Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. 206698 February 25, 2014
LUS R. !LL"FUERTE, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMSSON ON ELECTONS a#$ MGUEL R. !LL"FUERTE, Respondents.
D E C I S I N
PER"LT", J.:
Assailed via petition for certiorari and prohibition !ith pra"er for the issuance of a !rit of preli#inar"
in$unction and%or te#porar" restrainin& order is the Resolution' dated April ', ()'* issued b" the
Co##ission on Elections +CME,EC- En Banc, !hich affir#ed the Resolution( dated .anuar" '/,
()'* of its 0irst Division dis#issin& petitioner ,uis R. 1illafuerte2s verified petition to den" due course
to or cancel the certificate of candidac" of Mi&uel R. 1illafuerte +respondent-.
Petitioner and respondent !ere both candidates for the 3ubernatorial position of the Province of
Ca#arines Sur in the Ma" '*, ()'* local and national elections. n ctober (/, ()'(, petitioner filed
!ith the CME,EC a 1erified Petition* to den" due course to or cancel the certificate of candidac"
+CC- of respondent, alle&in& that respondent intentionall" and #ateriall" #isrepresented a false and
deceptive na#e%nic4na#e that !ould #islead the voters !hen he declared under oath in his CC that
5,6RA7 .R.6MI385 !as his nic4na#e or sta&ena#e and that the na#e he intended to appear on the
official ballot !as 1I,,A09ER:E, ,6RA7 .R.6MI38 NP; that respondent deliberatel" o#itted his
first na#e 5MI39E,5 and inserted, instead 5,RA7 .R.,5 !hich is the nic4na#e of his father, the
incu#bent 3overnor of Ca#arines Sur, 5,Ra" 1illafuerte, .r.5
In his Ans!er !ith Special and Affir#ative Defenses,< respondent denied the co##ission of an"
#aterial #isrepresentation and asserted, a#on& others, that he had been usin& the nic4na#e 5,RA7
.R. MI385 and not onl" 5MI385; that the choice of na#e%!ord to appear on the ballot !as solel" his
choice or preference; and that the presu#ption that the voters !ould be confused on the si#ple fact that
his na#e !ould be placed first in the ballot !as #isplaced.
n .anuar" '/, ()'*, the CME,EC2s 0irst Division denied the petition for lac4 of #erit and disposed
as follo!s=
> > > no co#pellin& reason !h" the CC of respondent should be denied due course to or cancelled on
the sole basis of an alle&ed irre&ularit" in his na#e%nic4na#e. ,a!s and $urisprudence on the #atter
are clear that #aterial #isrepresentation in the CC pertains onl" to ?ualifications of a candidate, such
as citi@enship, residenc", re&istration as a voter, a&e, etc.
Nothin& has been #entioned about a candidate2s na#e%nic4na#e as a &round to den" due course or
cancel his%her CC. Ahen the lan&ua&e of the la! is clear and e>plicit, there is no roo# for
interpretation, onl" application./
Petitioner filed a #otion for reconsideration !ith the CME,EC En Banc, !hich denied the sa#e in a
Resolution dated April ', ()'*.
:he CME,EC found that its 0irst Division did not err in den"in& the petition as e>istin& la! and
$urisprudence are clear in providin& that a #isrepresentation in a certificate of candidac" is #aterial
!hen it refers to a ?ualification for elective office and affects the candidate2s eli&ibilit"; and that a
#isrepresentation of a non6#aterial fact is not a &round to den" due course to or cancel a certificate of
candidac" under Section BC of the #nibus Election Code. It found that petitioner2s alle&ations did not
pertain to respondent2s ?ualifications or eli&ibilit" for the office to !hich he sou&ht to be elected. :he
candidate2s use of a na#e or nic4na#e is a not a &round to den" due course to or cancel a certificate of
candidac".
Dissatisfied, petitioner filed the instant petition for certiorari and prohibition alle&in& the follo!in&
issues=
I
Respondent CME,EC palpabl" and seriousl" co##itted &rave abuse of discretion a#ountin& to lac4
and%or in e>cess of $urisdiction !hen it !hi#sicall" and capriciousl" li#ited the &rounds provided in
Section BC in relation to Section B< of the #nibus Election Code to a candidate2s ?ualifications onl"
and e>cludin& as a &round a candidate2s #aterial representation that is 0A,SE on his identit" !hich
renders hi# ineli&ible to be voted for as a candidate, because a 0A,SE representation of ones2 true
na#e%nic4na#e as a candidate is a deliberate atte#pt to #isinfor#, #islead, and deceive the electorate
and not!ithstandin& that Section BC of the #nibus Election Code e>pressl" states that 5an"5 #aterial
#isrepresentation in violation of Section B< of the sa#e Code is a &round for cancellation of a
Certificate of Candidac".
II
Respondent CME,EC co##itted serious errors and patent &rave abuse of discretion a#ountin& to
lac4 and%or in e>cess of $urisdiction in failin& or refusin& to appl" prevailin& $urisprudence and la!,
!herein it !as held= that cancellation of CC is not based on the lac4 of ?ualification althou&h it #a"
relate to ?ualification based on a 5findin& that a candidate #ade a #aterial representation that is false5;
thereb" disre&ardin& the !ell6entrenched rulin&s of this Donorable Court that #aterial
#isrepresentation #a" also include ineli&ibilities to run for office or to assu#e office and is not li#ited
to ?ualifications; utterl" i&norin& the rulin& of this Donorable Court that votes cast in favor of a
candidate usin& a nic4na#e in violation of Section B< are S:RA7 votes, and in turnin& a blind e"e to
its constitutional and statutor" dut" and responsibilit" to protect the ri&hts of the voters and the
inte&rit" of the electoral processes in our countr", a#on& others.
III
Respondent CME,EC !hi#sicall", capriciousl" and despoticall" allo!ed herein respondent
MI39E, to use 5,RA7 .R.6MI385 and thereb" ille&all" disre&arded the effects of R.A. C<*E as
a#ended b" R.A. F*EF or the Auto#ation ,a! and the re?uire#ent therein for the alphabetical
arran&e#ent of the na#es of the candidates and for allo!in& respondent Mi&uel to deliberatel" and
#isleadin&l" o#it his baptis#al first na#e MI39E, !hich is #andatoril" re?uired b" Section B< to be
included in his CC and for respondent Mi&uel to use #ore than one nic4na#e for !hich he is not
&enerall" or popularl" 4no!n in Ca#arines Sur.
I1
Material #isrepresentation as conte#plated b" la! is N: to protect respondent as a candidate, but
MRES, to protect the ri&ht of other candidates under the Auto#ation ,a!, and #ore i#portantl" to
protect the electorate fro# bein& #isinfor#ed, #isled and deceived.E
:he #ain issue for resolution is !hether respondent co##itted a #aterial #isrepresentation under
Section BC of the #nibus Election Code so as to $ustif" the cancellation of his CC.
Petitioner filed the petition under Section BC of the #nibus Election Code clai#in& that respondent
co##itted #aterial #isrepresentation !hen the latter declared in his CC that his na#e%nic4na#e to
be printed in the official ballot !as 1I,,A09ER:E, ,RA7 .R.6MI38 instead of his baptis#al na#e,
1I,,A09ER:E, MI39E,6MI38; that such declaration #ade under oath constitutes #aterial
#isrepresentation even if the #aterial #isrepresentation did not refer to his ?ualifications but referred
to his eli&ibilit" to be validl" voted for as a candidate and, conse?uentl", to his eli&ibilit" to assu#e
office.
Ae find no #erit in the ar&u#ent.
Section B* of the #nibus Election Code states that no person shall be eli&ible for an" elective public
office unless he files a s!orn CC !ithin the period fi>ed herein. Section B< thereof enu#erates the
contents of the CC, to !it=
Sec. B<. Contents of certificate of candidac". G :he certificate of candidac" shall state that the person
filin& it is announcin& his candidac" for the office stated therein and that he is eli&ible for said office; if
for Me#ber of the Batasan& Pa#bansa, the province, includin& its co#ponent cities, hi&hl" urbani@ed
cit" or district or sector !hich he see4s to represent; the political part" to !hich he belon&s; civil status;
his date of birth; residence; his post office address for all election purposes; his profession or
occupation; that he !ill support and defend the Constitution of the Philippines and !ill #aintain true
faith and alle&iance thereto; that he !ill obe" the la!s, le&al orders, and decrees pro#ul&ated b" the
dul" constituted authorities; that he is not a per#anent resident or i##i&rant to a forei&n countr"; that
the obli&ation i#posed b" his oath is assu#ed voluntaril", !ithout #ental reservation or purpose of
evasion; and that the facts stated in the certificate of candidac" are true to the best of his 4no!led&e.
9nless a candidate has officiall" chan&ed his na#e throu&h a court approved proceedin&, a certificate
shall use in a certificate of candidac" the na#e b" !hich he has been bapti@ed, or if has not been
bapti@ed in an" church or reli&ion, the na#e re&istered in the office of the local civil re&istrar or an"
other na#e allo!ed under the provisions of e>istin& la! or, in the case of a Musli#, his Dad$i na#e
after perfor#in& the prescribed reli&ious pil&ri#a&e= Provided, :hat !hen there are t!o or #ore
candidates for an office !ith the sa#e na#e and surna#e, each candidate, upon bein& #ade a!are or
such fact, shall state his paternal and #aternal surna#e, e>cept the incu#bent !ho #a" continue to use
the na#e and surna#e stated in his certificate of candidac" !hen he !as elected. De #a" also include
one nic4na#e or sta&e na#e b" !hich he is &enerall" or popularl" 4no!n in the localit".
:he person filin& a certificate of candidac" shall also affi> his latest photo&raph, passport si@e; a
state#ent in duplicate containin& his bio6data and pro&ra# of &overn#ent not e>ceedin& one hundred
!ords, if he so desires.
And the proper procedure to be ta4en if a #isrepresentation is co##itted b" a candidate in his CC is
to ?uestion the sa#e b" filin& a verified petition pursuant to Section BC, thus=
Sec. BC. Petition to den" due course to or cancel a certificate of candidac".6 A verified petition see4in&
to den" due course or to cancel a certificate of candidac" #a" be filed b" an" person e>clusivel" on the
&round that an" #aterial representation contained therein as re?uired under Section B< hereof is false.
:he petition #a" be filed at an" ti#e not later than t!ent"6five da"s fro# the ti#e of the filin& of the
certificate of candidac" and shall be decided, after due notice and hearin&, not later than fifteen da"s
before the election.
Clearl", Section BC states that the false representation in the contents of the CC re?uired under
Section B< #ust refer to #aterial #atters in order to $ustif" the cancellation of the CC. Ahat then
constitutes a #aterial #isrepresentationH
In Salcedo II v. Co##ission on Elections,B petitioner 1ictorino Salcedo II filed !ith the CME,EC a
petition see4in& cancellation of respondent Er#elita Salcedo2s +Er#elita- CC on the &round that she
had #ade #aterial #isrepresentation b" statin& her surna#e as Salcedo. Petitioner clai#ed that
Er#elita had no ri&ht to use the surna#e Salcedo, since her #arria&e to Neptali Salcedo !as void. :he
CME,EC En Banc found that Er#elita did not co##it an" #isrepresentation nor usurp another2s
na#e since she had the ri&ht to use her husband2s surna#e for bein& #arried to hi#, and thus, validated
her procla#ation as Ma"or of Sara, Iloilo. Salcedo appealed the CME,EC2s resolution, and !e held=
In case there is a #aterial #isrepresentation in the certificate of candidac", the Co#elec is authori@ed
to den" due course to or cancel such certificate upon the filin& of a petition b" an" person pursuant to
Section BC > > >
As stated in the la!, in order to $ustif" the cancellation of the certificate of candidac" under Section BC,
it is essential that the false representation #entioned therein pertainIsJ to a #aterial #atter for the
sanction i#posed b" this provision !ould affect the substantive ri&hts of a candidate K the ri&ht to run
for the elective post for !hich he filed the certificate of candidac". Althou&h the la! does not specif"
!hat !ould be considered as a 5#aterial representation,5 the Court has interpreted this phrase in a line
of decisions appl"in& Section BC of the Code.C
> > > >
:herefore, it #a" be concluded that the #aterial #isrepresentation conte#plated b" Section BC of the
Code refer to ?ualifications for elective office. :his conclusion is stren&thened b" the fact that the
conse?uences i#posed upon a candidate &uilt" of havin& #ade a false representation in his certificate
of candidac" are &rave K to prevent the candidate fro# runnin& or, if elected, fro# servin&, or to
prosecute hi# for violation of the election la!s. It could not have been the intention of the la! to
deprive a person of such a basic and substantive political ri&ht to be voted for a public office upon $ust
an" innocuous #ista4e.
> > > >
Aside fro# the re?uire#ent of #aterialit", a false representation under Section BC #ust consist of a
5deliberate atte#pt to #islead, #isinfor#, or hide a fact !hich !ould other!ise render a candidate
ineli&ible.5 In other !ords, it #ust be #ade !ith an intention to deceive the electorate as to oneLs
?ualifications for public office. :he use of surna#e, !hen not intended to #islead, or deceive the
public as to one2s identit" is not !ithin the scope of the provision.F
In Aratea v. Co##ission on Elections,') !e proclai#ed Estela D. Antipolo, the alle&ed second placer,
as Ma"or of San Antonio, 8a#bales, bein& the one !ho re#ained as the sole ?ualified candidate for the
#a"oralt" post and obtained the hi&hest nu#ber of votes, since the CC of Ro#eo D. ,on@anida, the
first placer, !as declared void ab initio. Ae find that violation of the three6ter# li#it is an eli&ibilit"
affectin& the ?ualification of a candidate to elective office and the #isrepresentation of such is a &round
to &rant the petition to den" due course or cancel a CC. Ae said that=
Section B< re?uires the candidate to certif" that he is eli&ible for the public office he see4s election.
:hus, Section B< states that 5the certificate of candidac" shall state that the person filin& > > > is
eli&ible for said office.5 :he three6ter# li#it rule, enacted to prevent the establish#ent of political
d"nasties and to enhance the electorateLs freedo# of choice, is found both in the Constitution and the
la!. After bein& elected and servin& for three consecutive ter#s, an elective local official cannot see4
i##ediate reelection for the sa#e office in the ne>t re&ular election because he is ineli&ible. ne !ho
has an ineli&ibilit" to run for elective public office is not 5eli&ible for ItheJ office.5 As used in Section
B<, the !ord 5eli&ible5 #eans havin& the ri&ht to run for elective public office, that is, havin& all the
?ualifications and none of the ineli&ibilities to run for the public office.''
> > > >
In a certificate of candidac", the candidate is as4ed to certif" under oath his eli&ibilit", and thus
?ualification, to the office he see4s election. Even thou&h the certificate of candidac" does not
specificall" as4 the candidate for the nu#ber of ter#s elected and served in an elective position, such
fact is #aterial in deter#inin& a candidateLs eli&ibilit", and thus ?ualification for the office. Election to
and service of the sa#e local elective position for three consecutive ter#s renders a candidate ineli&ible
fro# runnin& for the sa#e position in the succeedin& elections. ,on@anida #isrepresented his eli&ibilit"
because he 4ne! full !ell that he had been elected, and had served, as #a"or of San Antonio,
8a#bales for #ore than three consecutive ter#s "et he still certified that he !as eli&ible to run for
#a"or for the ne>t succeedin& ter#. :hus, ,on@anidaLs representation that he !as eli&ible for the office
that he sou&ht election constitutes false #aterial representation as to his ?ualification or eli&ibilit" for
the office.'(
In .usti#baste v. Co##ission on Elections,'* !here petitioner therein clai#ed that respondent
co##itted #aterial #isrepresentation !hen he stated his na#e in the CC as Rustico Besa Balderian
instead of Chu :ec4 Siao, !e found that it had been established that in all of respondent2s school
records, he had been usin& Rustico Besa Balderian, the na#e under !hich he !as bapti@ed and 4no!n
since he can re#e#ber. De never used the na#e Chu :ec4 Siao b" !hich he !as re&istered. It !as also
established that he had filed a petition for chan&e of na#e to avoid an" confusion and !hich the R:C
had &ranted. Ae then said, that G
A: A,, E1EN:S, the use of a na#e other than that stated in the certificate of birth is not a #aterial
#isrepresentation, as 5#aterial #isrepresentation5 under the earlier6?uoted Section BC of the #nibus
Election Code refers to 5?ualifications for elective office.5 It need not be e#phasi@ed that there is no
sho!in& that there !as an intent to deceive the electorate as to private respondentLs identit", nor that b"
usin& his 0ilipino na#e the votin& public !as thereb" deceived.'<
Clearl", fro# the fore&oin&, for the petition to den" due course or cancel the CC of one candidate to
prosper, the candidate #ust have #ade a #aterial #isrepresentation involvin& his eli&ibilit" or
?ualification for the office to !hich he see4s election, such as the re?uisite residenc", a&e, citi@enship
or an" other le&al ?ualification necessar" to run for local elective office as provided in the ,ocal
3overn#ent Code.'/ Dence, petitionerLs alle&ation that respondentLs nic4na#e 5,RA7 .R. MI385
!ritten in his CC is a #aterial #isrepresentation is devoid of #erit. Respondent2s nic4na#e !ritten in
the CC cannot be considered a #aterial fact !hich pertains to his eli&ibilit" and thus ?ualification to
run for public office.
Moreover, the false representation under Section BC #ust consist of a deliberate atte#pt to #islead,
#isinfor#, or hide a fact !hich !ould other!ise render a candidate ineli&ible. As !e said, respondent2s
nic4na#e is not considered a #aterial fact, and there is no substantial evidence sho!in& that in !ritin&
the nic4na#e 5,RA7 .R. MI385 in his CC, respondent had the intention to deceive the voters as to
his identit" !hich has an effect on his eli&ibilit" or ?ualification for the office he see4s to assu#e.
Notabl", respondent is 4no!n to the voters of the Province of Ca#arines Sur as the son of the then
incu#bent 3overnor of the province, popularl" 4no!n as 5,Ra".5 :heir relationship is sho!n b" the
posters, strea#ers and billboards displa"ed in the province !ith the faces of both the father and son on
the#. :hus, the voters of the Province of Ca#arines Sur 4no! !ho respondent is. Moreover, it !as
established b" the affidavits of respondentLs !itnesses that as the father and son have stri4in&
si#ilarities, such as their loo4s and #anneris#s, !hich re#ained unrebutted, the appellation of ,RA7
.R. has been used to refer to respondent. Dence, the appellation ,RA7 .R., acco#panied b" the na#e
MI38'E !ritten as respondentLs nic4na#e in his CC, is not at all #isleadin& to the voters, as in fact,
such na#e distin&uishes respondent fro# his father, the then incu#bent 53overnor ,RA7,5 !ho !as
runnin& for a Con&ressional seat in the (nd District of Ca#arines Sur. As !e ruled in Salcedo II v.
CME,EC,'B the use of a surna#e, !hen not intended to #islead or deceive the public as to oneLs
identit", is not !ithin the scope of Section BC of the #nibus Election Code. :hus, respondent2s
nic4na#e !ritten in his CC, !ithout intendin& to #islead the voters as to his identit", cannot be
canceled. Ae find no &rave abuse of discretion co##itted b" the CME,EC En Banc in findin& that
respondent did not co##it #aterial #isrepresentation in his CC.
Petitioner relies on 1illarosa v. Douse of Representatives Electoral :ribunal'C to $ustif" the annul#ent
of respondent2s CC. In 1illarosa, !hich involves the countin& of ballots under the #anual elections,
respondent Muintos filed an election protest relatin& to the procla#ation of A#elita 1illarosa
+1illarosa- alle&in& that the 5.:15 votes should not be counted in the latter2s favor. Ae then held that
1illarosaLs use of 5.:15 as her nic4na#e !as a clever plo" to #a4e a #oc4er" of the election process;
thus, votes of 5.:15 !ere considered stra" votes. In so rulin&, !e found that 5.:15 is the nic4na#e of
1illarosaLs husband, !ho !as then the incu#bent representative of ccidental Mindoro; that !hen
1illarosa2s husband ran and ca#pai&ned for as representative in both the 'FF( and 'FF/ elections in the
sa#e le&islative district !here 1illarosa ran in the Ma" 'FFC elections, he !as &enerall" 4no!n as
5.:1.5 Ae thus ruled that the voters !ho !rote 5.:15 in the ballots had no other person in #ind e>cept
then incu#bent representative .ose :apales 1illarosa, or the sa#e person !ho# the" have 4no!n for a
lon& ti#e as 5.:1.5 Ae also too4 into consideration 1illarosa2s state#ent in her affidavit ad#ittin& that
she !as &enerall" and popularl" 4no!n in ever" baran&a" in ccidental Mindoro as 53IR,IE5 before
and after she filed her CC; and even her counsel asserted durin& the oral ar&u#ent that her other
nic4na#e before she filed her CC !as 5Mrs. .:15 and not 5.:1.5 Ae also found that since the na#e
53IR,IE5 !ritten on the space for representative !as in fact clai#ed b" petitioner 1illarosa and
credited in her favor, then the 5.:15 votes under the ide# sonans rule cannot be counted for 1illarosa,
because onl" one nic4na#e or sta&ena#e is allo!ed; and that Rule '* of Section ('' of the #nibus
Election Code, !hich allo!s the use of a nic4na#e and appellation of affection and friendship,
provided that it is acco#panied b" the first na#e or surna#e of the candidate, !as not applied since the
5.:15 votes !ere unacco#panied b" her first na#e or surna#e. :hus, !e found that #alice and bad
faith on the part of 1illarosa !as evident !hen, in her CC and ca#pai&n #aterials, she appropriated
the initials or nic4na#e of her husband, the incu#bent representative of the district in ?uestion.
1illarosa is not on all fours !ith this case. :his case is a petition to den" due course and to cancel CC
on the &round of a state#ent of a #aterial representation that is false; to be #aterial, such #ust refer to
an eli&ibilit" or ?ualification for the elective office the candidate see4s to hold. Dere, respondent2s
nic4na#e is not a ?ualification for a public office !hich affects his eli&ibilit". Notabl", respondent2s
father, !ho !on * consecutive ter#s as 3overnor of the Province of Ca#arines Norte, is popularl"
4no!n as 5,RA7,5 so !hen respondent !rote in his CC, 5,RA7 .R. MI385 as his nic4na#e, he
differentiated hi#self fro# 3overnor 5,RA7,5 !hich ne&ates an" intention to #islead or #isinfor# or
hide a fact !hich !ould other!ise render hi# ineli&ible. Also, the appellation ,RA7 .R. !as
acco#panied b" the na#e MI38 !hich !as not so in the 1illarosa case.
It bears stressin& that Section B< re?uires, a#on& others, that a candidate shall use in a CC the na#e
b" !hich he has been bapti@ed, unless the candidate has chan&ed his na#e throu&h court6approved
proceedin&s, and that he #a" include one nic4na#e or sta&ena#e b" !hich he is &enerall" or popularl"
4no!n in the localit", !hich respondent did. As !e have discussed, the na#e !hich respondent !rote
in his CC to appear in the ballot, is not considered a #aterial #isrepresentation under Section BC of
the #nibus Election Code, as it does not pertain to his ?ualification or eli&ibilit" to run for an elective
public office. B" invo4in& the case of 1illarosa !hich is in the nature of an election protest relatin& to
the procla#ation of 1illarosa, petitioner should have instead filed an election protest and pra"ed that
the votes for respondent be declared as stra" votes, and not a petition to den" due course or cancel the
CC.
0inall", petitioner clai#s that the false representation of respondent2s nic4na#e !ritten on the CC is
#eant to under#ine the statutor" re?uire#ent re&ardin& the alphabetical listin&%arran&e#ent of na#es
of the candidate as provided under Section '*'F of Republic Act No. +RA- F*EF a#endin& RA C<*E,
the auto#ated election s"ste#; that he !ould be put to a &reat and undue disadvanta&e as he beca#e
no. /, !hile respondent !as in no. < in the list of candidates for 3overnor of Ca#arines Sur.
Ae are not persuaded.
Considerin& that respondent2s na#e is 1I,,A09ER:E, ,RA7 .R.6MI38, his na#e !ould indeed be
ahead of petitioner2s na#e, 1I,,A09ER:E, ,9IS, in the official ballot !hich contains the
alphabetical listin& of the candidates for the &ubernatorial position of the Province of Ca#arines Sur.
Do!ever, petitioner2s clai# that such listin& !ould lead to confusion as to put hi# to undue
disadvanta&e is #erel" speculative and !ithout basis as the voters can identif" the candidate the" !ant
to vote for.
ADERE0RE, the petition is DENIED. :he Resolution dated April ', ()'*, of the Co##ission on
Elections En Banc, is hereb" A00IRMED.
S RDERED.
%OS%"%O M. PER"LT"
Associate .ustice
AE CNC9R=
M"R" LOUR%ES P. ". SERENO
Chief .ustice
"NTONO T. C"RPO
Associate .ustice
PRES&TERO '. !EL"SCO, 'R.
Associate .ustice
TEREST" '. LEON"R%O(%E
C"STRO
Associate .ustice
n leave
"RTURO %. &RON)
Associate .ustice
LUC"S P. &ERS"MN
Associate .ustice
M"R"NO C. %EL C"STLLO
Associate .ustice
RO&ERTO ". "&"%
Associate .ustice
M"RTN S. !LL"R"M", 'R.
Associate .ustice
'OSE PORTUG"L PERE*
Associate .ustice
'OSE C"TR"L MEN%O*"
Associate .ustice
&EN!EN%O L. RE+ES
Associate .ustice
ESTEL" M. PERL"S(&ERN"&E
Associate .ustice
M"R!C M"RO !CTOR F. LEONEN
Associate .ustice
C E R : I 0 I C A : I N
Pursuant to Section '*, Article 1III of the Constitution, I certif" that the conclusions in the above
Decision !ere reached in consultation before the case !as assi&ned to the !riter of the opinion of the
Court.
M"R" LOUR%ES P. ". SERENO
Chief .ustice
Foo,#o,e-
N n leave.
' Rollo, pp. BF6CC; Per Curia#; Si&ned b" Chair#an Si>to S. Brillantes, .r., Co##issioners
,ucenito N. :a&le, Elias R. 7usoph, Christian Robert S. ,i# and Maria 3racia Cielo M.
Padaca; Doc4eted as SPA Case No. '*6'/< +DC-+0-
( Id. at <E6<F; Per Curia#; Si&ned b" Presidin& Co##issioner Rene 1. Sar#iento, Ar#ando C.
1elasco and Christian Robert S. ,i#.
* Rollo, pp. CF6''(.
< Id. at '(E6'*B.
/ Id. at <C.
E Id. at '/6'B. +9nderscorin& o#itted-
B *B' Phil. *BB +'FFF-.
C Id. at *C/6*CE.
F Id. at *CF6*F). +Citations o#itted-
') 3.R. No. 'F/((F, ctober F, ()'(, EC* SCRA ')/.
'' Id. at '*E6'*B.
'( Id. at '<*6'<<.
'* 3.R. No. 'BF<'*, Nove#ber (C, ())C, /B( SCRA B*E.
'< Id. at B<C6B<F.
'/ Salcedo II v. CME,EC, supra note B, at *CF, citin& RA B'E), Section *F on ?ualifications.
'E Section (''. Rules for the appreciation of ballots. 6 In the readin& and appreciation of ballots,
ever" ballot shall be presu#ed to be valid unless there is clear and &ood reason to $ustif" its
re$ection. :he board of election inspectors shall observe the follo!in& rules, bearin& in #ind
that the ob$ect of the election is to obtain the e>pression of the voter2s !ill=
> > > >
'*. :he use of the nic4na#es and appellations of affection and friendship, if
acco#panied b" the first na#e or surna#e of the candidate, does not annul such vote,
e>cept !hen the" !ere used as a #eans to identif" the voter, in !hich case the !hole
ballot is invalid= Provided, :hat if the nic4na#e used is unacco#panied b" the na#e or
surna#e of a candidate and it is the one b" !hich he is &enerall" or popularl" 4no!n in
the localit", the na#e shall be counted in favor of said candidate, if there is no other
candidate for the sa#e office !ith the sa#e nic4na#e.
'B Supra note B, at *F).
'C *F< Phil. B*) +())'-.
'F Sec. '*. Section '' of Republic Act No. C<*E is hereb" a#ended to read as follo!s=
SEC. '/. fficial Ballot. 6 :he Co##ission shall prescribe the for#at of the electronic
displa" and%or the si@e and for# of the official ballot, !hich shall contain the titles of the
position to be filled and%or the proposition to be voted upon in an initiative, referendu#
or plebiscite. Ahere practicable, electronic displa"s #ust be constructed to present the
na#es of all candidates for the sa#e position in the sa#e pa&e or screen, other!ise, the
electronic displa"s #ust be constructed to present the entire ballot to the voter, in a
series of se?uential pa&es, and to ensure that the voter sees all of the ballot options on all
pa&es before co#pletin& his or her vote and to allo! the voter to revie! and chan&e all
ballot choices prior to co#pletin& and castin& his or her ballot. 9nder each position to be
filled, the na#es of candidates shall be arran&ed alphabeticall" b" surna#e and
unifor#l" indicated usin& the sa#e t"pe si@e. :he #aiden or #arried na#e shall be
listed in the official ballot, as preferred b" the fe#ale candidate. 9nder each proposition
to be vote upon, the choices should be unifor#l" indicated usin& the sa#e font and si@e.
+E#phasis supplied-.