LEGARDA v.

DE CASTRO
PET Case No. 003 Jan. 18, 2008 Quisumbing, J. Bec
petitioners Loren Legarda
responden Noli de Castro
ts
summary Legarda challenges the proclamation of De Castro because of the spurious electoral
returns (ER). As evidence, she asked PET for revision of the votes in two municipalities in
Lanao del Sur. However PET dismissed the protest because she abandoned the same
when she assumed her senatorial seat in the 2007 elections. Furthermore, the ERs as public
documents, have prima facie proof that the facts contained therein are accurate. Legarda
failed to overturn this presumption. Even ruling in favor of the petitioner would not
change the result of the elections.

facts of the case

Congress as National Board of Canvassers (NBC) proclaimed De Castro as Vice President elect in the 2004
elections with 15, 100,431 votes. His opponent Legarda, garnering 14,218,709 votes, filed an election protest
with PET to annul the proclamation of De Castro.
GROUNDS: basically states that there was electoral fraud carried through dagdag bawas system in the
municipalities concerned which reflected wrong numbers in their electoral returns
First Aspect 9,007 precints in 6 provinces, 1 city and 5 municipalities were falsified and manipulated. The correct results were
not properly reflected In the election documents which was used in the final canvass used in the proclamation of De Castro.
Second Aspect there is a need for revision of ballots in 124,404 precints
PROCEDURAL De Castro filed MTD but it was not granted because the protest was sufficient in form and substance. However
PET reserved its right to rule on the merits of the protest.
On June 2005, PET ascertained the number of ballot boxes subject to challenge and found that 22,679 boxes were involved.
However Legarda abandoned the other provinces and focused on Lanao del Sur with 1,568 boxes. (9,931 votes only)
While the case was pending, PET ordered the parties not to sensationalize the case by divulging information to the media.
However the parties continued to publicize the investigation as evidenced by numerous articles from different major newspapers
which quoted the legal teams of the parties. PET warned the parties and reminded them that these matters are sub judice.
As for the second aspect, there was revision of ballots from Cebu wherein a team of officials and trained personnel recounted the
ballots therein (for 10 months for one province only!!). Due to the failure of Legardo to pay the required amount for
revision of the ballots, the second aspect was dismissed.
EVIDENCE PRESENTED (Legarda): sample electoral returns from the pilot precints in Lanao del Sur
(Balindong and Taraka) and the statement of votes were not matching! May dagdag-bawas dito so malamang
meron din sa maraming lugar!
DE CASTRO: The electoral returns (ERs) are public documents which enjoy the presumption of regularity
of the facts stated therein. The ERs bore the security features also which proved their genuineness.
Furthermore, assuming that the results of the pilot precints retabulation was favorable to Legarda, still the
results of the elections will remain unchanged. (may lead pa akong 881,722 votes asa ka pang manalo!)
On Oct 2007, the hearing commissioner of PET submitted his final report recommending the dismissal
because:
1. Legarda failed to prove her case
2. Her candidacy for senator deemed as abandonment of her protest (Defensor-Santiago v. Ramos)
3. Pilot-tested revision of ballots would not affect the results of the 2004 elections.

issue
1. WON Legarda abandoned her protest? YES
2. WON there was electoral fraud? NO.
ratio
On the issue of abandonment of protest

1
 The court used the case of Defensor-Santiago v. Ramos wherein the protest filed by the former in the 1992
Presidential elections was deemed abandoned when she assumed her seat in the Senate. This would be in the
interest of the public as it would dissipate the aura of uncertainty as to the results of the 1992 elections. This
case is on all fours with the present controversy, except that Legarda was VP candidate. For being elected
senator in 2007, she is deemed to have abandoned her 2004 VP election protest.

On the issue of electoral fraud

Legarda failed to rebut the presumption of regularity of ER as public documents. The ER used by Congress
in proclaiming De Castro as VP elect were authentic and duly executed in the regular course of business. To
overcome the presumption of regularity, there must be clear and convincing evidence.
1. Legarda: the security features in the ERs retrieved by Congress and COMELEC were different!
SC: Nope, not enough as this is not evidence that ERs were fake and spurious. Testimonial
evidence presented not sufficient as those examined were from a sample set only, and witnesses
were able to identify security features naman!
2. Legarda: there was a break-in in Congress to switch the ERs
SC: No conclusive evidence presented! Deputy for Operations from HoR denied the allegations

And assuming arguendo that all the votes in the 497 precints included in the pilot areas for the first aspect
(99,400 votes) would be considered in favor of Legarda, The margin of De Castro would still be 881,722 votes!
Those proven (2 municipalities in Lanao del Sur only consists of 9,931 votes.
Legarda: But I did not have enough time to gather more evidence!
SC: PET was liberal already in allowing the first aspect of the case already. It cannot be concluded that a
half million votes were illegally obtained based on the evidence presented by the petitioner. Her evidence is
not sufficient!