COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion when it recommended prosecution of petitioners for double registration. Petitioners' claim of lack of intent and substantial compliance with the requirement of cancellation of previous registration are matters best ventilated in the trial proper.
COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion when it recommended prosecution of petitioners for double registration. Petitioners' claim of lack of intent and substantial compliance with the requirement of cancellation of previous registration are matters best ventilated in the trial proper.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion when it recommended prosecution of petitioners for double registration. Petitioners' claim of lack of intent and substantial compliance with the requirement of cancellation of previous registration are matters best ventilated in the trial proper.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
FACTS: Petitioners, Reynato Baytan, Reynaldo Baytan and Adrian Baytan
were on their way to register for the May 1998 elections when they met the newly elected Barangay Captain, Roberto Ignacio, in Barangay 18, Zone II of Cavite City, who led them to register in Precinct No. 83-A of Barangay 18.
Upon realizing that their residence is situated within the jurisdiction of
Barangay 28 not Barangay 18, petitioners proceeded to Precinct 129-A of Barangay 28 and registered anew.
Subsequently, petitioners sent a letter to former COMELEC Assistant
Executive Director Jose Pio O. Joson requesting for advice on how to cancel their previous registration.
Petitioners’ Voters Registration Records were forwarded to the Provincial
Election Supervisor, Atty. Juanito V. Ravanzo, for evaluation, who, subsequently, recommended filing an information for double registration against petitioners. The COMELEC affirmed Ravanzo’s resolution. Petitioners moved for reconsideration, which, was denied by COMELEC en banc.
Hence, this petition.
ISSUE: Whether COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion when it
recommended the prosecution of petitioners for double registration despite lack of intent and substantial compliance with the requirement of cancellation of previous registration.
HELD: No. There is no question that petitioners registered twice on different
days and in different precincts without canceling their previous registration. Since "double registration" is malum prohibitum, petitioners’ claim of lack of intent to violate the law is inconsequential. Neither is the letter to Joson an application to cancel their previous registration. This letter was sent after their second registration was accomplished and after the election officer of Cavite City had already reported their act of double registration to a higher official.
Moreover, petitioners’ claims of honest mistake, good faith and substantial
compliance with the Election Code’s requirement of cancellation of previous registration are matters of defense best ventilated in the trial proper rather than at the preliminary investigation.The established rule is that a preliminary investigation is not the occasion for the full and exhaustive display of the parties’ evidence. It is for the presentation of such evidence only as may engender a well-grounded belief that an offense has been committed and the accused is probably guilty thereof.