SISON v.

COMELEC
G.R. No. 134096 | March 3, 1999 on the true nature of a pleading), what conjointly determine
Digest by: Shekinah Mae Fortuna the nature of a pleading are the allegations therein made in
good faith, the stage of the proceeding at which it is filed,
FACTS: and the primary objective of the party filing the same.
Sison was a candidate for Vice-Mayor of QC during the 1998
elections. In Matalam v COMELEC, the Court has already ruled that a
pre-proclamation controversy is not the same as an action
During the canvassing and prior to proclamation of the for annulment of election results or declaration of failure of
winning candidates, Sison filed a petition with the COMELEC elections, founded as they are on different grounds.
to suspend the canvassing and declare a FOE on the ground
of massive fraud. Declaration of FOE or pre-proc, Sison’s petition must
fail; proper remedy: election protest
Sison’s specific allegations were concerned mostly with The Court examined Sison’s petition with the COMELEC but
irregularities with the election returns and ballot boxes: found nothing therein that could support an action for
- ERs with no inner seals, missing, or tampered declaration of failure of elections. Sison never alleged at all
- BOI brought ERs home that elections were either not held or suspended.
- Suspicious people bringing in ERs Furthermore, petitioner’s claim of failure to elect stood as a
- Dubious custody of the ballot boxes bare conclusion bereft of any substantive support to describe
- In Barangay. New Era, no voting took place but just exactly how the failure to elect came about.
instead manufactured
With respect to pre-proclamation controversy, it is well to
The COMELEC dismissed his petition as a pre-proclamation note that the scope of pre-proclamation controversy is only
case (grounds recited not among pre-proc issues in Sec 17 limited to the issues enumerated under Section 243 of the
of RA 7166). Meanwhile, the winning candidates were Omnibus Election Code, and the enumeration therein is
proclaimed. restrictive and exclusive. The reason underlying the
delimitation both of substantive ground and procedure is the
Sison filed a petition for ceriorari with the SC, claiming that policy of the election law that pre-proclamation controversies
the COMELEC committed GAOD in dismissing his petition should be summarily decided, consistent with the law’s
as a pre- proc case when it was a petition to declare FOE. desire that the canvass and proclamation be delayed as little
Also, he claims that he was not given the right to a hearing as possible. That is why such questions which require more
and to present evidence. deliberate and necessarily longer consideration, are left for
examination in the corresponding election protest.
Note: OR 3049 automatically terminated certain cases within
the COMELEC. Section 16 terminated pre-proclamation In situations where the winning candidates were already
controversies where the term of office has already begun. proclaimed, the proper remedy then would be a regular
Sison claims that as his petition was one for failure of election protest or a petition for quo warranto.
elections, his case should not be terminated under the
exception in par4. The exception in Omnibus Resolution 3049 does not
apply to Sison’s petition
Petitioner’s contention: Alleging that COMELEC Section 16 of the aforecited omnibus resolution refers to the
overstepped the limits of reasonable exercise of discretion in termination of pre-proclamation cases when the term of the
dismissing SPC No. 98-134, petitioner argues in the main office involved has already begun, which is precisely what
that the electoral body failed to afford him basic due process, obtains here. However, Sison claims his petition is one of
that is, the right to a hearing and presentation of evidence those cases which should have remained active pursuant to
before ruling on his petition. He then proceeded to argue that paragraph 4 thereof. That exception, however, operates only
the election returns themselves, as well as the minutes of the when what is involved is not a pre-proclamation controversy
canvassing committee of the City Board of Canvassers were, such as petitions for disqualification, failure of elections or
by themselves, sufficient evidence to support the petition. analogous cases. But as earlier declared, his petition, though
assuming to seek a declaration of failure of elections, is
Respondent’s contention: On June 22, 1998, the actually a case of preproclamation controversy and, hence,
COMELEC promulgated its challenged resolution dismissing not falling within the ambit of the exception.
the petition before it on the ground (1) that the allegations
therein were not supported by sufficient evidence, and (2) Sison’s right to due process not violated when he was
the grounds recited were not among the pre-proclamation not given the chance to present evidence
issues set fourth in Section 17 of Republic Act No. 7166.5 Sison invokes Section 242 of the OEC. The phrase “after
[Entitled "AN ACT PROVIDING FOR SYNCHRONIZED due notice” refers only to a situation where the COMELEC
NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS AND FOR decides and, in fact, takes steps to either partially or totally
ELECTORAL REFORMS, AUTHORIZING suspend or annul the proclamation of any candidate-elect.
APPROPRIATIONS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES," Approved: November 26, 1991.] Second, presentation of evidence before the COMELEC is
not at all indispensable in order to satisfy the demands of
due process. Under the amendment introduced by R.A. No.
ISSUES: 7166, particularly Section 18 thereof, all that is required now
is that the COMELEC shall dispose of pre-proclamation
1. WON a declaration of FOE is proper. NO controversies “on the basis of the records and evidence
2. What is the nature of Sison’s petition? Pre-proclamation elevated to it by the board of canvassers.”

RULING: This is but in keeping with the policy of the law that cases of
A pre-proclamation controversy may not be considered this nature should be summarily decided and the will of the
as a petition for declaration of FOE electorate as reflected on the election returns be determined
At the start, Sison’s petition was anchored on the OEC as speedily as possible. What exactly those records and
provision regarding FOE, but later built it up as a pre- evidence are upon which the COMELEC based its resolution
proclamatin controversy. In this situation (where there doubt and how they have been appreciated in respect of their
sufficiency, are beyond this Court’s scrutiny. But we have
reason to believe, owing to the presumption of regularity of
performance of official duty and the precept that factual
findings of the COMELEC based on its assessments and
duly supported by gathered evidence, are conclusive upon
the court, that the COMELEC did arrive at its conclusion with
due regard to the available evidence before it.