RAMON DELES, PROTESTANT AND APPELLANT, VS. ARELLANO ALKONGA, PROTESTEE AND APPELLEE.

This is an appeal taken by the protestant, Ramon Deles, from the
judgment of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo finding that the
protestee, Arellano Alkonga, obtained 243 votes and said protestant 216
votes for the office of municipal president in the general elections1
held on June 5, 1928, in the municipality of San Dionisio, Province of
Iloilo.

In support of his appeal, the appellant assigns the following errors
alleged to have been committed by the trial court in its judgment, to
wit:

“1. The lower court erred in counting as valid votes
in favor of the protestee, Arellano Alkonga, the twenty-six (26)
ballots wherein there appear in the space for municipal president, only
AA, Arellano A., and Arillano a.

“2. The lower court erred in
counting as valid votes for the protestee, Arellano Alkonga, the
ballots in which are written Arellano Ala in one, Arellano Alee or
Arellano Alco in another, and in another Arella; Alegr, and in still
another Arellano Alkon (4 ballots in all).

“3. The lower
court erred in not holding the registration and voting in the third
precinct of San Dionisio to be void, unlawful, and fraudulent.”

As to the first assignment of error, the appellant, Ramon Deles,
contends that the two ballots, one in precinct No. 1, and the other in
precinct No. 2, adjudicated to the protestee by the lower court, in
which are written in the space for municipal president, the names
“Arillano a” and “Arellano A,” respectively, should be rejected on the
ground that the Christian name and the initial of the surname alone are
not sufficient to identify a candidate in accordance with the doctrine
laid down in the case of Cailles vs. Gomez and Barbaza (42 Phil., 496), cited with approval in the case of Geukeko vs. Pascual (50 Phil., 221), and in the case of Lucero vs. De Guzman (45 Phil., 852). In several recent decisions in the cases of Adeser vs. Tago (G. R. No. 30282),^[1] and Namocatcat vs. Adag (G. R. No. 30283),^[2]
this court has laid down the doctrine that when, for a stated office,
there is only one candidate who bears a certain Christian name and
surname, the Christian name and the initial of the surname alone are
sufficient to identify said candidate. The court below, therefore, did
not err in admitting said two ballots in favor of Arellano Alkonga.

It is likewise contended by the appellant, Ramon Deles, in the said
first assignment of error that the twenty-four ballots—two in precinct
No. 1 and twenty-one in precinct No. 2—where the initials “A. A.”
appear in the space for the office of municipal president, and one in
precinct No. 1, where the letters “a. A.” appear, which were all
admitted by the lower court as votes in favor of the protestee, must be
rejected as being inadequate to identify Arellano Alkonga as candidate
for the office of municipal president, since the first letter “A,”
being the initial of many names, does not necessarily mean “Arellano,”
and the second letter “A,” being the initial of many surnames, also
does not necessarily mean “Alkonga.” In order that the initial letter
of the Christian name may suffice to identify a candidate, it is
necessary that it be accompanied by the full surname, and in order that
the initial letter of the sur- name may be sufficient for the same
purpose, it is necessary that it be accompanied by the full Christian
name.

Passing now to the second assignment of error, the appellant
contends that the ballots in one of which is written “Arellano Ala” in
another “Arellano Alee” or “Arellano Alco” in another “Arilia Alegr”
and in another “Arellano Alcon,” four ballots in all, admitted by the
trial court as votes in favor of Arellano Alkonga, should be rejected
as not falling within the idem sonans rule. Following the liberal view which has guided this court in the solution of similar questions in the cases of Valenzuela vs. Carlos and Lopez de Jesus (42 Phil., 428), Cailles vs. Gomez and Barbaza (42 Phil., 496), Mandac vs. Samonte (49 Phil., 284), and Bulan vs.
Gaffud (49 Phil., 906), said ballots must be admitted, with the
exception of the one with the words “Arilia Alegr,” for Alegr” is not idem sonans with the surname Alkonga.

With reference to the third assignment of error, the fact that the
first registration of voters was held in the town of San Dionisio
instead of the barrio of Bagacay, which was the place fixed by the
resolution of the municipal council, and the second registration in the
barrio of Bagacay, and the voting in the town of San Dionisio, while it
constitutes an irregularity, said fact is not sufficient to annul the
whole election in precinct No. 3 of San Dionisio where 185 electors had
voted, inasmuch as it does not appear that the forty-eight electors
registered in. said precinct were not able to vote by reason of said
change, and not for any other reason, nor does it appear that had they
voted, they would have voted for the protestant, Ramon Deles. The only
qualified elector whom the protestant, could present and who was not
able to vote on account of said change, was Fermin Montejo. Anatolio
Begaforo, even if he had wanted to vote, would not have been able to do
so, because he was not registered as a voter in said precinct.

Briefly, then, we hold that from the 248 ballots adjudicated to the
protestee, Arellano Alkonga, there must be subtracted the 24 ballots in
which appear the initials “A. A.” in the space for the office of the
municipal president, and the one in which appear the words “Arilla
Alegr,” leaving a remainder of 223 or a plurality of 7 votes over the
protestant, Ramon Deles, to whom 216 votes have been adjudicated.

By virtue whereof, and with the sole modification that instead of
32, the protestee’s plurality over the petitioner is reduced to 7
votes, the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed in all other
respects, with costs against the appellant. So Ordered.

Johnson, Street, Malcolm, Ostrand, and Johns, JJ., concur.

---

^[1]
52 Phil., 856.
^[2]
252 Phil., 789.