Republic of the Philippines 4 MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT MAPUN-TURTLE ISLANDS Ninth Judicial Region Bongao, Tawi-Tawi TH
MICHAEL N. AHMAD, Protestant,
ELECTION PROTEST CASE NO. 001-2013
-v -versus-
AKMAD SADDARAMIL, Protestee. x------------------x
FOR: “JUDICIAL REVISION AND/OR RECOUNTING OF VOTES”
MEMO MORANDUM FOR THE P ROTESTANT
COMES COME S NO NOW, W, PROTESTANT, thro throug ugh h the the unde unders rsig igne ned d counsel and unto the Honorable ourt, !ost respectfull" sub!its this #e!orandu! with $or!al %ffer of &xhibits as follows' PREFATORY STATEMENT
(.)n election contest, unli*e an ordinar" action is i!bued with public interest since it involves not onl" the ad+udication of the private interests of riva rival l cand candid idat ates es but but also also the the para para!o !oun unt t need need of disp dispel elli ling ng with with the the leas least t dela dela" " the the unce uncert rtai aint nt" " whic which h becl beclou ouds ds the the real real choi choice ce of the the elec electo tora rate te with respect to who shall discharge the prerogatives of the office within their gift. %ver and above the desire of the candidates to win, is the the deep deep publ public ic inte intere rest st to dete deter! r!in ine e the the true true choice choice of the people people (Loyola v. Court of Appeals, 62 SCAD 219, 245 SCRA 477). 477). Ti!e is of the essence in the the disp dispos osit itio ion n of an elec electi tion on prot protes est t with within in the the peri period od fixe fixed d b" law. law. t is neit neithe her r fair fair nor nor +ust that one whose right to the office is in doubt shou should ld re!a re!ai in on that that offi office ce for for an unce uncert rtai ain n peri period od (Bolal! v. "##a!o, 77 SCAD 757, 266 SCRA 2$%). 2$%). STATEMENT OF FACTS AND OF THE CASE AND MATERIAL DATES 2. Protestant and protestee were both candidates and were both voted for the position of Punong Baranga"
2
of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi, during the %ctober , /(0 Baranga" &lections. 0.)fter the canvass of the election returns, the Baranga" Board of anvassers proclai!ed protestee on %ctober 1, /(0, as the presump!"e winner for the position of Punong Baranga" of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi, having #$$e%e&$' garnered a total of NINE HUNDRED THIRTY ()*+ votes as against the FOUR HUNDRED SITY-THREE (4* votes obtained b" the protestant or a presump!"e FOUR winning difference2!argin of HUNDRED SITY-SE/EN (40 "1es. 3.There were EIHT (3 &u$' 15s!ue& $usere& pre!5s in Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi during the recentl" concluded %ctober , /(0 Baranga" &lections. 4.B" reason of the various election ano!alies, irregularities, inti!idations, coercions, and conse5uentl" filling up of ballots with protestee6s na!e, intentional !isreading of votes for the position of Punong Baranga" and other deliberate fraudulent acts, as well as the ra!pant violations of election laws, rules and regulations perpetrated b" Protestee and his cohorts during the &lections, deliberatel" designed to frustrate the will of the voters in the said baranga", the protestant hereb" protests and 5uestions the results of the elections in the three (3) dul" constituted clustered precincts of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi. 7.Pursuant to Se#. 252 of t&e "'!us le#to! Co*e, in relation to the Supre'e Court A*'!stratve +atter o. $7-4-15-SC, &#& too/ effe#t o! +ay 15, 2$$7 , protestant assailed the election and procla!ation of Protestee as the Punong Baranga" of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi during the %ctober , /(0 Baranga" &lections and filed the corresponding election protest. 8.The Revision of ballots was conducted on $ebruar" ((, ( and (0, /(3. ISSUES .9hether or not the procla!ation of the protestee reflected the true will of the electorate of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi:
3
1.9hether or not protestee has co!!itted the alleged electoral irregularities and fraud during the recentl" concluded Baranga" &lections: (/. 9hether or not the protestant will surpass the votes obtained b" the protestee upon the conclusion of the revision of the ballots in the protested precincts in case the protest will be given due course: DISCUSSION (/. $ore!ost, ours is a de!ocrac" were sovereignt" resides in the people whose sovereignt" will is expressed through the ballot. t is therefore of para!ount public interest that the electoral dispute be settled. Resolving the protest b" a !ere wave of the +udicial wand without touching on the !erits is not fair to the protestant. t is not fair to the tribunal whose disposition of the case without solid facts to support it would raise !ore 5uestions than it could answer and create needless speculations about its !otives however well-intentioned the" !a" be. t is not fair to the people who deserve to *now, without the slightest doubt, who the" reall" elected as the Punong Baranga" of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi Province. t is, certainl", not fair to the protestee who should be deprived the opportunit" to re!ove once and for all whatever cloud that !a" have been cast on his election as Punong Baranga". ((. learl", the grounds invo*ed b" the protestant in the filing of the instant election protest re5uire the opening of the ballot boxes to effect the careful perusal, exa!ination and2or recounting of ballots in order to resolve the election contest. ;uch recourse is explicitl" provided in Se#to! 255 of t&e "'!us le#to! Co*e a!* Rule 1$, ! Ba!#, A.+. o. $7-4-1-SC, pertinent provision of ;ec. 44 is hereunder 5uoted, thus' SC. 0u*#al #ou!t! of votes ! ele#to! #o!test.- &ere alleato!s ! a protest or #ou!ter-protest so arra!t, or &e!ever ! t&e op!o! of t&e #ourt t&e !terests of 3ust#e so reure, t s&all ''e*ately or*er t&e oo/ of voters,
4
allot oes a!* t&er /eys, allots a!* ot&er *o#u'e!ts use* ! t&e ele#to! e rou&t efore t a!* t&at t&e allots e ea'!e* a!* t&e votes re#ou!te*. (. The above provision does not re5uire that there be further proof than the allegations of the protest before the court !a" allow the exa!ination of the ballots and the recounting of votes. The rationale for the doctrine was elucidated in Astora v. er!a!*e, to wit' 8. "vously t&e s'plest, t&e 'ost epe*tous a!* t&e est 'ea!s to *eter'!e t&e trut& or falsty of t&s alleato! s to ope! t&e allot o a!* ea'!e ts #o!tests. o reure parol or ot&er ev*e!#e o! sa* allee* rreularty efore ope!! sa* o, oul* &ave 'erely ve! t&e protestee a'ple opportu!ty to *elay t&e settle'e!t of t&e #o!troversy, t&rou& le!t&y #rossea'!ato! of t&e t!esses for t&e protestee to t&e #o!trary. As &el* ! Ce#lo v. Bel'o!te, t&s oul* e to sa!#to! a! easy ay to *efeat a protest.: (0. n Crsp!o v. ;a!a!a!, pe!!e* y 0ust#e <laro =. Dav*e, 0r., #t! ;eople v. arvasa, this ourt categoricall" declared that' 8'e a!* aa!, t&s Supre'e Court &as *e#lare* ! !u'erous #ases t&at, &e! t&ere s a! alleato! ! a! ele#to! protest t&at oul* reure t&e perusal, ea'!ato!, or #ou!t! of allots as ev*e!#e, t s t&e '!steral *uty of t&e tral #ourt to or*er t&e ope!! of t&e allot oes a!* t&e ea'!ato! a!* #ou!t! of t&e allots *eposte* t&ere!.: (3.
, failure of voters to vote due to fraud and terroris! (;aso! vs. Co'ele#, 1$9 SCRA 2%>). The +urisdictional facts necessar" to confer +urisdiction to tr" an election protest are' (> that the protestant was a candidate who had dul"
5
filed a certificate of candidac" and had been voted for the sa!e office? > that the protestee has been proclai!ed? 0> that the petition was filed within ten =(/> da"s after procla!ation (+ro vs. Co'ele#, 121 SCRA 466)? and 3> that fraud and election irregularities vitiated the conduct of elections and affected the legalit" thereof (Ba*elles vs. Cal, 27 SCRA 1%%). Proper pleading also re5uires that there be allegation that the true result of the election is in favor of protestant and a pra"er that protestee6s procla!ation be set aside (De Castro vs. =!ete, 27 SCRA 62%). The Honorable ;upre!e ourt has !aintained in a long line of cases that !ere allegations of fraud and irregularities will suffice to warrant the opening of the contested ballot boxes and the recount of the ballots contained therein, hence in =.R.o. 1%6966, 0uly 5, 2$$$, 0a'es +uel vs. C"+LC a!* la*o +. Lapu, 8&e rule ! t&s 3urs*#to! s #lear a!* 3urspru*e!#e s eve! #learer. ?! a str! of #ateor#al pro!ou!#e'e!ts, e &ave #o!sste!tly rule* t&at &e! t&ere s a! alleato! ! a! ele#to! protest t&at oul* reure t&e perusal, ea'!ato! or #ou!t! of allots as ev*e!#e, t s t&e '!steral *uty of t&e tral #ourt to or*er t&e ope!! of t&e allot oes a!* t&e ea'!ato! a!* #ou!t! of t&e allots *eposte* t&ere!.: ?! Astora vs. er!a!*e, 19 SCRA %%1, 8"vously, t&e s'plest, t&e 'ost epe*tous a!* t&e est 'ea!s to *eter'!e t&e trut& or falsty of t&s alleato! s to ope! t&e allot o a!* ea'!e ts #o!te!ts. o reure parol or ot&er ev*e!#e o! sa* allee* rreularty efore ope!! sa* o, oul* &ave 'erely ve! t&e protestee a'ple opportu!ty to *elay t&e settle'e!t of t&e #o!troversy, t&rou& le!t&y #ross-ea'!ato! of t&e t!esses for t&e protesta!t a!* t&e prese!tato! of test'o!al ev*e!#e for t&e protestee to t&e #o!trary: . Protestant fir!l" believes that the protest has dul" co!plied with the above re5uire!ents. 6UDICIAL RE/ISION RE/EALS THE COMMISSION OF ELECTORAL FRAUD 7Y THE PROTESTEE
(4. After t&e 3u*#al revso! a!*@or re#ou!t! of t&e proteste* pre#!#ts ! ara!ay ;ola#o!, urtle ?sla!*s, t tur!e* out t&at so 'u#& of t&e
6
allots #ast for t&e protestee !o lo!er possess t&e !terty for t&e' to e #o!s*ere* val* a!* t&ereafter to e #re*te* to &s votes. #an" of the ballots cast for the protestee were prepared b" onl" one person or si!ilar group of persons. The shading in one ballot varies in that it contained the use of different colors of in*s of pen. 9orst, there were ballots that onl" ordinar" pens were used instead of the re5uired o!elec pen. There were ballots that were not signed b" the hair!an of the Board of &lection Tellers =B&T>. Pattern voting is ver" obvious in several nu!bers of the ballots in that it can be inferred that onl" one person has written the entries thereon. @nnecessar" !ar*ings for the sole purpose of identification of ballots during the counting of votes were li*ewise visible and glaring. (7. These irregularities that attended the casting of votes bolster the fact that to ensure his success in the election and to intensif" the co!!ission of election related ano!alies in the election protestee e!plo"ed the !entioned irregularities. Thorough exa!ination need not re5uire us to believe that the ballots cast for the protestee did not reflect the true will of the electorate. B" !ere glance at the !anner b" which the ballots were prepared, the sa!e une5uivocall" reveals that it no longer possess of the integrit" for it to be counted in favor of an" candidate. Prevalent are these *inds of ballots and the Honorable ourt cannot +ust afford to ignore. (8. ;uffice it to sa" that the foregoing irregularities in the conduct of the election in Baranga" Poblacion did not reflect the true will of the voters therein, such that it is dee!ed proper that protestee be ousted in the contested office where he has not shown that there is no doubt to his title thereto while the protestant has laid down all the irregularities that would divest hi! of the right to re!ain in the said office and conse5uentl" would reveal that protestant is !ore deserving of the authentic and genuine choice of the people of the concerned local govern!ent. (. &ssentiall", if the ballots cast for the protestee are declared invalid, in so far, as the"
7
are no longer reflective of the true will of the voters, their integrit" having been violated not not having been established fro! the ver" beginning, his votes will be greatl" lessened and the protestant will eventuall" sur!ount his votes and proved that he garnered the !ost nu!ber of valid votes and is the one lawfull" entitled to the office of the Punong Baranga" of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi Province. PRAYER WHEREFORE, foregoing pre!ises considered, it is !ost respectfull" pra"ed of the Honorable ourt to please consider and note the foregoing #e!orandu! and conse5uentl" declare the election of the protestee as not expressive of the true will of the electorate of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi Province and thereb" proclai! protestant #H)&A N. )H#) as the dul" elected Punong Baranga" of Baranga" Poblacion, Turtle slands, Tawi-Tawi Province. RESPECTFULLY SU7MITTED, this th da" of )pril /(3 at Ca!boanga it" for Bongao, Tawi-Tawi, Philippines. FAUNDO ESGUERRA & ASSOCIATES LAW FIRM
ounsel for Pr1es#5 &;D@R& &NTR& B@ANE To!as laudio &xtension, Ca!boanga it" Telefax 2 Telephone No. =/7> 11/-(8211(-73(
Email Address: [email protected] B".
BP Aifeti!e #e!bership No. ( Roll No. 087(? 0-(3-13 #A& o!pliance No. -///7708?(-3-//3? #A& o!pliance No. -//(/(? /8-(0-//1 #A& o!pliance No. -///3(7? /8-(0-//1 #A& o!pliance No. F-////(8(? /-/-/(/ PTR. N%. /81(1? /(-/0-(3 Ca!boanga it"
8
op" furnished' ATTY. NAR/ARO 7ELAR S. NA/ARRO ounsel for the Protestee Roo! , nd $loor, ;afa"a Building Feterans )venue Ca!boanga it"
EPLANATION
n co!pliance with Se#to! 4, Rule 2 of BAC A.+. o. $7-4-15-SC , counsel explains that the foregoing #e!orandu! will be filed with the Honorable ourt via registered !ail with return card due to distance and lac* of !anpower. QUIRINO G. ESGUERRA, JR.
