Case Digest: ALDO B. CORDIA v. JOEL G. MONFORTE AND COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS 380 SCRA 588 (2009)

ALDO B. CORDIA v. JOEL G. MONFORTE AND COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS 380 SCRA 588 (2009)

When the intention of the voter cannot be determined with reasonable certainty, the appreciation of contested ballots and election documents, which involves a question of fact, is best left to the determination of the COMELEC. Petitioner Aldo B. Cordia (Cordia) and respondent Joel G. Monforte (Monforte) were the official candidates for Punong Barangay in Legazpi City, Albay in the 2002 Elections. The Barangay Board of Canvassers proclaimed Cordia as the winner. Monforte filed an election protest before the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities (MTCC) for lack of familiarity with the Rules on Appreciation of ballots. The MTCC rendered judgment in favor of Monforte therefore annulling and setting aside the proclamation of Cordia. On appeal, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Second Division affirmed the decision of MTCC. The COMELEC En Banc affirmed the decision of the Second Division. Cordia questioned such decision and mentioned the alleged mistake in applying the principle of idem sonans when it counted the vote ―Mantete‖ appearing in the questioned ballot which was written on the space for the position of a kagawad and the ballot with a hole in it caused by a cigarette which Cordia alleged to be a marked ballot.

ISSUE:

Whether or not COMELEC made a mistake in the application of the Rules on Appreciation of Ballots.

HELD:

The object of the appreciation of ballots is to ascertain and carry into effect the intention of the voter, if it can be determined with reasonable certainty. When placed in issue, the appreciation of contested ballots and election documents, which involves a question of fact, is best left to the determination of the COMELEC. The COMELEC, in crediting to respondent the vote for ―Mantete in Exhibit ―A, following the idem sonans rule, the Court finds no grave abuse discretion. Nor does the Court find grave abuse of discretion in the COMELEC‘s not rejecting Exhibit ―C- 17‖ or the ballot with a hole, as a marked ballot, there being no indication that the blot therein was deliberately placed to identify the voter.