3&epubhc of tbe ~bilippine%

~upren1e Qtou rt
jflllnniln

EN BANC

NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames:

Please take notice that the Court en bane issued a Resolution

dated AUGUST 9, 2022, which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 237916 - (TANGGULANG DEMOKRASYA [TAN

DEM], INC., EVELYN L. KILAYKO, AND TERESITA D. BALTAZAR,
petitioners vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and SMMT-TIM 2016,
INC., respondents; BAGUMBAYAN VNP MOVEMENT, INC., petitioner-
in-intervention; COALITION FOR . CLEAN AND CREDIBLE
ELECTIONS [CJEJ, ERNESTO DELA ROSA DEL ROSARIO,
MELCHOR GRUELA MAGDAMO, LEON ESTRELLA PERALTA,
intervenors; and AES WATCH, ANG NARS INC., BUKLOD PAMILYA,
CAPITOL CHRISTIAN LEADERSHIP, CITIZENS' CRIME WATCH,
CONNECTING BUSINESSMEN IN THE MARKETPLACE TO
CHRIST, LATTER RAIN HARVEST MINISTRIES, ONE VOTE OUR
HOPE INC., UPPER ROOM BRETHEREN CHURCH [PHILIPPINES],
group intervenors, and BERNARD C. ROQUE, DIEGO L. MAGPANTAY,
DOLORES V. LAVADO, JOSE 'JOJO' LAGUNZAD GONZALES, JUAN
SANTOS PRING, LEAH SAMACO PAQUIZ, NELSON JAVA CELIS,
PABLO 0. OLMEDA, TROADIO 'TROY' BENITEZ AB/TONA,
VICENTE 'NOY' ALEJO MACATANGAY, WENDELL ANACAY
UNLA YAO, individual intervenors.) - Before the Court is a petition I for
injunction seeking. to nullify the purchase by the Commission on Elections
(COMELEC) of the precinct-based Optical Mark Reader (OMR) and
Election Management System (EMS) from SMMT-TIM 2016, Inc. (SMMT-
TIM) on 12 January 2018, and enjoin the implementation of the purchase
transaction.

After two separate public biddings, the COMELEC and SMMT-TIM

executed two Contracts 2 of Lease with Option to Purchase (OTP) of 93,977
units of precinct-based OMR and EMS for the 2016 Elections. Both
contracts stipulated on the period to exercise the OTP as follows:
1
Rollo, pp. 3-26.
2
Id. at 56-81, 82-108; 27 August 2015 and 4 Septe mber 2015 Contracts for the Lease with Option to
Purchase of [23,000 and 70,977] Units of Precinct-Based Optical Mark Reader Machines and an
Election Management System for the 9 May 20 16 National, Local, and Autonomous Region in Muslim
Mindanao Elections.
Notice of Resolution -2- G.R. No. 237916
August 9, 2022

4.3.1. The COMELEC may exercise its option to purchase the

Goods under Component 1 within one (1) year from 09 May 2016,
which the Parties may extend under a written agreement x x x. 3
(Emphasis supplied)

Thereafter, respondents extended the original period of one year from

9 May 2016 to exercise the OTP on several occasions. Petitioners and
intervenors allege that the OTP was extended on five occasions ending on 8
January 2018. 4 On the other hand, respondents claim that they extended the
OTP for the sixth time until 8 February 2018. 5

Meanwhile, in its Minute Resolution No. 17-07706 dated 18 December

2017, the COMELEC En Banc resolved to exercise the OTP and instructed
its Executive Director to implement the resolution. On 5 January 2018, the
COMELEC Executive Director requested for extension of the OTP until 8
February 2018 which was accepted by SMMT-TIM the following day. 7 On
12 January 2018, respondents executed the subject Deed of Sale. 8

On 27 March 2018, petitioners filed the instant petition for injunction

to annul the Deed of Sale executed by respondents and enjoin its
implementation. The petition primarily asserts that 1) the COMELEC
violated the Government Procurement Act and committed grave abuse of
discretion in exercising the OTP and executing the subject Deed of Sale
pursuant to an expired OTP and without competitive bidding; 2) the ruling in
Capalla v. COMELEC should be revisited; and 3) the COMELEC committed
grave abuse of discretion in its favorable assessment of the automated
election system (AES) of SMMT-TIM in connection with the purchase of
the subject hardware and software licenses, because these were never
operated with certified digital signatures mandatorily required by R.A. No.
8436, as amended.

Several intervenors then manifested their support for the Petition,

praying for similar reliefs. 9

In their respective comments, both the COMELEC 10 and SMMT-

TIM1 1 maintain that the OTP was exercised within the allowed period, and
the digital signatures used in COMELEC's AES complied with R.A. No.
8436, as amended. In addition, SMMT-TIM questions the propriety of the

3
Id. at 64, 90.
4
Id. at IO, I 15-117.
5
Id. at 323, 444.
6
Id. at 118-123.
7
Id. at 502-504.
8
Id. at 124-130.
9
Id. at 204-215, 172-192, and 234-252; Petition-in-Intervention dated 14 August 2018 ofBagumbayan
VNP Movement, Inc., Motion to Intervene in Support of Petitioners dated 20 June 2018 of Coalition
for Clean and Credible Elections, et al., and Motion to Intervene dated 31 August 2018 of AES Watch, et
al.
10 Id. at 318-341 and 517-539; Comments on the Petition and Petition-in-Intervention.
11
Id. at 435-479; Consolidated Comment on the Petition and Petition-in-Intervention.
Notice of Resolution -3- G.R. No. 237916
August 9, 2022

petition ra1smg in issue the legal standing of petitioners and intervenors,

involvement of factual issues, and non-observance of the doctrine of
hierarchy of courts.

The instant petition lacks merit.

This is not the first time that issues involving the procurement of the
COMELEC's AES and the compliance of digital signatures with the
requirements of R.A. No. 8436, 12 as amended, 13 have been directly raised
before the Court. As it has done in similar cases, the Court sets aside the
procedural challenges against the petition including the question on legal
standing, non-observance of hierarchy of courts, and proper remedy before
the Supreme Court, in view of the compelling significance and public
interest involved. 14

Treating the present pet1t10n as one for certiorari and prohibition

under Rule 65, the Court is not convinced that the COMELEC acted with
grave abuse of discretion in exercising the OTP and executing the Deed of
Sale with SMMT-TMI. For an act to be struck down as having been done
with grave abuse of discretion, it must be shown that the abuse of discretion
was patent and gross. 15

In challenging the validity of the Deed of Sale, pet1t10ners heavily

anchored their argument on the expiration of the OTP. They alleged that the
fifth extension to exercise the OTP ended on 8 January 2018 16 and therefore,
competitive public bidding was required for the purchase of the subject
hardware and software licenses. As to the sixth extension, they alleged that
there is no COMELEC resolution authorizing the Executive Director to
request for an extension unlike previous ones.

A review of the records, however, shows that on 18 December 201 7,

the COMELEC already resolved to exercise its OTP and directed its
Executive Director to enforce the same. It only follows that the letter-
request of the Executive Director to request for the sixth extension is
intended to give life to COMELEC's reso lution to exercise the OTP and
facilitate compliance with the directive to implement such resolution.

12
Entitled 'An Act Authorizing the Commission on Elections to Use an Automated Election System in
the I I May 1998 National or Local Elections and in Subsequent National and Local Electoral
Exercises, Providing Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes.'
IJ R.A. No. 9369 (2007); entitled "An Act Amending [R.A.] No. 8436, entitled 'An Act Authorizing the
(COMELEC] to Use Automated Election System in the 11 May 1998 National or Local Elections and
in Subsequent National or Local Electoral Exercises, to Encourage Transparency, Credibil ity, Fairness
and Accuracy of Elections, Amending for the Purpose Batas Pambansa Big. 88 I, as Amended, [R.A.]
No. 7166 and Other Related Election Laws, Providing Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes."'
14
See Roque, Jr. v. COMELEC, 615 Phil. 149 (2009); Capcilla v. COMELEC, 687 Phil. 617 (20 12);
Pabi/lo v. COMELEC, 758 Phil. 806 (20 15); and Pantaleon v. Metro Manila Development Authority,
G.R. No. 194335, 17 November 2020.
15
Beluso v. COMELEC, 635 Phil. 436, 443 (20 I 0).
16
Rollo, p. 117.
 G.R. No. 237916
•
Notice of Resolution -4-
August 9, 2022

Following Capalla v. COMELEC, 17 where the Court likewise upheld

the COMELEC's exercise of the extended OTP, a new public bidding is not
needed since the option amount is already included in the original contract
when it was bidded upon. The Court further stated that '[t]he contract
amount not only included that for the contract of lease but also for the OTP.
Hence, the competitive public bidding conducted for the AES contract was
sufficient. A new public bidding would be a superfluity.' 18

As to the alleged non-compliance with the requirement that the

electoral returns and certificates of canvass be electronically transmitted and
digitally signed, suffice it to say that the Court has already ruled in previous
petitions that the COMELEC's AES complies with the requirements ofR.A.
No. 8436, as amended. 19

In AES Watch v. COMELEC, 20 the Court held that 'the authentication

process of electronically transmitted results is compliant with jurisprudence'
citing Capalla and Bagumbayan-VNP Movement, Inc. v. COMELEC. 21 The
Court also clarified that although Capalla discussed the capabilities of
PCOS machines used in the 2010 Elections, the procedure concerning
iButtons and PINs remains the same in the 2019 Elections using Vote
Counting Machines. 22

The Court likewise frowns upon petitioners' proposition for a manual

or hybrid election system claiming that R.A. No. 8436, as amended, still
allows the same. In Roque, Jr. v. COMELEC, 23 the Court already
pronounced that 'Congress has chosen the May 2010 elections to be the
maiden run for full automation.' 24 The Court also disapproved the proposal
for a partial automation for lack of basis since Section 5 clearly states that
'the AES shall be implemented nationwide. ' 25

In performing its constitutional mandate to enforce and administer all

laws and regulations relative to the conduct of all elections, 26 the
COMELEC should be allowed considerable latitude in devising means and
methods that will insure the accomplishment of the great objective for which
it was created-free, orderly and honest elections. 27 Its measures therefor

17
Supra note 14; See also Pabillo v. COMELEC, supra note 14, at 888-889.
18
ld. at 674.
19 See Capalla v. COMELEC, supra note 14, where the Court pronounced that the PCOS machines used
in the 20 l O Elections are capable of digitally-signed transmissions; and Bagumbayan-VNP Movement,
Inc. v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos. 206719, 206784, and 207755. 10 April 2019, where the Court ruled that
iButtons and P!Ns are the functional equivalents of the signatures of the members of the electoral
board for the 2013 Elections; and AES Watch v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 246332, 9 December 2020,
where the Court recognized the compliance of the Vote Counting Machines used in the 2019 Elections.
20
G.R. No. 246332, 9 December 2020.
21
G.R. Nos. 206719, 206784, and 207755, 10 April 2019.
22
Supra note 20.
23
Supra note 14.
24
Id. at 237.
25
Id. at 215.
26
Constitution, Article IX-C, Section 2 (1).
27
Sumulongv. COMELEC, 73 Phil. 288, 295-296 (1941).
 Notice of Resolution -5- G.R. No. 237916
August 9, 2022

should be respected, unless it is clearly shown that the same are devoid of
any reasonable justification.28

WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit

and the prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order is
accordingly DENIED." Lopez, M., J., on official leave. Cs)

By authority of the Court:

MARIFE M. LOMJ :AO-CUEVAS

Clerk of Court ,t..,,.

28
Kabataan Party-list v. COMELEC, 775 Phil. 523, 560(20 15).
 Notice of Resolution - 6- G.R. No. 237916
August 9, 2022

ATTYS. DEMOSTHENES B. DONATO, COMELEC (x)

AMANDA REGINA G. REYES and lntramuros, Manila
MARIA CONNIE R. DE GALA (x)
Donato and Zarate THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (x)
Counsel for Petitioners Office of the Solicitor General
7/F Electra House 134 Amorsolo St., Legazpi Village
115 Esteban St., Legazpi Village Makati City
Makati City
SMMT-TIM 2016, INC. (x)
ERNESTO DELA ROSA DEL ROSARIO, AccraLaw Tower
MELCHOR GRUELA MAGDAMO and Second Avenue corner 3Qfu Street
LEON ESTRELLA PERALTA (x) Crescent Park West, Bonifacio Global City
lntervenors 0399 Taguig City
Coalition for Clean and Credible Elections (C3E)
No. 65 Antoinette Street, Parkway Village ANGARAABELLO CONCEPCION REGALAAND
Apolonio Samson, Quezon City CRUZ LAW OFFICE (x)
Counsel for Respondent SMMT-TIM 2016, Inc.
ATTYS. RODOLFO 0. REYES and 22"' Floor, ACCRALAW Tower, 2°' Avenue
FRANCISCO S. BULSECO IV (x) cor. 30fu Street, Crescent Park West
Gordon Reyes Buted Viado & Blanco Law Offices Bonifacio Global City, Taguig
Counsel for Petitioner-In-Intervention 1635 Metro Manila
6/F W Global Center
30th Street corner 9fu Avenue BELGICAARANAO ALIM DELA CRUZ AND
High Street, Bonifacio Global City ASSOCIATES (x)
Taguig City 1634 Counsel for lntervenors Gonzales, Macatangay
and Magdamo
JUDICIAL RECORDS OFFICE (x) Suite 210, DMG Center Building, D.M. Guevara corner
JYJ)GMENT DIVISION (x) Calbayog Extn. Sts., Madaluyong City
,PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE (x)
LIBRARY SERVICES (x) BERNARD C. ROQUE, et al., (x)
[For uploading pursuant to A.M. No. 12-7-1-SC] Respondent-lntervenors
Faith Baptist Church
No. 4, West Avenue, WestTriangle
1104 Quezon City

G.R. No. 237916 AES WATCH,

Sarah 080922 (URes5) 102022 ANG NARS, INC,
BUKLOD PAMILYA,
CAPITOL CHRISTIAN LEADERSHIP,
CITIZENS' CRIME WATCH,
CONNECTING BUSINESSMEN IN THE
MARKETPLACE TO CHRIST,
LATTER RAIN HARVEST MINISTRIES,
ONE VOTE OUR HOPE, INC and
UPPER ROOM BRETHREN CHURCH (x)
Respondent-lntervenors
Faith Baptist Church
No. 4, West Avenue, West Triangle
1104 Quezon City