
(D), PAR A.
When two (2) or more words are written on the
same line on the ballot, all of which are the
surnames of two (2) or more candidates, the same
shall not be counted for any of them unless one is
a surname of an incumbent who has served for at
least one (1) year, in which case it shall be counted
in favor of the latter.
1. GUMBAN, Ismael “Ma-it”

2. MAGNO, Paul “Pol” - (Incumbent who
has served for at least one year) Appreciation
The vote shall be counted in favor of the

candidate Magno.
•RULE 3
• _____________________________________________________________________
•PRIMACY OF SURNAME
RULE 3: PRIMACY OF SURNAMES RULE
Case 1
If It Is The First Name Of A Candidate But When Read Sounds Similar To The
Surname Of Another Candidate, The Vote Shall Be Appreciated In Favor Of The
Latter (1st Sentence, Par.2, Sec. 211)

1.TENTATIVA, Benzen “Moi”
2.VINCEN, Ligaya “Gay-Gay”

(E)
When on the ballot is written a
single word, which is the first
name of a candidate and which is
the same time the surname of his
opponent, the vote shall be
counted in favor of the latter.
1. ROMAN, Pablo “Pabs”
2. SULPICIO, Roman “Sonny”
“Primacy of Surname”
Appreciation
(F)
When two (2) words are written on the
ballot, one of which is the first name of a
candidate and the other is the surname
of his opponent, the vote shall not be
counted for either one.
1. CORPUZ, Esteban M.
2. IBAY, Isidro B.
Appreciation
The vote cast is deemed as a stray

•RULE 4
• _____________________________________________________________________
•RULES ON MARRIED WOMEN

RULE 4: RULES ON MARRIED WOMEN
Case 1
If It Is The Maiden Or Married Surname Or Both Of A Woman Candidate And There Is
No Other Candidate With Such Surname, Vote Shall Be Appreciated In Favor Of That
Candidate (Par. 1, Sec. 211)

1. ARNALDO-RUIZ, Alpha “Apang”


2. ARANAS-DIAZ, LOURDES “Lulu”
3. MARTEL-PORRAS, MAE “Mae”
Conui-Omega v. Samson, G.R. No. L-21910, November 11, 1963

Yniguez-Lerias v. HRET, G.R. No. 97105, October 15, 1991
RULE III
In case a candidate is a woman who uses her maiden or

married surname or both and there is another candidate
with the same surname, a ballot bearing only such surname
shall be counted in favor of a candidate who is an
incumbent.
1. ARNALDO-RUIZ, Alpha “Apang”

2. ARNALDO-RUIZ, Lydia “Lids” - (Incumbent)
1. ARANAS-DIAZ, Lourdes “Lulu”

2. ARANAS, Rodolfo “Rudy” - (Incumbent)
3. DIAZ, Arnulfo “Buddy” - (Incumbent)
Second where “EQUITY OF THE INCUMBENT

Appreciation
RULE” applies.
All votes should be appreciated for all incumbents.
RULE 4: RULES ON MARRIED WOMEN
Case 3
If Candidates for Punong
It Is The Maiden Barangay
Or Married Surname Or Both Of A Woman Candidate And There Is
Another Candidate With Such Surname And One Of Them Is An Incumbent, Vote
1.ARNALDO-RUIZ, AlphaIn“Apang”
Counted Favor Of Incumbent. (Par. 3, Sec. 211)
2.ARNALDO-RUIZ, Lydia
“Lids” (Incumbent)


3.ARANAS-DIAZ, LOURDES “Lulu”
4.ARANAS, Rodolfo
“Rudy” (Incumbent)
•RULE 5
• _____________________________________________________________________
IDEM SONANS RULE

(G)
A name or surname incorrectly written which,
when read, has a sound similar to the name or
surname of a candidate when correctly written
shall be counted in favor of such candidate.
1. PERFECTO, Querubin
1. ARZAGA, Emilio
2. CECILIO, Aurelio
3. GLORIA, Ricardo Appreciation
4. JULIANO, Teodoro
5. LONTOC, Jose All votes were counted in favor of candidates
Perfecto, Arzaga, Cecilio, Gloria, Juliano, Lontoc
6. MONTEZA, Pablo and Monteza.
“The Idem Sonans Rule”

•RULE 6
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULES ON THE USE OF

NICKNAMES
(M)
If the nickname used is unaccompanied
by the name or surname of a candidate
and it is the one by which he is generally
or popularly known in the locality, the
name shall be counted in favor of the
said candidate for the same office with
the same nickname
1. FERRER, Danilo “Danny”
Appreciation
It being the registered nick name of

candidate Ferrer, the vote “Danny”
(MM)
If t is the vote is the registered nickname
of a candidate, and at the same time, one
of the words of the nickname of another
candidate whose nickname is composed of
two or more words, the vote shall be
counted in favor of the former.
1. NG, Rudy “Toto Rudy”
2. REYES, Omar “Toto”
Appreciation
The vote shall be credited in favor of

(MMM)
If the nickname of a candidate is
composed of two or more words,
and the vote written is any one of
those words, and there is no other
candidate with the same name or
nickname, the vote is appreciated in
favor of that candidate.
1. LEE, May “Inday May”
Appreciation
•RULE 7
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULES ON THE USE OF

INITIALS
(J)
The erroneous initial of the first name
which accompanies the correct surname
of a candidate, the erroneous initial of
the surname accompanying the correct
first name of a candidate, or the
erroneous middle initial of the candidate
shall not annul the vote in favor of the
latter.
1. RODRIGUEZ, Teodoro
The vote should appreciated favorably

for candidate Rodriguez
(N)
Any vote containing initials only or
which illegible, or which does not
sufficiently identify the candidate for
whom it is intended shall be
considered as stray but shall not
invalidate the whole ballot.
1. GUPIT, Mark M. “Macmac”
Appreciation
The vote cast, being purely initials,

is deemed a stray vote.
•RULE 8
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULES ON THE USE OF

PREFIXES
(L)
Ballots which contain prefixes
such as “Mr.”, “Datu”, “Don”,
“Ginoo”, “Hon.”, or suffixes like
“Hijo”, “Jr.”, “Segundo” are valid.
1. CASTRO, Leon “Boy”
Appreciation
The appreciation “Hon. Leon

Castro” is deemed a valid vote and has
to be counted for candidate Castro
RULE 8: RULES ON THE USE OF PREFIXES
Notes on Prefixes
The prefixes enumerated in paragraph 12, section 211 OEC (Sr.,

Mr., Datu, Don, Ginoo, Hon., Gob) are just examples and are not
1 exclusive. Thus, expressions which connote respect and
something equivalent to the Tagalog “ka” or the English “Mr.”
were considered legitimate.
Prefixes, however, may be utilized as identification marks.

2 • in every ballot only one is given a prefix, the rest none
• in several ballots, different prefixes were given one candidate
•RULE 9
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULES INVOLVING
APPELATIONS OF AFFECTION
OR FRIENDSHIP
(M)
The use of nicknames and appellations
of affections and friendship, if
accompanied by the first name or
surname of the candidate, does not
annul such vote, except when they were
used as a means to identify the voter, in
which case the whole ballot is invalid.
1. ANG, Jose “Joe”
Appreciation
The words “Pare Ko” will not affect

the validity of the vote, hence, it should
•RULE 10
• _____________________________________________________________________
SPECIAL CASES
(D) PAR. B
When two (2) or more words are written on different
lines on the ballot, all of which are the surnames of
two (2) or more candidates bearing the same surname
for an office for which the law authorizes the election
of more than one and there are the same number of
such surnames written as there are candidates with the
surname, the vote shall be counted in favor of all the
candidates bearing the surname.
1. GO, Arnold “Bongbong”

2. GO, Esther “Ma’am Esther”
3. GO, Noel “Noel”
Appreciation
The three “GO” votes should be given to the three

candidates surnamed Go.
(H)
When a name of a candidate appears in a space of
the ballot for an office for which he is a candidate
and in another space for which he is not a
candidate, it shall be counted in his favor for the
office for which he is candidate and the vote for
the office for which he is not a candidate shall be
considered as stray, except when it is used as a
means to identify the voter, in which case, the
whole ballot shall be void.
1. ALBAN, Romeo “Roming”
Appreciation
Being a candidate for Kagawad, Alban

(R)
If the candidates voted exceed the number of those to be
elected, the ballot is valid, but the votes shall be counted
only in favor of the candidates whose names were firstly
written by the voter within the spaces provided for said
office until the authorized number is covered.

1. ABAD, Gil “Nonong”
2. CO, Nancy “Nans”
3. DOLLEDO, Hans “Boy”
4. ELLANGA, Aida “Nang Ayda”
5. MORENO, William “Bill”
6. SOTERO, Eden “Pangga”
7. TORRE, Jay “Jay”
8. VILLA, Ma. Teresita “Teray”
Appreciation
Considering that the voter wrote eight names for the
office where only a maximum of seven is authorized, only
the seven names written first shall be counted and the vote
“Teray” shall be stary vote.
(SS)
If what is written is a name of a non-
candidate, the vote shall be considered
a stray vote.
1. AUSTRIA, Artemio “Toto”
2. SEMOY, Alicia “Gingging)
Appreciation
The vote “Rex Abalo,” being that of a

non-candidate should be treated as a
stray vote
(O)
If on the ballot is correctly written the
first name of a candidate but with a
different surname or the candidate
written but with a different first name,
the vote shall not be counted in favor of
any candidate having such first name
and/or surname, but the ballot shall be
considered valid for other candidates.
1. VILLAVERT, Alberto A.
Appreciation
The vote cannot be counted in favor

of a candidate Villavert. It is deemed a
(K)
The fact that there exists another person
who is not a candidate with the first name
or surname of a candidate shall not
prevent the adjudication of the vote of the
latter.
1. JIMENEZ, Ralph “Nonoy”
2. NADAL, Francisco “Boc”
Appreciation
The vote shall be credited in favor of

candidate Ralph Jimenez.
(Q)
Where there are two (2) or more candidates voted for an
office for the law authorizes the election of only one, the
vote shall not be counted in favor of any of them, but this
shall not affect the validity of the other votes therein.
1. BEDIA, Myla “Maymay”
2. CALVO, Michael “Mike”
Appreciation
The vote as written should not be appreciated in favor

of any of the candidate. In the same manner for which
that of what written are all surnames of candidates, then
it is a stray vote except if one is an incumbent who has
served for at least one year, then it should be appreciated
in his favor.
RULE 10: SPECIAL CASES
Case 8
If It Is Illegible Or Cannot Sufficiently Identify The Candidate For
Whom It Is Intended, Stray Vote. (Par. 14, Sec. 211)

1.LAPUZ, John “Jon”


2.DOJILLO, Nilo “Calong”
3.VIDAL, Rodrigo “Jing”
Dojillo v. Comelec, G.R. No. 166542, July

25, 2006
•RULE 1I
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULE ON MISPLACED VOTES

CORRECT SEQUENCE RULE
A general misplacement of an entire series of
names intended to be voted for the successive
offices appearing in the ballot.
,
1. CASTILLO, Angie “Ging”

1. AMADOR, Leah “Bing”
2. CERCADO, Manuel “Manny”
3. GONZALES, Leo “Parts”
4. GUMBAN, Daisy “Meg”
5. MALLADA, Rose “Rose”
6. ROMULO, Adrian “Bords”
7. SABAN, Marie “Mar”
8. TOLEDO, Daphne “Dapdap”
Appreciation
The vote for candidate Castillo should be
•RULE 12
• _____________________________________________________________________
EVIDENT INTENT RULE

1. EVIDENT INTENT RULE
A single or double misplacement of names
where such names were preceded or
followed by the title of the contested
office.
1. LAO, Mary “May”
1. GO, Eduard “Ed”
2. TORRES, Irene “Princess”
Appreciation
2. EVIDENT INTENT RULE
Where the voter wrote after the candidate’s
name a directional symbol indicating the
correct office for which the misplace name
was intended.
1. RUIZ, Juan “Jun”
1. GO, Eduard “Ed”
2. TORRES, Irene “Princess”
Appreciation
EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE ON MISPLACED
VOTES
•RULE
• _____________________________________________________________________
NEIGHBORHOOD RULE
1. NEIGHBORHOOD RULE
A single misplacement of a name
written off-center from the
designated space.
1. LEDONIO, Marlon “Lonion”
Appreciation
The vote should be counted in

favor of the candidate Marlon
Ledonio.
written slightly underneath the
line for the contested office.
1. PO, Mario “Mayok”
Appreciation
The vote “Po” is considered for

the candidate Mario Po.
written immediately above the
title for the contested office.
1. SINON, Betty “Bet”
Appreciation
The vote should be counted in

favor of the candidate Sinon.
written in the space for an office
immediately following that for which
the candidate presented himself.
1. BARON, Angel “Angie”
Appreciation
As an illustration of this rule, the

vote Baron as written on the first space
for Kagawad and leaving blank that
intended for Punong Barangay, should
be credited in favor of Angel Baron.
RULE 11: MISPLACED VOTES (exception)
3. Neighborhood Rule – Cases 5 and 6
Ranilo A. Velasco v. Commission on Elections and Benigno C. Layesa, Jr., G.R. No.
166931, February 22, 2007
Marife Estomagulangv. Commission on Elections and Antonio Durango, G.R. No.
•RULE 13
• _____________________________________________________________________
•RULE ON DISQUALIFIED
CANDIDATE
RULE 12: RULE ON DISQUALIFIED CANDIDATES
Case 1
If It Is The First Name Or Surname Of A Candidate Disqualified By Final
Judgment, Considered As Stray Vote (Par. 24, Sec. 211)

1.FULLON, Ken “Bords” (Disqualified)
Ticzon v. Comelec, G.R. No. 52451, March

31, 1981
RULE 12: RULE ON DISQUALIFIED CANDIDATES
A Run Through
1. Votes cast in favor of a candidate who has been DISQUALIFIED by final

judgment shall be considered STRAY VOTES based on paragraph 24, Section 211
2. Votes cast in favor of a candidate whose certificate of candidacy

was CANCELLED or DENIED DUE COURSE shall be considered STRAY votes based
on paragraph 19, section 211 for being a non-candidate
3. Votes cast in favor of a candidate who has WITHDRAWN shall be

considered STRAY votes based on paragraph 19, Section 211; and
4. Votes cast in favor of a candidate who has been declared NUISANCE due to the
same name and/or surname with a bona fide candidate shall not be deemed stray votes
but may be COUNTED in favor of the latter.
•RULE 14
• _____________________________________________________________________
•MARKED BALLOT
RULE 13: MARKED BALLOTS
What is a Marked Ballot?
One which is marked by the voter for the purpose of identifying the ballot as one that he
accomplished. As it violates the sacredness of votes, it results in the invalidation of the entire
ballot.
What are its Elements?

(a) The voter must have placed the mark; and
(b) The mark was placed deliberately for the purpose of identifying the voter or the ballot.
Note: Marks made by the voter unintentionally do not invalidate the ballot. Neither do
marks made by some person other than the voter.
RULE 13: MARKED BALLOTS
Kinds of Marked Ballots

Marked Ballot Due to Unnecessary Markings (MB-UM)
1 -invalidation may immediately be done
Marked Ballots Due to Pattern Voting (MB-PV)

2 - requires presentation of evidence aliunde to be invalidated
MARKED BALLOT
• _____________________________________________________________________
•DUE TO UNNECESSARY
MARKINGS (MB-UM)
EXAMPLES OF MARKED BALLOTS
If the ballot is signed by the
voter. It is deemed a marked
ballot.
1. IRENEA, Grace
1. AVELINO, Carlo
EXAMPLE OF MARKED BALLOT
If the names are written in
extraordinarily big letters,
the ballot is considered
marked.
1. BARCE, Lito
If in several ballots names are written
twice in a single space, such are
deemed marked ballot.
1. CHAVEZ, Mark “Macoy”
1. ANAD, Andres “Gingging”
2. BANOY, Eleuterio “Primo”
3. CALVAN, Mae “Maymay”

If the candidate’s name is
written more than twice on a
single ballot is considered
marked.
1. NABAR, Porferio “Peryong”

Irrelevant remarks, impertinent
words, and/or derogatory
expressions found on ballots
render such ballot invalid.
1. LIM, Isidro “Sarge”

OTHER INSTANCES OF MARKED BALLOTS
(UM)
1. Names of candidates are written upside down1;
2. Presence of irrelevant expressions (e.g. ”Have a good time Mr. Pacito”,

“Forget Me Not”, “Tse na Lang”, “Jugador” (Gambler), My Vote is Heartily
Dedicated, etc.)2;
3. Names of candidates were written in ordinary writing except for one which
was written in big Gothic letters3;
1
Jose M. Lontoc v. Gregorio G. Pineda and Teodoro Rodriguez, G.R. No. L-37106, June 30, 1975
2
Jaime T. Torres v. HRET and Ninfa Garin, G.R No. 144491, February 6, 2001; Vicente Ferrer v. Josefin DeAlban, G.R. No. L-12083,
July 31, 1957; Sulpicio Gadon v. Pedro Gadon, G.R. No. 20015, November 30, 1963; Lloren v. CA, G.R. No. L-25907, January 25, 1967
3
Rafael B. Hilao v. Teodulo Bernados, G.R. No. L-7704, December 14, 1954
MARKED BALLOT
• _____________________________________________________________________
•DUE TO PATTERN VOTING

(MB-PV)
1. Appearance
INSTANCES OFofMARKED
the same BALLOTSnames on several DUE TO ballots on precisely
PATTERN VOTING the same space,
cast only in one precinct1
2. Name of one candidate is clearly and markedly indented to the right as
to render the ballot easily distinguishable2
3. Fourteen (14) ballots are marked with the word "Joker”, six (6) with
"Alas”, seven (7) with "Queen”, and seven (7) ballots with the word "Kamatis,
all in the number 7 space for Kagawad
4. Fifteen (15) ballots in the same precinct contain the letter "C" after the name
"Galido”4
5. In every ballot only one candidate is given a prefix, the rest none. In
several ballots the prefixes given to one and the same candidate are of
different nature5
Mariano B. Delgado v. Angel B. Tiu, et al., G.R. No. L-18027, June 29, 1962
6. Candidates surname is accompanied by different first names, nicknames, and
1
2
Alejandro Sarmiento v. Serafin Quemado, G.R. No. L-18027, June 29, 1962
3
appellations
Felomino 6
Villagracia v. Comelec, G.R. No. 168296, January 31, 2007
4
Perfecto Galido v. Comelec, G.R. No. 95346, January 18, 1991
5
Jesus Jimenez Sr. v. Margarito Lofranco, G.R. L-21124, November 8, 1963
6
Paulino Tumakay v. Orbiso, G.R. No. L-8354, August 22, 1955
Some
1. TheInstances Where
names voted forBallots
are in are
veryDeemed Valid
large block and Not
letters. TheMarked
writing could well
be the voter’s habitual one, there being no evidence to show otherwise1;
2. Voters tend to follow the arrangement appearing in the sample

ballots distributed by each candidate. This, standing alone does not render the
ballot marked2;
3. The writing of the name of the candidate twice in the space for Mayor
would indicate only the enthusiasm of the voter voting for the said
candidate3; and
4. Having voters belonging to the same precinct writing the names

1 of particular
Santiago candidates
A. Silverio v. Pedro in Clamor,
Castro and Misael an identical manner
G.R. No. L-23827, in28,
February a 1967
ballot is not necessarily
2
invalid.
Jose Katigbak 4
Mendoza, G.R. No. L-24477, February 28, 1987.
v. Ricardo
3
Teodoro Juliano v. Court of Appeals and Datu Mando Sinsuat, G.R. No. L-27477, July 28, 1987
4
Jose Katigbak v. Ricardo Mendoza, supra.
•RULE 15
• _____________________________________________________________________
•BALLOTS WRITTEN BY ONE

Written by One
Q. When can there be multiple ballots “Written by One” person?
A. This arises when there are several ballots with similar handwriting in excess of
the number of officially recognized disabled and illiterate voters in a polling
place plus the voter himself.
Q. Are “Written by One” ballots valid?
A. Yes, provided the handwritings thereon are similar to the signature of a register assistor
found in the Minutes of Voting; one ballot by the assistor and for not more than three
illiterate or disabled voters unless the assistor is a member of the Electoral Board.
Otherwise, the ballots should be rejected.
Written by One
Q. How can one determine that a handwriting is that of one person only?
A. When the writings in the subject ballots are strikingly alike, with presence not
only of class characteristics but also individual characteristics or dents and
scratches in sufficient quantity.
Q. Is there a need for technical examination of ballots?
A. The rule is, the Commission or the Electoral Tribunal may or may not make the
determination without need of calling handwriting experts.
•RULE
• _____________________________________________________________________
•BALLOTS WRITTEN BY TWO

OR MORE PERSONS
Written by Two or More Persons
Q. When can we say that the ballot was filled out by two or more persons?
A. When the ballot shows distinct and marked dissimilarities in the writing of the names of
some candidates from the rest.
Q. What are it effects?
A. If the tampered entries were made after the ballot was cast, it is valid. If it bears the
fillings of two or more persons when cast, the ballot is deemed marked, thus, void., 2007],
Q. What is the presumption if there are such dissimilarities found on the ballot?
A. That such dissimilarities were made before the ballot was deposited in the ballot box.
Written by Two or More Persons
Q. How do we resolve doubts?
A. When there is doubt as to whether the names were written by two persons, the
doubt must be resolved in favor of the validity of the ballot.
Q. Are all dissimilarities indications of marked ballots?
A. No. It is very rare that two specimens of a person’s handwriting or signature

are exactly alike.
Minor and insignificant variations in handwriting are even perceived

as indicia of genuineness rather than falsity.
•RULE 16
• _____________________________________________________________________
•MISCELANEOUS CASES
RULE 16: MISCELANEOUS CASES
Case 1
Use Of Any Type Of Writing Instrument Does Not Invalidate The
Ballot. (Par. 16, Sec. 211)

1. RUIZ, Leopoldo “Polding”


2. BRIONES, Lourdes “Lulu”
3. SALIDO, Daisy, “Nene”
4. SOLIS, Raul “Toto”

Manalo v. Sevilla, G.R. No. L-8515, March
29, 2013
(T)
A ballot containing the name of a
candidate printed and pasted on a
blank space of the ballot or affixed
thereto through any mechanical
process is totally null and void.
1. RODRIGUEZ, Tomas “Tom”
Appreciation
The vote having been printed on a

slip of paper and pasted on the ballot
is considered marked, hence, renders
the entire ballot null and void.
(V)
Unless it should clearly appear that they have
been deliberately put by the voter to serve as
identification marks, commas, dots, lines, or
hyphens between the first name and surname of a
candidate, or in other parts of the ballot, traces of
the letter “T”, “J”, and other similar ones, the first
letters or syllables of names which the voter does
not continue, the use of two (2) or more kinds of
writing and unintentional or accidental flourishes,
strokes, or strains shall not invalidate the ballot.
1. BORJA, Miguel “Miki”
1. JEREOS, Angel “Pards”
Appreciation
(Y)
Ballots wholly written in Arabic in localities
where it is of general use are valid. To read it,
the Electoral Board may employ an interpreter
who shall take an oath that he/she shall read
the votes correctly.
1. BAHADUR, Ahwaz
2. SHAZIL, Aalimah
1. BAHARAH, Noralia
2. LAMAH, Haadi
3. SAAHIR, Alyssa
(Z)
The accidental tearing or perforation of
a ballot does not annul it.
1. SY, Magdalena “Magdal”
1. ACSAY, Ben “Ben”
Appreciation
The ballot is deemed valid and all

the votes written thereon should be
accordingly counted.
(AA)
Failure to remove the detachable
coupon from the ballot does not annul
such ballot.
1. YAP, Joseph “Yao”
Appreciation
The ballot is considered valid.

(P)
Any ballot written
with crayon, lead
pencil or ink, wholly
or in part, shall be
valid.
(S)
Any in vote in favor of a person who has
not filed a certificate of candidacy or in
favor of a candidate for an office for
which he did not present himself shall
be considered as a stray vote, but it
shall not invalidate the whole ballot.
1. GABITO, Sergio “Sarge”
1. DAGANI, Girlie “Paday”

2. JACOBA, Andrea “Nene”
3. PRADO, Marivic “Becbec”
(W)
Any ballot which clearly appears to have been filled by
two (2) distinct persons before it was deposited in the
ballot box during the voting is totally null and void.
(x)
Any vote cast in favor of a candidate who has been

disqualified by final judgment shall be considered as
stray and shall not be counted but it shall not invalidate
the ballot.
OTHER INSTANCES OF MARKED BALLOTS
• 1. Names of candidates are written upside down.
• 2. Ballots contain names of non-candidates who are
historical figures, TV or movie personalities,
and basketball players.
• 3. Names of candidates were written in ordinary
writing except for one which was written in
big Gothic letters.
• 4. Appearance of the same names on several ballots
on precisely the same space, cast only in one
precinct.
•“ YOU CAN NEVER MAKE SAME
MISTAKE TWICE BECAUSE THE
SECOND TIME YOU MAKE IT,
IT’S NOT A MISTAKE IT’S A
CHOICE”
•Thank you po!

Rules For The Appreciation of Ballots

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Rules For The Appreciation of Ballots

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rules For The Appreciation of Ballots

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RULES FOR THE

• It is the act of ascertaining the real

• 1. Will of voter is paramount

• A. Elections are all about people’s

• B. Cardinal Objective is to give effect to the

• C. Results are not subject to the discretion of

• A ballot is indicative of the will of the

Every ballot shall be presumed

Candidate for Punong Barangay

1. ALFARO, Renato “Nato” APPRECIATION:

The vote “Renato” shall be counted in favor of the

Candidates for Punong Barangay

1. CRUZ, Teodoro “Ted”

2. CRUZ, Uldarico “Toto”

Candidates for Kagawad

1. MARQUEZ, Elena “Elen”

2. RAMOS, Elena “Inday Lena”

Candidates for Punong Barangay

1. CORDERO, Bethel “Neneng”

2. TIU, Arlene “Inday Dako”

The vote “TIU” shall be counted for

Candidate for Punong Barangay

1. VILLA, Erlinda “Linda”

Candidate for Kagawad

1. CERCADO, Eugene “Gene”

The ballot is deemed valid. The big “X”

Candidate for Punong Barangay

1. ENRIQUEZ, Joy “Inday Joy”

Candidate for Kagawad

1. JOCSON, Alberto “Bert” Appreciation

Candidates for Punong Barangay

1. GUMBAN, Ismael “Ma-it”

The vote shall be counted in favor of the

Candidates for Punong Barangay​

2.VINCEN, Ligaya “Gay-Gay”​

Candidates for Punong Barangay

1. ROMAN, Pablo “Pabs”

2. SULPICIO, Roman “Sonny”

Candidates for Punong Barangay

The vote cast is deemed as a stray

•RULES ON MARRIED WOMEN

Conui-Omega v. Samson, G.R. No. L-21910, November 11, 1963

In case a candidate is a woman who uses her maiden or

Candidate for Punong Barangay

1. ARNALDO-RUIZ, Alpha “Apang”

Candidate for Kagawad

1. ARANAS-DIAZ, Lourdes “Lulu”

Second where “EQUITY OF THE INCUMBENT

IDEM SONANS RULE

Candidates for Punong Barangay

Candidates for Kagawad

“The Idem Sonans Rule”

RULES ON THE USE OF

Candidate for Punong Barangay

1. FERRER, Danilo “Danny”

It being the registered nick name of

Candidate for Punong Barangay

Candidates for Punong Barangay

2.VINCEN, Ligaya “Gay-Gay”

Candidate for Punong Barangay

Candidate for Punong Barangay