DOMALANTA V. COMELEC

  

DR. TERESITA G. DOMALANTA and DR. AGRIPINA B. FRANCISCO, petitioners v. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, AQUILINO Q. and THE OFFICE OF THE STATE PROSECUTOR, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, MANILA, respondents

[G.R. No. 125586. June 29, 2000.]

TOPIC: Election offenses as mala in se

FACTS:

Members of the staff of the Provincial Board of Canvassers (PBC) of Isabela, petitioners included, were charged by respondent Pimentel in a complaint for alleged violation of the Omnibus Election Code with the COMELEC. It was alleged that they participated in the padding of votes in (nine) 9 municipalities in favor of senatorial candidates Juan Ponce Enrile (27,755), Gregorio Honasan (10,000) and Ramon Mitra (7,000).

Petitioners, in their counter affidavits, categorically denied the charges, and declared that they faithfully recorded the votes obtained by the candidates. Petitioners were part of the support or technical staff of the PBC of the Province of Isabela.

COMELEC issued a resolution for the filing of the information against respondents for violation of Section 27 (b) of Republic Act No. 6646. It ruled that petitioners acted in conspiracy with the rest of respondents in the unauthorized addition of votes for the said senatorial candidates. Discovered in the anomaly was a pattern of distribution of votes — retaining the last 3 digits of the number of votes in the padded Provincial certificate of canvass. The COMELEC held that the padded votes gave a presumption that the act done was intentionally and deliberately.

 

SECTION 27. Election offenses — In addition to the prohibited acts and election offenses enumerated in Section 261 and 262 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881, as amended, the following shall be guilty of an election offense.

(b) Any member of the board of election inspectors or board of canvassers who tampers with, increases or decreases votes received by a candidate in any election or any member of the board who refuses, after proper verification and hearing, to credit the correct votes or deduct such tampered votes.

This finding of the COMELEC was challenged by petitioners in this petition for certiorari and prohibition.

 

ISSUE:

Whether or not the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in directing the filing of criminal and administrative complaints against the petitioners.

 

RULING:

No, the COMELEC did not gravely abuse its discretion in directing the filing of criminal and administrative complaints against the petitioners.

The discrepancies are too substantial and rounded off to be categorized as a mere 'computation error' or a result of fatigue. There is a limit to what can be construed as an honest mistake or oversight in the performance of official duty. — Suffice it to state that the magnitude of the error as reflected in the discrepancies itemized above renders unacceptable the defense of 'computer error' or honest mistake.

Paragraph 2 of the Joint Counter-Affidavits of petitioner Domalanta and Dr. Olympia G. Marquez, acting as Member-Secretary of the PBC, avers that in recording the vote totals of the senatorial candidates appearing in the Municipal CoCs in the SoV per Municipality/City, the Board was assisted by the petitioners, two (2) clerks also from the DECS, Messrs. Dante Limon and Edward Tamang as well as Mr. George Noriega, a representative of the Provincial Accountant's Office.

Implicit in the averment of paragraph 2 of said Joint Counter-Affidavit is the insinuation that the anomalies or the tampering of the results of the senatorial canvass in Isabela could only have been done by their staff.

It was indeed highly unlikely that the padded vote totals were entered in the SoV per Municipality/City without the knowledge of petitioners, if they were faithfully and regularly performing their assigned tasks. It cannot be denied that the members of the PBC and their support staff, including herein petitioners, were the only ones in control and in possession of said documents during its preparation. It need not be overemphasized, given this fact, that the padding of the vote totals could only have been done by all of them acting in concert with one another.

The peculiar factual circumstances prevailing in this case hardly paints a picture of manifest human error or fatigue in the tabulation of the votes of the senatorial candidates in Isabela. It, in fact, discloses a pernicious scheme which would not have been successfully perpetrated without the indispensable cooperation of all members of the PBC and their support staff which included herein petitioners.

The latter's protestations in the counter-affidavits that they only tabulated the vote totals of senatorial candidates Tillah and Tolentino are at best convenient and self-serving explanations to justify their exculpation from any wrong-doing. Their claims are, moreover, not substantiated by any of the PBC members. Indeed, as this Court pointedly observed in Velayo v. COMELEC the "self-serving nature of said Adavits cannot be discounted. As this Court has pronounced, reliance should not be placed on mere affidavits."

Be that as it may, petitioners' claims are a matter of defense which are best ventilated in the trial proper than at the preliminary investigation.

WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby dismissed for lack of merit.