G.R. No. L-19083. November 22, 1963
HADJI TAHER COROCORO, PETITIONER, VS. HADJI SINAL BASCARA, RESPONDENT.
DIZON, J.:
petitioner, from the decision of the Court of Appeals reversing that of
the Court of First Instance of Lanao del Sur, and declaring Hadji Sinal
Bascara, herein respondent, duly elected mayor of the Municipal
District of Poonabayabao of said province.
Petitioner and respondent were, among others, candidates for mayor
for the above-mentioned municipal district in the general election of
1959. After the canvass had been made, the Board of Canvassers found
that petitioner had received 170 votes as against respondent’s 196, and
accordingly proclaimed the latter mayor-elect.
Petitioner filed the corresponding protest in the Court of First
Instance of Lanao del Sur, impugning the election results in Precinct
Nos. 2 and 4. After trial, said Court rendered judgment declaring
petitioner duly elected mayor with a plurality of 12 votes over
respondent. The latter appealed with the result stated heretofore.
Petitioner contends that the Court of Appeals erred (a) in
adjudicating to the respondent the 30 votes marked as Exhibits C-5 to
C-8; C-15 to C-17; C-20; C-23 to C-25; C-27; C-39; K; K-3; K-6; K-8;
K-11 to K-12; K-16 to K-17; K-22 to K-23; K-27; K-29; K-33; K-37; and
K-40, thereby contravening the provisions of paragraphs 2, 9, 13, and
15, Section 149 of the Revised Election Code, and (b) in admitting evidence aliunde to determine the intention of the voters who cast the questioned ballots.
The portions of the appealed decision material and pertinent to the questions thus raised read as follows:
“3. First to confront us is a batch of some 30
ballots on the space for mayor of which, as found by the trial court
and admitted by the parties, the following appears:
Name Written —Madaba —Madamba —Madamba —Madamba —Madamba —Madum —Madamba —Madamba —Madamba Macadidang —Madaba —Madama —Madamba —Madaba —Madaba —Madamba —Madab —Madamba —Madum —Madaba —Madaba —Madaba —Madaba —Madamba —Madamba —Madamba —Madamba —Madaba —Madab —Madamba —Madamba “Literally or upon the familiar rule of idem sonans,
the name written on the space for mayor in the foregoing ballots is
‘Madamba’. But, the trial court declared them as invalid votes for
protestee.“Protestee’s position, however, is that said
ballots should be counted as valid votes for him upon the ground that
although his certificate of candidacy carried his name as Hadji Sinai
Bascara, he is nevertheless known likewise by the name ‘Madamba’. Upon
the other hand, protestant challenged said ballots because the word
‘Madamba’ is neither a derivative nor a contraction of, or idem sonans with, protestee’s given name.”The
evidence is overwhelming in that protestee, who was born in
Poonabayabao, is known in that municipal district by the name Madamba.
However, after his pilgrimage to Mecca, het was given the additional
religious name ‘Hadji Sinai Bascara’, so that actually his full name is
‘Madamba Bascara Hadji Sinal’. In all his dealings with the government,
he was known as such ‘Madamba’. Proof of this are his 1958 residence
tax certificate, his tax clearance, his firearm license and the
receipts for fees paid therefore, and the receipts for real estate
taxes paid by him for a number of years. Not only that. In the militia
forces during- the guerilla days, protestee was registered as a
lieutenant under the name ‘Madamba’.“Protestee’s certificate
of candidacy, it is true, did not carry the word ‘Madamba’ as part of
his name. On November 2, 1959, however, he filed with the Commission on
Elections an urgent petition for an order directing the counting in his
favor of any votes for Sultan Madamba or Madamba. This move was denied
by the Commission on Elections because the same involves the
appreciation of ballots over which the tribunal had no jurisdiction.
Protestee’s efforts at reconsideration of said denial proved unavailing.“Then,
on the day preceding the election, the mayoralty candidates in
Poonabayabao met with the members of the boards of inspectors.
Protestee then proposed that the name ‘Madamba’ if written on the
corresponding space for mayor be considered in his favor, as all those
present knew him to be Madamba. The candidates—protestant
included—agreed and signed a document, Exhibit 5, prepared by the
principal teacher, clause 4 of which provides ‘4. That in the
appreciation of the ballots the name Madamba will be counted in favor
of Candidate Hadji Sinai Bascara since he has always been called by
that name.’“In a nutshell, the question is whether or not the ‘Madamba’ votes should be counted for protestee.
“Suffrage, in the words of the Supreme Court in Perez vs.
Suller, 69 Phil., 196, 204, is “the means by which the great reservoir
of power must be emptied into the receptacular agencies wrought by the
people through their Constitution’. With the recognition that the
enfranchized citizen is ‘a particle of popular sovereignty’ and the
‘ultimate source of the established authority’ the Court there warned
that the Judiciary, when called upon to act in justifiable cases, must
give the voice of the electorate efficacy and not stifle or frustrate
it (id.). Courts are accordingly enjoined to discharge this mandate
with reasonable liberality to the end that the freest possible
expression of the will of the voter be attained. Pujol vs. Estrella, CA-G.R. No. 18723-R, August 30, 1957.“After
all, the identification of the person voted for is the object of
appreciation of ballots. Technical rules should never be allowed to
stand as a roadblock astride the route to the discovery of the voter’s
intent.“The record overwhelmingly shows that protestee is
popularly known in Poonabayabao by the name ‘Madamba’. One voter
testified that he did cast his vote in protestee’s favor by using the
name aforesaid because that was the name familiar to him. Even
protestee’s rivals, in writing, conceded that mayoralty votes written
‘Madamba’ should be counted in his favor.“Indeed, if the mere nicknames of a candidate is acceptable as a valid vote for him, a fortiori
ballot bearing his actual name—one by which he is known in the
community—cannot be treated with lesser solicitude. Here, so many voted
the name Madamba. The intention to vote for protestee appears clearly
discernible. The intention should be given effect.“In fine,
we rule that the thirty (30) ballots above enumerated should be as they
are hereby declared valid votes for protestee.”
Relative to the statement contained in the appealed decision to the
effect that even respondent’s rivals had conceded in writing that votes
cast for “Madamba” should be counted in his favor, it appears that, a
day before the election, the candidates for mayor, vice-mayor, and
councilors of Poonabayabao had a meeting with the members of the boards
of election inspectors. In said meeting respondent proposed that, as
every one knew that “Madamba” was his real name, ballots containing
this name on the space for mayor should be counted in his favor. Result
of this was the written agreement now in the record as Exhibit 5
whereby the candidates for mayor (including petitioner), vice-mayor,
and councilors expressly agreed to respondent’s proposition. As
petitioner signed this agreement freely and voluntarily, we do not see
how he can now validly assail the rulings under consideration. We
therefore find that the Court of Appeals committed no error in
admitting the 30 questioned ballots.
Wherefore, the appealed decision is affirmed, with costs.
Bengzon, C. J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepción, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Regala, and Makalintal, JJ., concur.