LUCAS V. CAUTON, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND PABLO SANIDAD, RESPONDENTS.

Cauton versus Commission on Elections

The Case

This is a petition for certiorari and prohibition brought by Lucas V. Cauton against the Commission on Elections and Pablo Sanidad, arising from the national elections of November 1965. Cauton and Sanidad were rival candidates for Representative in the second congressional district of Ilocos Sur. The case matters because it fixes the constitutional and statutory authority of the Commission on Elections to order the opening of ballot boxes, not to favor any candidate, but to retrieve the authentic copy of the election returns and thereby secure a canvass based on the true will of the voters.

Procedural History

During the canvass by the Provincial Board of Canvassers of Ilocos Sur, Sanidad asked the Commission on Elections to open the ballot boxes in the precincts of Candon, Santiago and Santa Cruz so that the election returns deposited inside them could be retrieved and used in the canvass, and to restrain the board from proclaiming a winner in the meantime. The Commission issued a restraining order, heard the petition, and on December 22, 1965 issued the resolution directing the opening of the ballot boxes. Pursuant to that resolution, the ballot boxes were opened and the envelopes containing the election returns were taken to Manila. On December 23, 1965, Cauton filed with the Supreme Court a petition for certiorari and prohibition with preliminary injunction, alleging that the Commission acted without or in excess of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court gave due course to the petition but did not issue the writ of preliminary injunction. Meanwhile, Sanidad filed with the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur a petition for recount under Section 163 of the Revised Election Code, and Cauton's urgent motion to enjoin that court from proceeding was denied. The case then came before the Supreme Court for decision.

Facts

In the elections of November 9, 1965, Cauton, Sanidad and Godofredo S. Reyes were candidates for Representative in the second congressional district of Ilocos Sur. When the Provincial Board of Canvassers opened the envelopes containing the election returns presented by the Provincial Treasurer, Sanidad pointed out that the entries of votes in those copies differed from the entries in the copies held by the Liberal Party.

After hearing, the Commission on Elections found that the copies of the election returns for the Municipal Treasurer, for the Commission on Elections and for the Provincial Treasurer for the municipality of Santa Cruz had uniform alterations in the entries of votes cast for representative, showing different numbers compared with the Liberal Party copies, and that the copies for the Commission on Elections and the Provincial Treasurer for Candon and Santiago likewise had uniform alterations. The copies furnished the municipal treasurers of Candon and Santiago were never verified because those treasurers did not comply with the subpoena issued by the Commission.

On December 22, 1965, the Commission issued its resolution directing the opening of the ballot boxes in the three municipalities solely for the purpose of retrieving the election returns deposited inside them, to enable the aggrieved party to establish the discrepancy between copies of the election returns for the purpose of obtaining judicial remedy under Section 163 of the Revised Election Code. The boxes were opened and the returns brought to Manila, and later examined and recorded by a committee of the Commission in a formal hearing with notice to the parties.

Issues

• Whether or not the Commission on Elections acted without or in excess of jurisdiction in issuing the resolution of December 22, 1965 ordering the opening of the ballot boxes to retrieve the election returns deposited inside them.
• Whether or not Section 157 of the Revised Election Code limits the opening of ballot boxes to an official investigation for the prosecution of election offenses or for purely administrative purposes, and excludes the situation where the purpose is to assist a candidate in establishing a discrepancy.

Applicable Provisions

Section 157 of the Revised Election Code provides:

The municipal treasurer shall keep the boxes unopened in his possession in a secure place and under his responsibility for three months, unless they are the subject of an official investigation, or a competent court or tribunal shall demand them sooner, or the competent authority shall order their preservation for a longer time in connection with any pending contest or investigation.

This is the very provision on which Cauton relied, and the Court construed the phrase "competent authority" to include the Commission on Elections.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the Commission acted within its jurisdiction. The Constitution gives the Commission exclusive charge of the enforcement and administration of all laws relative to the conduct of elections, and the Court had long ruled that the Commission may investigate and act on the propriety or legality of the canvass made by a board of canvassers. The power is administrative and supervisory, intended to secure the proclamation of the winning candidate based on the true count of the votes cast. The election law requires four copies of the election return in each precinct, one deposited in the ballot box, one delivered to the municipal treasurer, one sent to the provincial treasurer, and one sent to the Commission. Where the three copies outside the ballot box are shown to have been uniformly tampered, the only copy left to be checked is the one inside the ballot box, and the Commission may order the boxes opened to ascertain whether that copy is also tampered. In so doing, the Commission secures a basis for prosecution and affords the aggrieved party a basis for a judicial recount under Section 163.

On the second issue, the Court held that Section 157 does not confine the opening of ballot boxes to the instances Cauton enumerated. The boxes may be opened in an election contest, when their contents are needed as evidence in the prosecution of election frauds, and when they are the subject of any official investigation ordered by a competent court or other competent authority. The Court declared that the "competent authority" must include the Commission on Elections, which is charged with the administration and enforcement of the laws relative to the conduct of elections. The Court stressed that the purpose of the Revised Election Code is to protect the integrity of elections, and that the choice of means taken by the Commission, unless clearly illegal or constituting grave abuse of discretion, should not be interfered with.

Doctrine

The Commission on Elections, under its constitutional power of exclusive charge of the enforcement and administration of all laws relative to the conduct of elections, may order the opening of ballot boxes to retrieve the copy of the election returns deposited inside them, where the copies outside the ballot box have been shown to be tampered, so that a genuine and untampered basis for the canvass may be obtained and the aggrieved party may be afforded a basis for a judicial recount under Section 163 of the Revised Election Code. The phrase "competent authority" in Section 157 of the Revised Election Code includes the Commission on Elections. The power is administrative and supervisory, exercised not to help a candidate win but to bring about a canvass based on the true results of the elections.

Disposition

The petition for certiorari and prohibition was dismissed, with costs against the petitioner, and the resolution of the Commission on Elections of December 22, 1965 was upheld as perfectly within its power to issue.

Remember This

The one line to memorize: the Commission on Elections may open the ballot box to retrieve the election return inside it when all copies outside have been tampered, because that power is part of its constitutional duty to enforce the election laws. Examiners use this case on the scope of the Commission's administrative and supervisory authority over the canvass, and on the proper construction of Section 157 of the Revised Election Code.