4.

Pre-proclamation controversy (PPC)

• General rule: Any candidate or any registered political party may raise a PPC under the
appropriate grounds (S233, 234, 235, 236 OEC)
• Exception: PPC are not allowed for the elections of President, VP, Senator, or Congressman.
This is to avoid delays in proclamation in these sensitive posts, creating a vacuum
• Exception to exception: A petition for correction of manifest errors (S30)

1. What are the four (4) exclusive grounds for a PPC? See OEC
• Any question pertaining to or affecting the proceedings of the Board of Canvassers
concerning:
(a) Illegal composition or proceedings of BOC
(b) ERs which are incomplete, contain material defects, appear to be tempered with or
falsified, or contain discrepancies
(c) ERs prepared under duress, threats, coercion, or intimidation
(d) Substitute or fraudulent ERs were canvassed
NOTE: Please memorize this!
• Exclusive jurisdiction is vested on COMELEC Division (See Ong v COMELEC)
• Well-settled that election cases which include PPC must be heard and decided by a division of
the Commission. The Commission en banc does not have the authority to head and decide it in
the first instance.
• Strongly advised to memorize Art 9-B S3: Talks about division of division and COMELEC
en banc, although not explicit
• Priorly raised before the Board of Canvassers
• Proceeding: Summary in nature
• Precinct-> Board of Canvass : called Election returns
• 1st level BOC-> 2nd level BOC: called Certificates of Canvass
• Usually Municipal/District/City -> Province -> National

• What distinguishes PPCs from a failure of elections: In PPCs, the COMELEC takes ERs on
their face. But in a failure of elections, the COMELEC is duty-bound to investigate factual
allegations of fraud, terrorism, violence, and other analogous causes.
• In PPC, you’re questioning the integrity of the ERs (ie. incomplete, defective, prepared under
duress)
• In failure of elections, the failures that may have affected the canvassing process are so
widespread that the entire electoral exercise for that locality is actually affected and if we say
that we can’t trust the results of this elections because of fraud, terrorism, violence, etc (popular
example: ARMM)

2. Are PPCs allowed for the elections for national positions, including Congressmen?

• No. PPC are not allowed for the elections of President, VP, Senator, or
Congressman. This is to avoid
delays in proclamation in these sensitive
posts, creating a vacuum. Unless, it is for a petition for correction of
manifest errors.
• No. PPCs shall be allowed on matters relating to the preparation, transmission, receipt, custody,
and appreciation of election returns or the certificates of canvass, as the case may be, except
manifest errors as
provided for in Section 30 hereof.
• Questions affecting the the composition or proceedings of the BOCs may be initiated in the
board or directly with the Commission in accordance with Sec. 19 hereof (S15 RA 7166 as
amended)
• What is the general procedure in raising a PPC issue:
(a) Questions affecting the composition or proceedings of the BOC may be initiated with it or
directly with the COMELEC
• Sir advises, raise it before the Board of Canvassers (similar to admin law principle; give admin
body a chance to correct)
(b) But questions relating to the ERs [COCs] must be brought before the BOC only in the first
instance.
(c) The BOC should rule on the objections summarily
• Make sure it’s in their minutes
(d) Any party adversely affected may appeal to the COMELEC, and thereafter, by certiorari to
the SC

3. Distinguish a PPC from an election protest.

• When the inclusion of Election Returns is contested because they are obviously manufactured
or not authentic, this is a PPC
• When there are additional allegations of massive electoral irregularities such as ballot box
snatching, widespread, intimidation, flying voters, these pertain to an election protest

• [BAR Q] A and B were both candidates for the same Congressional seat. B filed a PPC with
the COMELEC alleging that rampant vote-buying and terrorism accompanied the elections,
supplying particulars that B’s supporters were bought off an others prevented from casting their
votes. But the COMELEC dismissed the PPC since all the ERs appeared complete and valid.
Was the COMELEC correct?

4. What is the rule on statistical improbability?

• Suhuri v COMELEC citing Lagumbay: Under Lagumbay, therefore, the doctrine of statistical
improbability is applied only where the unique uniformity of tally of all the votes cast in favor of
all the candidates belonging to one part and the systematic blanking of all the candidates of all
the opposing parties appear in the election return. The doctrine has no application where there is
neither uniformity of tallies nor systematic blanking of the candidates of one party
• Factual grounds are very strict; Memorize the doctrine!
• Thus, the bare fact that a candidate for public office received no votes in one or two precincts,
standing alone and without more, cannot adequately support a finding that the subject election
returns are statisticallyimprobable. Verily, a zero vote for a particular candidate in the
electionreturns is but one strand in the web of circumstantial evidence that the electoral returns
were prepared under duress, force, and intimidation. The Court has thus warned that the doctrine
of statistical improbability must be restrictively viewed, with the utmost care being taken lest in
penalizing fraudulent and corrupt practices- which is truly called for- innocent voters become
disenfranchised, a result that hardly commends itself. Such prudential approach makes us dismiss
Suhuri’s urging that some of the electoral results had been infected with the taint of statistical
improbability as to warrant their exclusion from the canvass in a PPC (Suhuri v COMELEC)

• Pimentel v COMELEC: After the proclamation of a Senator, can the Court continue to
hear a petition based on a PPC? Was the “no questions procedure” adopted by the
SPBOC-Maguindanao valid? Can that be raised as controversy in a PPC, but after the
other senators have already been proclaimed? No. In elections for President, Vice-President,
Senators, and members of the House of Representatives, the general rule still is that PPC on
matters relating to the preparation, transmission, receipt, custody and appreciation of elections
returns or certificates of canvass are prohibited.
• The proclamation somehow closes the PPC and transforms it into an election contest.
• Are there exceptions to the rule prohibiting PPC for Congressional elections and higher:
YES, namely: the correction of manifest errors; the composition or proceedings of the LBOc, etc
(S30 RA 7166).
• The exception applies only to Congress or the COMELEC en banc acting as the NBOC and not
to local boards of canvassers
• The four criteria enumerated in S30 of RA 7166 as amended by RA 9369, must be applied by
the NBC to the second Maguindanao PCOC. The authenticity and due execution of the
Maguindanao MCOCs, which had already been determined by the SPBOC-Maguindanao, which
are nolonger in issue before the NBC. To allow Pimentel to revive again before the NBC the
issue of authenticity and due execution of the Maguindanao MCOCs after a determination
thereof by the SPBOC-Maguindanao is like granting him an appeal, a remedy which is without
any statutory or regulatory basis.
• Koko the filed an election contest before the SET. The SET eventually granted the petition.
According to the SET, these ballots were considered fake because of deformities in the
watermark, no ultraviolet spots and after-glow spots, as well as chemical or solvent insensitive.
SET also said the fake ballots’ microprints were not readable even under a magnifying glass. It
also noted these were shorter compared to the genuine ballots. It also said around 60K genuine
ballots were also rejected because theywere prepared by 1 or 2 persons, based on the style and
stroke of the hand-writing

5. Why does proclamation terminate a PPC?

• Because PPC becomes moot and academic
• Exceptions: Proclamation is void or based on an incomplete canvass (COMELEC v
Mamalinta) or Computation was patently erroneous

6. Election protest (election contest)

• A proceeding where a losing candidate for a particular position contests the results of the
elections due to frauds or irregularities committed before, during, or after the casting and
counting of votes and the preparation and canvass of
returns.
• Protestant v Protestee
• Protestee must have received 2nd or 3rd highest number of votes
• APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Election contest: Protest or QW
(a) EOJ:
• RTC: Municipal officials
• MTC: Barangay officials
• Appeal within 5 days from promulgation to ECAD, COMELEC (Election Contest
Adjudication Department)
1. For municipal and barangay officials, see AM 07-4-15-SC (2007). For municipal officials,
the SC also issued AM 10-4-1-SC and OCA Circ. No. 69-2010 in relation thereto.
2. Note pending electoral protest/recount, Marcos v Robredo before the PET (PET Case
No. 005) filed June 29, 2016.
3. Quo warranto (Election contest)
• An action filed by any registered voter to contest the election of any candidate in any grounds
of lack of qualifications, ineligibility or disloyalty to the Republic
• Is the winner qualified to sit?
• Petitioner v respondent
• Must be filed within 10 days following the date of proclamation in both cases unless there is
pending PPC. But a disqualification case shall not bar the filing.
1. Distinguish from an election protest.
• Quo warranto proceeding is filed by any registered voter
• Issue in QW is not who won, but is the winner qualified to sit?
2. Note the remedy is available pre- and post-proclamation.