CIRIACO V. CAMPOMANES, PETITIONER, VS. THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF SARIAYA, TAYABAS, RESPONDENT.

The facts are not disputed and are stated in the following stipulation submitted to this court by counsel for both parties:

“1. El recurrente Ciriaco V. Compomanes fue el candidato oficial del
Partido Sakdalista para el cargo de Gobernador Provincial de Tayabas en
las elecciones generates de junio de 1934.

“2. En dichas elecciones de 1934 el Partido Sakdalista, lo mismo que el Partido Nacionalista-Democratico
Anti, presento en la Provincia de Tayabas un ticket completo para todos
los cargos Insulares y provinciales, asi comom para todos los cargos
municipales en Sariaya, Tayabas.

“3. Actualmente los candidatos para cargos provinciales del Frente Popular,
con el cual se ha confundido el Partido para el cargo de Gobernador, y
Honesto D. R. Manalo, Osmundo T. Cruz, Isaac Ballo y Felix Palacio para
vocales.

“4. El Partido Frente Popular y el Partido Sakdalistano tienen candidates para cargos municipales en Sariaya,Tayabas, en las elecciones venideras.

“5. Fuera de los candidatos provinciales del Partido Nacionalista y del Frente Popular
no existen otros candidatos para dichos cargos provinciales para las
proximas elec-ciones; y fuera de los candidatos municipales del
PartidoNacionalista y del Partido Reformista no existen otroscandidatos
municipales en Sariaya, Tayabas.

“6. Los grupos politicos pula y puti, ambos ramifieacionesdel Partido Nacionalista,
del Municipio de Sariaya estaban coaligados en las elecciones de 1934 y
sus candidatos. municipales triunfaron en dichas elecciones en contra
de loscandidatos del Partido Reformista y los candidatos del Partido
Sakdalista.

“7. Los votoa obtenidos por cada uno de dichos Partidosen las
elecciones de 1934 son los que constan en el ExhibitB del recurrente y
en el adjunto Exhibit F del mismo recurrente.

“8. El Partido Liberal Reformista es un grupo
puramentelocal en Sariaya, constituido desde el afio 1920 y
desdeentonces hasta las ultimas elecciones generales de junio de 1934,
siempre ha presentado un ticket completo paratodos los cargos
municipales en el Municipio de Sariaya,Tayabas, bajo certificados de
candidatura cuyo ejemplar teriores se acompana aqui como Anexo 1; no ha
presentado para todos sus candidatoa en dichas elecciones y otras anen
cualquiera eleceion candidates insulares o provinciales, ni tampoco
candidatos municipales en otro cualquier municipio fuera de Sariaya.

“9. El Partido Sakdalista se constituyd en la Provineiade Tayabas el
ano 1930, pero en el Municipio de Sariayasolamente en las elecciones de
1934 presento candidatos para cargos localesr.en el referido municipio.

“10. Los grupos politicos pula y puti han pertenecidosiempre al Partido Nacionalista Consolidado, luego al Partido Nacionalista Democratieo Anti y hoy al Partido Nacio-nalista.

“11. De los aflliados al Partido Liberal Reformista en la
ultima eleceion presidencial, la mayor parte apoyo al candidato
presidencial socialista, algunos al candidato presidencial del Partido
Republicano y unos cuantos al candidato presidencial de la coalision
anti-pro; y en otras elecciones pasadas a veces apoyaba a candidatos
insulares Nacionalistas y a veces Democratas antis y pros.

“12. Que sumados los votos obtenidos por los candidatos del Partido Liberal Reformista
en Sariaya desde el Presidente Municipal hasta el ultimo concejal en
las eleceiones generates de junio de 1934, y sumados igualmente los
votos obtenidos en Sariaya por los candidatos del Partido Sakdalista
para cargos provinciales y municipales, el Partido Liberal Reformista ha obtenido mayor numero de votos que el Partido Sakdalista en el citado Munieipio de Sariaya.

“13. En 4 de octubre de 1937 (un dia antes de la sesion del Concejo
Municipal de Sariaya) el representante debidamente autorizado del
directorio nacional del Frente Popular sometio la propuesta
de inspectores Exhibit A-l del recurrente, firmado por el Sr. Donato
Magtibay, presidente local, y por el Sr. Dionisio C. Mayor,
representante provincial.

“14. El Partido Liberal Reformista en la misma fecha 4 de octubre, 1937, sometid la propuesta Exhibit A del recurrente, firmada por el Presidente del Partido Liberal Reformista.’

“15. El dia 2 de octubre, 1937, el Partido Nacionalista sometio la propuesta Exhibit A-2 del recurrente firmada por su representante debidamente autorizado.

“16. El acta Exhibit C del recurrente es copia exacta del aeta del Concejo recurrido nombrando inspectores.

“17. Las partes tambien convienen en que se admitan como prueba los
affidavits que cualquiera de las partes quiera someter sobre si existe
o no confabulaci6n entre el Frente Popular y el grupo Liberal Reformists.”

The right of the Partido NadoTwlista to two inspectors of election
in each and every election precinct of the municipality of Sariaya is
not denied. Neither is there any dispute regarding the appointment of
said inspectors at the instance of the duly authorized representative
of that party (Exhibit A-2). Although it appears from resolution No.
92, series of 1937, of the municipal council of Sariaya, Tayabas
(Exhibit C), that the inspectors were appointed for a local political
organization (Pula-Puti) of the Partido Nacionalista, it appears from the foregoing stipulation of facts (par. 6) that this political organization was a local branch of the Partido Nacionalista in Sariaya. The conflict arises between the Partido Liberal Reformista to which the municipal council gave an inspector and a substitute inspector of election and the Frente Popular which claims a better right thereto. It is not denied that the Frente Popular is a “political party” within the definition of paragraph (h)
of section 417 of the Election Law. Upon the other hand, it is admitted
in paragraph 8 of the above stipulation that the Partido Liberal Reformista “es un grupo puramente local en Sariaya,
constituido desde el ano 1920 y desde entonces hasta las ultimas
elecciones generales de junio de 1934, siempre ha presentado un ticket
complete para todos los cargos municipales en el Municipip de Sariaya,
Tayabas, bajo certificados de candidatura cuyo ejemplar para todos sus
candidatos en dichas elecciones y otras anteriores se acompafia aqui
como Anexo 1; no ha presentado en cualquiera eleccion candidatos
insulares o provinciales, ni tampoco candidatos municipales en otro
cualquier municipio fuera de Sariaya.”

The question presented is: Which political organization is entitled
to recognition as an opposition party with respect to the appointment
of an inspector and a substitute inspector of election, the Frente Popular or the Partido Liberal Reformista?

Section 417 of the Election Law, prior to its amendment by
Commonwealth Act No. 233, recognizes the legal personality of political
aggroupments for election purposes, and the right to propose inspectors
of election. A “political group” is there denned. The amendatory
section of Commonweaith Act No. 233 no longer accords this recognition
and has eliminated the definition of this term. The evident purpose of
the law is to foster and encourage the formation of political parties
inspired by high political ideals of government. In case, therefore, of
antagonism or conflict between a political party whose claim to
national character is not denied and a mere political group, the claim
of the former, as an opposition party, to an inspector of election
under section 417 of the Election Law, as amended, must prevail over
that of the latter” That such is the intention of the legislature is,
furthermore, inferable from paragraph (f) of the same section.

Counsel for the respondent municipal council of Sariaya invokes the
ruling laid down by this court in the case of Municipal Board of the
City of Manila and Mendoza vs. Agustin (36 Off. Gaz., 1335),
as authority in support of the action taken by the said municipal
council of Sariaya granting an inspector and a substitute inspector of
election to the partido Liberal Reformista. Our ruling in that case is
necessarily predicated upon the facts related in the decision of the
Court of Appeals and its application should not be extended beyond its ratio decidendi or
the legal propositions therein decided. Our decision in that case did
not pass upon the character of the political organizations which were
parties to the controversy or were involved therein. That point was not
then before us. On the contrary, the political character of such
organizations appears to have been conceded, and in that connection
this court was careful to observe:

“While in the oral argument of counsel for both
parties there has been a mutual denial of the existence of the one and
the other party, we find from the relation of facts of the decisions of
the Court of First Instance of Manila and of the Court of Appeals that
the existence of the contending parties here, within the definition of
paragraph (h) of section 417 of the Election Law as amended,
is not controverted and we cannot properly inject our finding into the
record.”

In view of the foregoing, the writ prayed for is hereby granted, and
the municipal council of Sariaya is hereby ordered to meet within
forty-eight hours from notice of this decision, to revoke the
appointments of inspectors and substitute inspectors of election for
the Partido Liberal Reformista and forthwith to appoint an
inspector and a substitute inspector of election for the Frente Popular
in each and every precinct of the municipality of Sariaya, Tayabas,
such new appointments to be made m accordance with the proposal of the
duly authorized representative of the Frente Popular in the province or municipality aforementioned. Without costs. So ordered.

Avancena, C. J., Villa-Real, Abad Santos, Diaz, and Concepcion, JJ., concur.

IMPERIAL, J.:

It being admitted by the parties that the Popular Front is a political party as defined by law and that El Partido Liberal Reformista is
merely a local political group, the question to be determined is, in
the first place, whether or not the two political entities are entitled
to an inspector and substitute and, if so, which has a better or
preferred right.

“Paragraphs (c) and (f) of section 417 of the Revised Administrative Code, as amended by Commonwealth Act No. 233, provided as follows:

“(c) Two of the” inspectors and the poll clerk, and
their substitutes, shall belong to the party which polled the largest
number of votes in the city, municipality or municipal district at the
next preceding election, and the other inspector and his substitute
shall belong to the party which polled the next largest number of votes
at said election. In computing the number of votes polled by each party
for the appointment of inspectors for a regular election of provincial
and city or municipal officers, the votes polled by all the candidates
for said offices belonging to said party according to their
certificates of candidacy shall be counted, and in the case of the
appointment of inspectors for a regular election for President or
Vice-President of the Philippines and Members of the National Assembly,
or only the latter, the votes polled by the candidate for tne offices
to be nlled belonging to the party concerned according to their
certificates of candidacy shall be counted for the purposes of said
computation.”

“(f) The election inspectors and poll clerks
and their respective substitutes shall be persons proposed by the
authorized representatives of the national directorates of the parties.
The representatives of the parties in the municipality or province, as
the case may be, shall communicate in within at least three days before
the meetrag for the appointment of inspectors is held, the names,
surnames, and post-office addresses of the persons who are to act as
their representatives in the designation of the election inspectors.”

From the foregoing provisions infer that the National Assembly
prescribed two fundamental conditions to be fulfilled by the political
parties in order to be entitled to inspectors and substitutes, to wit:
(1) That they polled the largest and next largest number of votes in
the city, municipality or municipal district at the next preceding
election, or in 1934,and (2) that they be national in character.

With respect to the Partido Liberal Reformista, it is clear
that it is not entitled to an inspector and substitute on the ground
that it is not a political party under the law, but merely a local
political group. Strictly speaking, neither is the Popular Front
entitled to an inspector and substitute, although it is a political
party, national in character, because it did not poll the largest or
the next largest number of votes in the municipality of Sariaya at the
last elections, not having then been organized.

Therefore this is a case not provided for in the amendment to the
Election Law. Taking into consideration the fact that it has always
been the intention of the legislature to grant the third inspector and
substitute to the opposing political party or group existing in a
locality in order to maintain the cleanliness of elections, I am of the
opinion that the Popular Front is more entitled to the third inspector
and substitute than the Partido Liberal Reformista on the ground that the latter is local in nature and, according to the facts, it does not strictly represent the opposition.

For these reasons, I concur in the majority opinion.

Petition granted with instructions.