[01] PEOPLE VS SAN JUAN  This provision guarantees the rights (1) to vote in the order of her entrance
ights (1) to vote in the order of her entrance into the polling
GR NO. L-22944 | 10 FEB 1968
Castro, J.
PETITIONERS/PROSECUTORS: THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: CLAUDIA SAN JUAN AND SEVERO SAN JUAN
TOPIC: I. Right to Suffrage
CASE SUMMARY:
The private respondents were charged with the violation of Sec 133 of the Revised Election
code when they prevented Generosa Pilapil from entering the polling place to vote. The court
a quo quashed the information, stating that it failed to charge an offense, for failure to allege
that the respondents did not fall within the exception in Sec 133. The SC ruled that the
information need not show that the respondents did not fall within the exception because it
was a matter of defense.
DOCTRINE:
o The limitation—when there are more than forty voters waiting inside— on the right
of a voter to freely enter the polling place does not constitute an essential part of
the definition of the crime contemplated in section 133 of the Revised Election Code.
Instead, it is but a matter which the accused must assert and establish as a defense,
and not for the prosecution to anticipate, allege, and disprove.
o Every unlawful obstacle, by whatever means or method, interposed to the free entry
of a vote into the polling place to cast his vote, strikes at the very heart of the right
of suffrage.
FACTS:
 This is an appeal by the People, in an order quashing, upon motion of the defense, an
indictment for violation of Sec 133 of the Revised Election Code.
 Information :
o On 12 Nov 1963 (election day), 10 am at the polling place at City Central
School, Ormoc City … Claudia San Juan and Severo San Juan, conspiring,
cooperating, confabulating and helping with one another, … use of force,
prevent the complaining witness Generosa Pilapil from exercising her right
to freely enter the polling place of precinct no 1 in order to vote
 Court a quo granted the motion to quash because the facts charged do not constitute an
offense.
place; (2) to freely enter the polling place as soon as she arrived unless there were then
more than forty voters waiting inside; and (3) in the latter eventuality, to enter in the
order of her arrival' as those inside went out.
 The gravamen of the information is that the accused Claudia San Juan and Severo San
Juan "willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously with the use of force prevent(ed) the
complaining witness Generosa Pilapil from exercising her right to freely enter the polling
place of Precinct No. 1 in order to vote". However, the right thus allegedly infringed upon
is qualified by the clause: "unless there are more than forty voters waiting inside". This,
in effect, defines an exception by virtue of which the right is not intended to be
immediately operative. As formulated, the information does not negative this exception.
ISSUES AND RULING:
1. WON the information should explicitly negate the exception to sufficiently charge a
violation of Sec 133 - NO
o The limitation—when there are more than forty voters waiting inside— on the right
of a voter to freely enter the polling place does not constitute an essential part of
the definition of the crime contemplated in section 133 of the Revised Election
Code. Instead, it is but a matter which the accused must assert and establish as a
defense, and not for the prosecution to anticipate, allege, and disprove.
o When the legislature provided in Sec 133 of the Revised Election Code an explicit and
unequivocal guarantee of a voter’s free access to the polling place, it could have
intended no purpose other than to maintain inviolate the right to vote by
safeguarding the voter against all manner or unauthorized interference and travesty
that purveyors of fear can devise. Every unlawful obstacle, by whatever means or
method, interposed to the free entry of a vote into the polling place to cast his
vote, strikes at the very heart of the right of suffrage.
o That the transgressor is outside the compass of the excepted situation, cannot be
regarded as an essential ingredient of the offense. Let him prove his disclaimer who
pleads that he comes within the ambit of the exception.
o Upon the foregoing disquisition, we hold that the information here satisfies the
requirements for the legal sufficiency of an indictment lodged under section 133 of
the Revised Election Code.
DISPOSITIVE:
ACCORDINGLY, the order appealed from is set aside. This case is hereby ordered remanded to
the court of origin for further proceedings in accordance with law.
PROVISIONS
Sec 133. Order of Voting.—The voters shall have the right to vote in the order of their entrance
into the polling place. The voters shall have the right to freely enter the polling place as soon
as they arrive unless there are more than forty voters waiting inside, in which case they have
the right to enter in the order of their arrival as those who are inside go out, which the latter
shall immediately do after having cast their votes.