PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL

[P.E.T. Case No. 003 . January 18, 2008.]

LOREN B. LEGARDA, protestant, vs. NOLI L. DE CASTRO,

protestee.

RESOLUTION

QUISUMBING, J : p

On June 23, 2004, Congress sitting as the National Board of Canvassers

(NBC) proclaimed 1 protestee Noli L. de Castro the duly elected Vice-
President of the Republic of the Philippines. The official count of the votes
cast for Vice-President in the May 10, 2004 elections showed that the
protestee obtained the highest number of votes, garnering 15,100,431 votes
as against the 14,218,709 votes garnered by the protestant Loren B.
Legarda, who placed second, in a field consisting of four candidates for Vice-
President.
On July 23, 2004, the protestant filed this protest with this Tribunal
praying for the annulment of the protestee's proclamation as the duly
elected Vice-President of the Republic of the Philippines. 2
The protest has two main parts. The First Aspect originally covered "all
the erroneous, if not manipulated, and falsified results as reflected in the
final canvass documents" for 9,007 precincts in six provinces, one city and
five municipalities. 3 Protestant avers that the correct results appearing in
the election returns were not properly transferred and reflected in the
subsequent election documents and ultimately, in the final canvass of
documents used as basis for protestee's proclamation. Protestant seeks the
recomputation, recanvass and retabulation of the election returns to
determine the true result.
T h e Second Aspect required revision of ballots in 124,404 precincts
specified in the protest. 4
The Tribunal confirmed its jurisdiction over the protest and denied the
motion of protestee for its outright dismissal. Protestee filed a motion for
reconsideration arguing in the main that the Tribunal erred in ruling that the
protest alleged a cause of action sufficient to contest protestee's victory in
the May 2004 elections. 5
On March 31, 2005, the Tribunal ruled that:
On the matter of sufficiency of the protest, protestee failed to
adduce new substantial arguments to reverse our ruling. We hold
that while Peña v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal on
requisites of sufficiency of election protest is still good law, it is
inapplicable in this case. We dismissed the petition in Peña because
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 it failed to specify the contested precincts . In the instant protest,
protestant enumerated all the provinces, municipalities and cities
where she questions all the results in all the precincts therein .
The protest here is sufficient in form and substantively, serious
enough on its face to pose a challenge to protestee's title to his
office. In our view, the instant protest consists of alleged ultimate
facts, not mere conclusions of law, that need to be proven in due
time.
Considering that we find the protest sufficient in form and
substance, we must again stress that nothing as yet has been
proved as to the veracity of the allegations. The protest is only
sufficient for the Tribunal to proceed and give the protestant the
opportunity to prove her case pursuant to Rule 61 of the PET Rules.
Although said rule only pertains to revision of ballots, nothing herein
prevents the Tribunal from allowing or including the correction of
manifest errors, pursuant to the Tribunal's rule-making power under
Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution.
On a related matter, the protestant in her reiterating motion
prays for ocular inspection and inventory-taking of ballot boxes, and
appointment of watchers. However, the Tribunal has already ordered
the protection and safeguarding of the subject ballot boxes; and it has
issued also the appropriate directives to officials concerned. At this
point, we find no showing of an imperative need for the relief prayed
for, since protective and safeguard measures are already being
undertaken by the custodians of the subject ballot boxes.
WHEREFORE, protestee's motion for reconsideration is
hereby DENIED WITH FINALITY for lack of merit. Protestant's
reiterating motion for ocular inspection and inventory-taking with
very urgent prayer for the appointment of watchers is also DENIED
for lack of showing as to its actual necessity.
Further, the protestant LOREN B. LEGARDA is ORDERED to
specify, within ten (10) days from notice, the three (3) provinces best
exemplifying the manifest errors alleged in the first part of her
protest, and three (3) provinces best exemplifying the frauds and
irregularities alleged in the second part of her protest, for the purpose
herein elucidated.
Lastly, the Tribunal hereby ORDERS the Commission on
Elections to SUBMIT, within 30 days hereof, the official project of
precincts of the May 2004 Elections.
SO ORDERED. 6

On April 11, 2005, protestant identified three (3) provinces as pilot

areas best exemplifying her grounds for the First Aspect of the protest. She
chose the provinces of Lanao del Sur, Lanao del Norte, and Surigao del Sur
with the following number of protested precincts: 1,607, 2,346 and 350,
respectively, or a total of 4,303 out of the original 9,007 precincts. 7
On June 21, 2005, the Tribunal ascertained 8 the number of ballot
boxes subject of the protest, to wit:
The Tribunal Resolved to NOTE the Letter dated 30 May 2005
filed by Executive Director Pio Jose S. Joson, COMELEC, in compliance
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 with the Letter dated 14 April 2005 of Atty. Luzviminda D. Puno,
Acting Clerk of the Tribunal, informing the Tribunal that one thousand
four hundred fifty-four (1,454) ballot boxes are involved in the
precincts of the province of Surigao del Sur which the protestant has
identified to the Tribunal as best exemplifying the irregularities in
connection with the 10 May 2004 National and Local Elections.
Accordingly, without prejudice to its recomputation, the number
of ballot boxes involved in the precincts of the provinces which the
protestant has identified to the Tribunal as best exemplifying the
irregularities in connection with the said elections are as follows:
Lanao del Sur - 1,568
Lanao del Norte - 2,317
Surigao del Sur - 1,454
Cebu City - 10,127
Pampanga - 5,458
Maguindanao - 1,755
=====
Total - 22,679 ballot boxes
involved in
the
precincts
x P500.00
P11,339,500.00

On November 2, 2005 protestant moved to withdraw and abandon

almost all pilot precincts in the First Aspect except those in the province of
Lanao del Sur. 9 On November 22, 2005, the Tribunal granted the said
motion withdrawing and abandoning the protest involving the manifest
errors in the municipalities of Lanao del Norte and Surigao del Sur. 10
Thereafter, proceedings duly ensued concerning both the First and
Second Aspects. Former Associate Justice Bernardo P. Pardo as Hearing
Commissioner 11 heard the presentation of evidence of both parties for the
First Aspect. Subpoenas were issued to the witnesses of the protestant,e.g.
the President/General Manager of Ernest Printing Corporation 12 and then
Commission on Elections Chairman Benjamin Abalos. 13 On August 28, 2006,
a preliminary conference was called by Hearing Commissioner Bernardo P.
Pardo to schedule the presentation of evidence. The latter then ordered as
follows:
Pursuant to the Resolution of the Tribunal dated 22 August
2006, setting the preliminary conference of the parties with the
Hearing Commissioner today, the designated Hearing Commissioner
called the preliminary conference in order to consider the order of
hearing and presentation of evidence of the parties according to the
procedure prescribed in the Resolution of the Tribunal of 1 August
2006, under paragraph B (1 and 2).
The following are the appearances:
1) Protestant Loren B. Legarda, in person;

2) Atty. Sixto S. Brillantes, Jr. and Atty. Jesus P. Casila, for the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 protestant;
3) Protestee Noli L. de Castro did not appear;

4) Atty. Armando M. Marcelo and Atty. Carlo Vistan, for the

protestee.

Atty. Brillantes manifested that the protestant is ready to

adduce testimonial and documentary evidence on a date to be
scheduled and agreed upon by the parties; they have about seven
witnesses to testify on the first aspect as indicated in the Tribunal's
Resolution of 1 August 2006. He suggested 6 September 2006 as the
initial date of the hearing. Atty. Marcelo stated that he was leaving for
abroad on 6 September 2006 for one month and suggested a hearing
after his return in October 2006. At any rate, protestee has a pending
motion for reconsideration of the Tribunal's Resolution of 22 August
2006 designating a retired Justice of the Supreme Court as Hearing
Commissioner. They wanted an incumbent Justice of the Supreme
Court or an official of the Tribunal who is a member of the Bar to be
the designated Hearing Commissioner.
The undersigned Hearing Commissioner suggested that the
initial hearing be held on 4 September 2006, at 10:00 a.m., when
protestee's counsel will still be in town, without prejudice to the
resolution of the Tribunal on his motion for reconsideration.
The undersigned Hearing Commissioner suggested to
protestant's counsel to submit by this afternoon the list of the names
of the proposed witnesses and documents to be produced so that the
proper process may be issued to them.
The undersigned Hearing Commissioner set the initial hearing
tentatively on Monday, 4 September 2006, at 10:00 a.m., at the same
venue, subject to the Tribunal's ruling on protestee's motion for
reconsideration of the person of the Hearing Commissioner, and
protestant to submit by this afternoon the list of witnesses and
documents to be produced at the hearing.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 14

Several hearings on the First Aspect were held wherein the protestant
adduced evidence and the protestee interposed his continuing objection to
such in the form of motions and comments. Months of continuous trial took
place until the Hearing Commissioner made his final report of the
proceedings for detailed consideration by the Tribunal.
On January 31, 2006, while the case was sub judice, the Tribunal
ordered both parties to refrain from sensationalizing the case in the media.
Its extended resolution on the matter reads as follows:
On December 12, 2005, the re-tabulation of election returns
(ERs) from the ten (10) protested municipalities of Lanao del Sur
commenced. According to the report submitted by the Acting Clerk of
the Tribunal, Atty. Maria Luisa D. Villarama, the correction team was
able to re-tabulate only the ERs from four (4) of the ten (10) protested
municipalities of Lanao del Sur, namely, Balindong, Masiu, Mulondo
and Taraka. The ERs of the other six (6) protested municipalities were
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 not found inside the ballot boxes collected from the House of
Representatives, but found were the ERs from municipalities not
subject of the protest.
Therefore, acting on the aforementioned report of the Acting
Clerk, the Tribunal resolves to REQUIRE Hon. Roberto Nazareno,
Secretary General of the House of Representatives and Atty. Artemio
Adasa, Jr., Deputy Secretary General for Operation, of the House of
Representatives, within a non-extendible period of five (5) days from
notice, to
(a) DELIVER to the Tribunal the election returns and other
election documents/paraphernalia used in the May 2004
National/Local elections for the remaining six (6) protested
municipalities of Lanao del Sur, namely (1) Bacolod-Kalawi;
(2) Ganassi; (3) Kapai; (4) Sultan Gumander; (5) Tamparan;
and (6) Wao;

(b) EXPLAIN why the election returns and other election

documents and paraphernalia which were turned over to
the PET Retrieval Team are incomplete when compared to
the COMELEC's total number of clustered precincts for
Lanao del Sur; and
(c) SUBMIT to the Tribunal the complete list of all the
election returns, Provincial/District Certificates of Canvass
and Statements of Votes and other election documents and
paraphernalia used in the May 2004 National and Local
Elections for the province of Lanao del Sur which were in its
official custody.

In the resolution dated December 6, 2005, the Tribunal granted

protestant's motion to suspend the remittance of additional cash
deposit amounting to P3,882,000 as required in the resolution of
November 22, 2005. Protestant also manifested in said motion that
she will make the required cash deposit sometime in the year 2006.
Thus, the Tribunal resolves to REQUIRE protestant to comply with
the resolution of November 22, 2005 requiring her to make additional
cash deposit of P3,882,000 within ten (10) days.
On another matter, the Presidential Electoral Tribunal notes the
following news reports:

(1) In an article entitled "Recount shows fraud, says Legarda"

appearing in the December 13, 2005 issue of The Manila
Times, protestant Legarda said that the election returns
from Congress had been tampered after initial retabulation
of votes by the Tribunal showed that the lead of protestee
de Castro over her has widened. She added that this
discovery confirmed her claim of massive poll fraud in
favor of protestee in the 2004 election.
(2) In an article entitled "Intel feelers offer proof of poll fraud
to Loren" published in the December 13, 2005 issue of The
Daily Tribune, sources from protestant's legal team said
that feelers from the military's intelligence service arm
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 have reached their camp offering videotapes of cheating in
the 2004 elections for a price they cannot afford.
(3) In another article entitled "Election returns altered inside
Congress — Loren" published in the December 15, 2005
issue of Philippine Daily Inquirer, protestant claimed that
the altering of election returns from Lanao del Sur occurred
right inside Congress as borne out by the "spurious"
returns being retabulated by the Tribunal. She said the
crime could have been perpetrated by the operatives of
protestee.

(4) In a news article entitled "Cebu recount shows Noli, Loren

votes tally with NBC" appearing in the January 6, 2006
issue of The Manila Times, Atty. Romulo Macalintal, counsel
of protestee, stated that "the initial recount in Lapu-lapu
showed that there was no tampering of the ballot boxes in
the city," and further noted that the four (4) out of the 40
ballot boxes "contained tampered or spurious ballots, but
these are not connected to the protest of Senator Legarda
but on local protests."
(5) In an article entitled "Noli condemns tampering of ballots"
appearing in the January 6, 2006 issue of Manila Standard
Today, Atty. Armando Marcelo said that their revisors at
the PET discovered that several ballots of Legarda had
been substituted with fake and spurious ballots. Atty.
Macalintal added that "the substitution of ballots was so
clear, that the security markings of the substitute ballots
were not reflected or visible or that the ultraviolet markings
of the COMELEC seal do not appear or are not present", and
that "these ultraviolet markings are readily visible in a
genuine ballot once lighted with an ultraviolet light."
(6) In an article entitled "No cheating in Cebu, Noli's lawyer
insists," published in the January 19, 2006 issue of
Philippine Daily Inquirer, Atty. Macalintal said that "the
results of the actual count of the ballots for Legarda and de
Castro from the cities of Mandaue and Lapu-lapu tallied
with the results as reflected in the election returns and tally
boards. There was no sign of any tampering of the results
of the ballot count as well as the votes reflected on the
returns and tally boards." He also said that protestant
Legarda is already estopped from questioning the results of
the election in these cities since she failed to object to the
returns.
(7) In an article entitled "GMA-Noli poll win in Cebu affirmed,"
published in the January 19, 2006 issue of The Philippine
Star, it was reported that Atty. Macalintal, in his speech
before the Rotary Club of Pasay City, denied protestant's
claim that 90 percent of the ballots from two major cities of
the province were found to be spurious by the Tribunal. He
added that "if a candidate would allow himself to be
cheated by 90 percent, then he or she has no business to
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 be in politics."

(8) In an article entitled "Why Noli is unacceptable" appearing

in the January 20, 2006 issue of The Daily Tribune,
protestant "told the media that the real ballots from
Mandaue City and Lapu-lapu City were 'clearly substituted
with fakes so that they would correspond with the similarly
spurious results reflected in the election returns (ERs).'"
Surely, the parties do not harbor the idea that the re-tabulation
of election returns and revision of ballots is the end of the election
protest. They are merely the first phase of the process and must still
pass closer scrutiny by the Tribunal.
The great public interest at stake behooves the Tribunal to
exercise its power and render judgment free from public pressure and
uninterrupted by the parties' penchant for media mileage. Therefore,
in view of the foregoing reports where press statements of both
parties appeared as an attempt to influence the proceedings,
convince the public of their version of facts, and create bias, prejudice
and sympathies, the Tribunal resolves to WARN both parties and
counsels from making public comments on all matters that are sub
judice.
Finally, acting on the pleadings filed in this electoral protest
case, the Tribunal further Resolves to
(a) NOTE the Comment on Protestee's Motion to Allow
Revisors to Examine All Ballots dated January 24, 2006,
filed by counsel for protestant Legarda, in compliance with
the resolution of January 17, 2006, informing the Tribunal
that she interposes no objection and opposition to the
motion and GRANT the aforesaid motion of the protestee;
(b) DIRECT all Head Revisors to ALLOW the parties to
examine the ballots within a reasonable time;
(c) NOTE the Manifestation dated January 24, 2006, filed by
counsel for protestant relative to the Motion to Intervene
filed by Intervenor/Movant Amytis D. Batao, informing the
Tribunal that she is not waiving the revision of the thirty-
five (35) ballot boxes subject of the electoral protest for the
mayoralty post of Carmen, Cebu, and proposing that
priority be given and extended to the same so that upon
completion of the revision by the Tribunal, said ballot
boxes can be returned to the Regional Trial Court of
Mandaue City, at the earliest time possible; and
(d) DENY the above Motion to Intervene of Intervenor/Movant
Amytis D. Batao, with regard to the return of the ballot
boxes considering that the Tribunal has priority in their
possession and examination." Ynares Santiago, J., no part.
15

Revision of ballots was also conducted for the Second Aspect in the
Tribunal's premises by the duly designated officials and trained personnel
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 with both parties duly represented. After ten months of continuous work by
twenty-four revision teams, under the supervision of Atty. Orlando Cariño as
the designated Consultant, the revision of the ballots from the pilot province
of Cebu was completed. Revision also started for the second pilot province of
Pampanga, but was suspended after the Tribunal granted the protestee's
Motion for Partial Determination of Election Protest Based on the Results of
the Revision of Ballots of the Province of Cebu and the Recanvass of Election
Returns from Lanao Del Sur and to Hold in Abeyance Revision of Ballots from
Pampanga. 16
On May 3, 2007, the protestant was required to deposit P3,914,500 for
expenses necessary for the continuation of the revision of ballots. 17 But
protestant failed to pay on the due date. Thus, protestee moved to dismiss
the protest. The Tribunal extended the period for protestant to make the
necessary deposit. Even with this extension, she still failed to pay. Thus, in a
Resolution dated June 5, 2007, the Tribunal partially granted the protestee's
motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 33 18 of PET rules, and ordered the
dismissal of the Second Aspect of the protest as follows:
PET Case No. 003 ( Loren B. Legarda vs. Noli L. de Castro). —
Acting on the protestee's Motion to Dismiss dated May 9, 2007, the
Tribunal Resolved to
(a) PARTIALLY GRANT the aforesaid motion pursuant to
Rule 33 of the 2005 PET Rules; and
(b) DISMISS the second aspect of the protest (revision of
ballots), for protestant's failure to make the required
deposit.

The Tribunal further Resolved to DENY the request of Atty. Eric

C. Reginaldo in his letter dated May 29, 2007 that he be furnished
with a copy of the petition in this case for case study, as he is neither
a party nor a counsel of any party in this protest. 19
On June 13, 2007, Hearing Commissioner Bernardo P. Pardo submitted
to the Tribunal a Report of the Proceedings of the First Aspect. 20
On June 18 2007, protestant filed an Urgent Motion to Resolve First
Aspect of the Protest, stating that she formally moved for the immediate
resolution of the submitted portion of the First Aspect of the protest. 21
Protestee did not interpose any objection to this motion.
On July 10, 2007, the Tribunal resolved to note the report of the
Hearing Commissioner. In response to the motion filed by the protestant, the
Tribunal required the parties to submit their respective memoranda within
twenty days from notice, pursuant to Rule 61 22 of the PET Rules. 23
On August 2, 2007, by counsel protestant submitted her
memorandum. 24 On August 16, 2007, also by counsel protestee filed his
memorandum. 25
On October 1, 2007, Hearing Commissioner Bernardo P. Pardo
submitted his Final Report of the Proceedings on the First Aspect. After a
thorough analysis of the parties' memoranda and the results of the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 proceedings on the protest, he recommended the dismissal of the First
Aspect. 26
For her part, protestant filed a memorandum stating that based on the
pieces of evidence she presented, both documentary and testimonial, she
has shown that electoral fraud or cheating was committed through the so-
called dagdag-bawas strategy in the elections for President and Vice-
President held last May 14, 2004. Protestant in particular submitted that
electoral fraud was perpetuated as follows:
1. That the correct votes of the parties were properly recorded
and tabulated in the election returns (ERs), wherein she
garnered a higher number of votes over protestee de Castro;
27

2. That when the ERs were canvassed at the municipal level,

the ER results were "wrongly and erroneously" transposed
and transferred to the Statement of Votes by Precinct (SOV-
P), such that the protestee was given a higher number of
votes; 28
3. That the inaccurate results shown in the SOV-P were totaled
and transferred to the Municipal Certificate of Canvass
(MCOC), with protestee prevailing over protestant; 29
4. That the MCOC, with incorrect totals, was transmitted to the
Provincial Board of Canvassers, wherein the inaccurate MCOC
totals were transposed to the Statement of Votes by
Municipalities (SOV-M); 30

5. That the numbers reflected in the individual SOV-Ms were

totaled, and the sum for the whole province was indicated in
the Provincial Certificate of Canvass (PCOC); 31

6. That the PCOCs, with the erroneously transposed totals

stemming from the incorrect SOV-Ps, were the ones
canvassed by Congress, acting as the National Board of
Canvassers for the presidential and vice-presidential
positions; 32 and
7. That Congress, sitting as the National Board of Canvassers,
merely "noted" and denied protestant's request to view the
precinct-source ERs, and proceeded to canvass the "already-
manipulated/dagdag-bawas" PCOCs, resulting in the flawed
and farcical victory of protestee de Castro. 33

Protestant avers that fraud, by means of the anomalous election

practices, was sufficiently proven by using her sample-pilot precincts in two
municipalities in Lanao del Sur, particularly Balindong and Taraka. She
likewise alleges that the " dagdag-bawas" scheme, which was perpetrated
through the deliberate and erroneous transposition of results from the
authentic ERs to the SOV-Ps, was further aggravated by an alleged cover-up
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 operation to hide the same. According to protestant, the Congress-retrieved
copies of the ERs which tally with the SOV-Ps, were fake and spurious; they
were intended to cover-up the electoral fraud committed. Protestant submits
that the correct voting results are those reflected in the COMELEC and
NAMFREL's copies of the ERs, not those in the copies retrieved from
Congress.
Protestant further claims that while she presented pieces of evidence,
both testimonial and documentary, in only two municipalities of Lanao del
Sur, i.e., Balindong and Taraka, to prove the electoral fraud perpetrated
through the dagdag-bawas strategy, she could have shown that such
fraudulent machination was replicated in several other municipalities of
Lanao del Sur and other provinces, such as Basilan, Sulu, Tawi-Tawi,
Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat, and Lanao del Sur if she had enough time.
Protestee, for his part, argues that the Congress-retrieved ERs are
public documents as defined under Section 19 (a), 34 Rule 132 of the Rules
of Court, and thus, they enjoy the presumption of regularity accorded
thereto, and they are prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein. He
avers that there is prima facie presumption that the Congress-retrieved
copies of the ERs are genuine, authentic and duly executed. Protestee
submits that protestant has failed to rebut such presumption with clear and
convincing evidence.
Protestee adds that a blank or unused ER form duly authenticated by
the COMELEC, with the correct and complete set of security features and
markings, should have been marked and offered as evidence, to serve as
basis for comparison with the various sets of ERs presented to prove the
genuiness * of the security features and markings in the ER forms. On this
score, according to protestee, the protestant's counsel has failed in his task.
At any rate, protestee points out that the witnesses presented by protestant,
i.e., COMELEC Chairman Benjamin S. Abalos and Mr. Robert Payongayong of
the Ernest Printing Corporation, testified that they were able to discern
security features and markings in the Congress-retrieved copies of the ERs.
Protestee also claims that when Mr. Payongayong testified about the security
features on the Congress' copies, he was shown only a sample set thereof,
and was not able to examine all Congress' copies being contested. Protestee
thus concludes that the Tribunal cannot rely on the testimonies of the
protestant's witnesses debunking the authenticity of the Congress-retrieved
copies vis-Ã -vis the other sets of ER copies.
Protestee further contends that, assuming arguendo that the results
reflected in the COMELEC, NAMFREL and MBOC's 35 copies of the ERs are re-
tabulated, in lieu of the results in the Congress-retrieved copies, or even if all
the votes in the 497 precincts included in the pilot areas, as well as in the
remaining protested precincts in the First Aspect, are counted in favor of
protestant, said votes would be insufficient to overcome the lead of the
protestee totaling 881,722 votes. Hence, in view of the failure of the
protestant to make out her case for the First Aspect of the protest, the same
and ultimately the protest in its entirety, must be dismissed without
consideration of the other provinces mentioned.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 The Hearing Commissioner further recommended, following the
precedent set in Defensor-Santiago v. Ramos 36 that the protest be
dismissed for being moot and academic due to abandonment and withdrawal
resulting from protestant's election and assumption of office as senator. He
also emphasized that assuming that dagdag-bawas had indeed occurred and
that the results in the COMELEC's ER copies indicated in Annex "A" were to
be used for re-tabulation, protestant would be entitled to an additional 4,912
votes for the municipality of Taraka and 5,019 votes for Balindong, or a total
of 9,931 votes, which is not adequate to surpass protestee's lead of 881,722
votes over protestant.
On protestant's charges of electoral fraud allegedly aggravated by a
cover-up operation that switched or exchanged the Congress' ER copies with
spurious ones, the Hearing Commissioner stressed that the Congress-
retrieved ERs are public documents which enjoy the presumption of
regularity and are prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein. He
concluded that the protestant failed to adequately and convincingly rebut
the presumption. The Hearing Commissioner also emphasized that
protestant failed to substantiate sufficiently her claim that the Congress-
retrieved ERs are spurious and were switched with the authentic copies
during an alleged break-in at the storage area of the House of
Representatives as no evidence was presented to prove such break-in.
Hence, the alleged discrepancies found in NAMFREL, MBOC and COMELEC's
copies of the ERs are insufficient to exclude the Congress-retrieved ER
copies from the re-tabulation. The Hearing Commissioner also observed that
in 11 out of the 51 precincts in Balindong, Lanao del Sur, there are similar
entries in the Congress-retrieved ERs and in the COMELEC's copies of the
ERs, where protestant garnered a higher number of votes over protestee,
while the entries in the respective SOV-Ms are different in that the protestee
received more votes, belying protestant's assertion that the Congress-
retrieved ERs should all be disregarded since the results therein differ from
those in the COMELEC's copies of ERs and that they have been manipulated
to favor protestee. Consequently, according to the Hearing Commissioner's
report, protestant failed to make out her case.
Thus, the Hearing Commissioner recommended that the protestant's
Motion to Resolve the First Aspect of the Protest under consideration should
be denied, and consequently, the protest itself, be dismissed for lack of legal
and factual basis, as the pilot-tested revision of ballots or re-tabulation of the
certificates of canvass would not affect the winning margin of the protestee
in the final canvass of the returns, in addition to the ground of abandonment
or withdrawal by reason of her candidacy for, election and assumption of
office as Senator of the Philippines. 37
After thorough deliberation and consideration of the issues in this case,
this Tribunal finds the abovestated recommendations of its Hearing
Commissioner well-taken, and adopts them for its own.
Further, we are also in agreement that the protestant, in assuming the
office of Senator and discharging her duties as such, which fact we can take
judicial notice of, 38 has effectively abandoned or withdrawn her protest, or
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 abandoned her determination to protect and pursue the public interest
involved in the matter of who is the real choice of the electorate. The most
relevant precedent on this issue is Defensor-Santiago v. Ramos, 39 a decision
rendered by this Tribunal, which held that:
The term of office of the Senators elected in the 8 May 1995
election is six years, the first three of which coincides with the last
three years of the term of the President elected in the 11 May 1992
synchronized elections. The latter would be Protestant Santiago's
term if she would succeed in proving in the instant protest that she
was the true winner in the 1992 elections. In assuming the office of
Senator then, the Protestant has effectively abandoned or withdrawn
this protest, or at the very least, in the language of Moraleja,
abandoned her "determination to protect and pursue the public
interest involved in the matter of who is the real choice of the
electorate." Such abandonment or withdrawal operates to render
moot the instant protest. Moreover, the dismissal of this protest would
serve public interest as it would dissipate the aura of uncertainty as
to the results of the 1992 presidential election, thereby enhancing the
all-[too] crucial political stability of the nation during this period of
national recovery.
It must also be stressed that under the Rules of the Presidential
Electoral Tribunal, an election protest may be summarily dismissed,
regardless of the public policy and public interest implications
thereof, on the following grounds:
(1) The petition is insufficient in form and substance;
(2) The petition is filed beyond the periods provided in
Rules 14 and 15 hereof;
(3) The filing fee is not paid within the periods provided for
in these Rules;
(4) The cash deposit, or the first P100,000.00 thereof, is not
paid within 10 days after the filing of the protest; and
(5) The petition or copies thereof and the annexes thereto
filed with the Tribunal are not clearly legible.
Other grounds for a motion to dismiss, e.g., those provided in
the Rules of Court which apply in a suppletory character, may
likewise be pleaded as affirmative defenses in the answer. After
which, the Tribunal may, in its discretion, hold a preliminary hearing
on such grounds. In sum, if an election protest may be dismissed on
technical grounds, then it must be, for a decidedly stronger reason, if
it has become moot due to its abandonment by the Protestant. 40
In the case at bar, protestant's tenure in the Senate coincides with the
term of the Vice-Presidency 2004-2010, that is the subject of her protest. In
Defensor-Santiago v. Ramos , the protestant's tenure in the Senate also
coincided with the term of the Presidency she was vying for. Like the
protestant in the aforementioned case, the protestant in the case at bar filed
her certificate of candidacy for the Senate, campaigned for the office,
assumed office after election, and discharged the duties and functions of
said office. Thus, we agree concerning the applicability of the Defensor-
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 Santiago case as a precedent in the resolution of the present protest, though
they differ in that Defensor-Santiago's case involves the Presidency while
Legarda's protest concerns only the Vice-Presidency.
On the matter of the alleged spurious ER copies, we agree with the
protestee that the protestant had not adequately and convincingly rebutted
the presumption that as public documents, the Congress-retrieved ER
copies, used for the proclamation of the protestee by the NBC, are authentic
and duly executed in the regular course of official business. The evidence
adduced by protestee to show that the supposed security features and
markings in the Congress-retrieved ERs and the COMELEC/NAMFREL's copies
are different, did not categorically establish that the Congress-retrieved ERs
are fake and spurious. To overcome the presumption of regularity, there
must be evidence that is clear, convincing and more than merely
preponderant. Absent such convincing evidence, the presumption must be
upheld. 41 In fact, the records show that even the witnesses presented by
the protestant testified that they were able to discern security features and
markings in the Congress-retrieved ERs. The records also show that
witnesses were not made to examine all Congress-retrieved ERs in making
observations relative to security features and markings, but only a sample
set thereof was utilized, resulting in grave insufficiency in the evidence
presented by protestant.
As to the alleged break-in in Congress, which allegedly facilitated the
switching of ERs, no conclusive evidence has been given. One of the
protestant's own witnesses, Atty. Artemio Adasa, Deputy General for
Legislative Operations of the House of Representatives, categorically denied
that a break-in and a switching of ERs had occurred in Congress. 42
At any rate, as pointed out by protestee, even assuming arguendo that
all the votes in the 497 precincts included in the pilot areas for the First
Aspect with approximately 99,400 votes are considered in favor of
protestant, still the protestant would not be able to overcome the lead of the
protestee. The margin in favor of protestee adds up to a total of 881,722
votes, and it would take much more than a hundred thousand votes to
overcome this lead. This is what the protestant had set out to do in her
protest before the Tribunal, but unfortunately she failed to make out her
case. 43 In fact, Taraka and Balindong, the only two municipalities on which
protestant anchors her arguments for the First Aspect, would only yield an
additional 9,931 votes (4,912 votes for Taraka and 5,019 votes for
Balindong), a mere fraction of the lead of protestee over protestant. To say
that she could have shown that such fraudulent machination was replicated
in several other municipalities of Lanao del Sur and other provinces, such as
Basilan, Sulu, Tawi-Tawi, Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat and Lanao del Sur if
she had enough time, is mere conjecture and can not be considered
convincing by this Tribunal. It is the protestant herself who admits that she
was able to adduce evidence only in Taraka and Balindong, for lack of time.
But this Tribunal has been liberal in granting her plea for time extension. To
say that the protestant had shown enough evidence to prove that the whole
or even half (440,862) 44 of the lead of the protestee over the protestant is
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 spurious, would go against the grain of the evidence on hand. One cannot
say that half a million votes were illegally obtained based on unclear
evidence of cheating in less than ten thousand. The protestant has been
afforded ample opportunity to adduce evidence in her behalf for the First
Aspect of the protest but the evidence presented is simply insufficient to
convince the Tribunal to render invalid all or even half of the 881,722 votes
that protestee had over her in the last elections for Vice-President.
WHEREFORE, the First Aspect of the protest is hereby DISMISSED for
lack of legal and factual basis, as the pilot-tested revision of ballots or re-
tabulation of the certificates of canvass would not affect the winning margin
of the protestee in the final canvass of the returns, in addition to the ground
of abandonment or withdrawal by reason of protestant's candidacy for,
election to and assumption of the office of Senator of the Philippines. The
Second Aspect, having been already DISMISSED on June 5, 2007, pursuant to
Rule 33 of this Tribunal, the entire Protest is now deemed DISMISSED and
TERMINATED.
SO ORDERED.
Puno, C.J., Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-
Martinez, Corona, Carpio-Morales, Azcuna, Tinga, Nachura, Reyes and
Leonardo-de Castro, JJ., concur.
Chico-Nazario and Velasco, Jr., are on leave.

Footnote
1. PET rollo, Vol. I, pp. 39-41.

2. Id. at 3-36.
3. Id. at 9-11.

4. Id. at 11-13.

5. Id. at 511.
6. Id. at 514-516.

7. Id. at 10; 527.

8. Id. at 660.
9. PET rollo, Vol. II, pp. 1007-1010.

10. Id. at 1059-1061.

11. Id. at 1753, August 1, 2006 PET Resolution.

xxx xxx xxx

A. Hearing Commissioner —
1. Designation. — The Tribunal may delegate the reception of evidence to a
Hearing Commissioner who may be a Member of the Tribunal or an official of
the Tribunal who is a member of the Philippine Bar or a retired Justice of the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 Supreme Court who is willing to accept the designation.

xxx xxx xxx

12. PET rollo, Vol. III, pp. 2135-2140.

SUBPOENAE AD TESTIFICANDUM ET DUCES TECUM

TO: The President/General Manager

Ernest Printing Corporation
29 M.H. Del Pilar Street
Between 3rd and 4th Avenues, Grace Park
Caloocan City

GREETINGS:
You are hereby commanded:

(1) to appear in person before the Presidential Electoral Tribunal and its duly
designated Hearing Commissioner Ret. Justice Bernardo P. Pardo, during the
scheduled hearing/proceedings of the above-entitled case on November 3,
2006, Friday, at ten o'clock in the morning at the Division Session Hall,
Ground Floor, New SC Building and then and there to testify under oath on
the following matters and/or subjects —

The DETAILS on the aspect and on the matter of the PRINTING of the
Comelec-contracted and ordered copies of the ELECTION RETURNS and other
election documents, if any, as prepared and printed by the Ernest Printing
Corporation, which printed documents were used in the May 10, 2004
elections, and in particular, on matters respecting the placing and/or
incorporating in the said election documents, of some or several secret
marks or any other security feature/s, if any including some other details
material and relevant to and/or related to or connected with the AUTHORITY
of Ernest Printing Corporation to undertake such actual printing of the said
election returns and other election documents."
(2) to bring with you the following —

"Any and all documents such as CONTRACTS, AGREEMENTS and/or AWARDS

between Ernest Printing Corp. and COMELEC that would show and prove the
scope of the AUTHORITY of Ernest Printing Corporation to undertake the
PRINTING of the election returns and other election documents, as extended
or granted unto it by the Commission on Elections; as well as any and all
other documents on any pertinent matter/s and subject/s relative to and/or
connected with, the contracted or awarded PRINTING of election returns and
other election documents to the said Ernest Printing Corporation."

FAIL NOT UNDER PENALTY OF LAW.

WITNESS the Honorable Bernardo P. Pardo, Ret. Associate Justice, this 25th
day of October 2006.

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Clerk of the Tribunal

13. PET rollo, Vol. II, pp. 1842-1847.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

 SUBPOENAE AD TESTIFICANDUM ET DUCES TECUM
TO: Chairman Benjamin Abalos
Commission on Elections
Main Office, Aduana
Intramuros, Manila

GREETINGS:
You are hereby commanded:

(1) to appear in person before the Presidential Electoral Tribunal and its
designated Honorable Hearing Commissioner Ret. Justice Bernardo P. Pardo,
during the scheduled hearing/proceedings of the above-entitled case at 2:00
o'clock in the afternoon of Monday, September 18, 2006, Division Session
Hall, Ground Floor, New SC Building and then and there to testify on the
originals of the COMELEC copies of the various election documents herein
below enumerated, described and specified, and also to further testify on
other matters related to the said various election documents in the
possession and custody of the Commission on Elections, coming from and/or
pertaining to, the Municipalities of Balindong and Taraka, Lanao del Sur as
well as the Province of Lanao del Sur;

(2) bring with you to the Tribunal the following documents, therein below
specified:
[a] The ORIGINALS of the ELECTION RETURNS -copies for the COMELEC,
for the Municipalities of Balindong and Taraka, Lanao del Sur used in the May
10, 2004 elections;

[b] The Originals of the COMELEC COPIES of the Municipal Certificate

of Canvass for the Municipalities of Balindong and Taraka, Lanao del Sur,
and their accompanying Originals-Comelec copies of the STATEMENT
OF VOTES BY PRECINCT for the same Municipalities of Balindong and
Taraka, Lanao del Sur, used in the May 10, 2004 election; and

[c] The Originals of the COMELEC COPIES of the Provincial

CERTIFICATE OF CANVASS for the Province of Lanao Del Sur used by
COMELEC in senatorial canvass for the May 10, 2004 elections, including
their accompanying Originals of the COMELEC COPIES of the
STATEMENT OF VOTES BY MUNICIPALITY for the Province of Lanao del
Sur.

You shall also testify on the various election documents above enumerated in
respect to their printing, their genuineness and authenticity, and on the
presence of SECURITY FEATURES contained, placed and/or embedded
therein, should there be any.

FAIL NOT UNDER PENALTY OF LAW.

WITNESS the Honorable Bernardo P. Pardo, Ret. Associate Justice, this 13th
day of September 2006.

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Clerk of the Tribunal

14. PET rollo, Vol. II, pp. 1777-1778.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 15. PET rollo, Vol. II, pp. 1330-1335.

16. Id. at 1592-1600.

17. PET rollo, Vol. III, p. 2500.

18. RULES OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL (2005), Rule 33.

RULE 33. Effect of failure to make cash deposit. — If a party fails to make the
cash deposits or additional deposits herein required within the prescribed
time limit, the Tribunal may dismiss the protest or counter-protest, or take
such action as it may deem equitable under the circumstances.

19. PET rollo, Vol. III, pp. 2554-2555.

20. Id. at 2564-2576.

21. Id. at 2615-2618.

22. RULES OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL (2005), Rule 61.

RULE 61. When submitted; contents . — Within twenty days from receipt of
the Tribunal's ruling on the last offer of evidence by the protestee, the
parties shall simultaneously submit their respective memoranda setting forth
briefly:
(a) The facts of the case;

(b) A complete statement of all the arguments submitted in support of their

respective views of the case;
(c) Objections to the ballots adjudicated to or claimed by the other party in
the revision of ballots;

(d) Refutation of the objections of the other party to the ballots adjudicated
to or claimed in the revision of ballots;
(e) Objections to the tallying of election returns and certificates of canvass
raised by the other party in the correction of manifest error; and

(f) Refutation of the objections raised by the other party to the tallying of
election returns and certificates of canvass in the correction of manifest
error.
All evidence, as well as objections to evidence presented by the other party,
shall be either referred to or contained in the memorandum or in an appendix
thereto.

23. PET rollo, Vol. III, pp. 2619-2620.

24. Id. at 2661-2684.

25. Id. at 2712-2733.

26. Id. at 2834-2844.

27. Id. at 2671-2673.

28. Id.
29. Id.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 30. Id.
31. Id.

32. Id.
33. Id.

34. SEC. 19. Classes of documents. — For the purpose of their presentation in
evidence, documents are either public or private.
Public documents are:

(a) The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign
authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the
Philippines, or of a foreign country;
xxx xxx xxx

35. Municipal Board of Canvassers'.

36. P.E.T. Case No. 001, February 13, 1996, 253 SCRA 559.
37. PET rollo, Vol. III, pp. 2840-2844.

38. Saludo, Jr. v. American Express International, Inc., G.R. No. 159507, April 19,
2006, 487 SCRA 462, 483, held that courts are allowed to take judicial
notice of matters which are of public knowledge, or are capable of
unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known to judges because of
their judicial functions.

39. Supra note 36.

40. Id. at 574-575.

41. Melchor v. Gironella, G.R. No. 151138, February 16, 2005, 451 SCRA 476.

42. TSN, November 6, 2006, pp. 89-96.

43. RULES OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL (2005), Rule 63.
Dismissal; when proper. — The Tribunal may require the protestant or
counter-protestant to indicate, within a fixed period, the province or
provinces numbering not more than three, best exemplifying the frauds or
irregularities alleged in his petition; and the revision of ballots and
reception of evidence will begin with such provinces. If upon examination
of such ballots and proof, and after making reasonable allowances, the
Tribunal is convinced that, taking all circumstances into account, the
protestant or counter-protestant will most probably fail to make out his
case, the protest may forthwith be dismissed, without further
consideration of the other provinces mentioned in the protest.

The preceding paragraph shall also apply when the election protest involves
correction of manifest errors.

44. Computed as follows:

881,722
–––––––– + 1 = 440,862.
2
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com