Friday, November 24, 2017

CASE DIGEST : COMELEC VS ROMILLO

G.R. No. L-36388 March 16, 1988

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, petitioner, 
vs.
HONORABLE MANUEL V. ROMILLO, JR., District Judge, Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte (Branch II), respondent.


FACTS : On April 24,1972, the COMELEC filed four (4) criminal Complaints against one Eden Asuncion for election offenses committed on Election Day, November 8,1971, at around 10:00 A.M., at Polling Precinct No. 58, Laoag City. The four (4) cases were filed with said court for preliminary investigation pursuant to Sections 234 and 236 of the Election Code of 1971 (Republic Act No. 6388. 1

After preliminary investigation, respondent Judge issued the Order, dated October 27,1972, dismissing Criminal Cases Nos. 119-II, 121-II and 122- II for insufficiency of evidence, and quashing the Complaint in Criminal Case No. 120-II, which is the questioned portion of the Order, on the ground that the mere presence of an unauthorized person in the polling place does not constitute an offense.

COMELEC's Motion for Reconsideration was denied by respondent Judge in his Order dated December 20, 1972,

ISSUE : WON there is a violation of Section 172 of the Election Code.

HELD : Violation of the foregoing provision is classified as a serious election offense, thus:

Sec. 230.              Election offenses and their classification. — Violation of any of the provisions, or pertinent portions of sections ... one hundred and seventy-two ... shall be serious election offenses; ...

the penalty prescribed therefor being:

SEC. 233.              Penalties. — Any one found guilty of a serious election offense shall be punished with imprisonment of not less than six years and one day but not more than twelve years; ...

From the tenor of the foregoing provisions, it is clear that Section 172, in relation to Sections 230 and 233 of the Revised Election Code of 1971, is penal in character, contrary to the ruling of respondent Judge.

Sections 172, 230 and 233 of the said 1971 Election Code have been reproduced in Sections 137, 179 and 181 of the 1978 Election Code, and in Sections 192, 262 and 264 of the Omnibus Election Code.



But while respondent Judge may have erred in his rationalization, the quashal of the complaint in Criminal Case No. 120-II will have to be upheld. The same reason given by respondent Judge for the dismissal of Criminal Cases Nos. 119-II, 121-II and 122-II, that is, for insufficiency of evidence, applies. Quoted in the dismissal Order is the following testimony of the Chairman of the Board of Election Inspectors of Precinct No. 58, Laoag City, showing the absence of a prima facie case against the accused.

Q —       As per telegram of the Comelec, Manila, dated February 10, 1972, affidavits were submitted by Marcelino Dajugar and Lucille Guerrero of Barrios Balatong and No. 19, respectively, of Laoag City charging one, Eden Asuncion, of having entered the polling place and voting booths of Precinct No. 58, with firearms and then watched voters fill up ballots and read the contents thereof What can you say about that?

A—        All I can say is that when I saw Eden Asuncion tried (sic) to enter the voting booth, I stopped him and sent him out and he did so; I never saw him carrying a firearm. With respect to the charges that Eden Asuncion watched voters fill up their ballots and reading the contents of the same, I never saw him committed (sic) those acts because when he tried to enter the voting booths I called his attention to go out and he went out. (Exhibit "1")

No comments:

Post a Comment