Moya v. Del Fierro, 69 Phil.

199 (1930)

FACTS: In the general elections held on December 14, 1937, respondent Agripino Ga. Del Fierro and
petitioner Ireneo Moya were contending candidates for the office of the mayor of the Municipality of
Paracale, Camarines Norte. After canvass of the returns, the Board of canvassers proclaimed
petitioner as the elected mayor with a majority of 102 votes. However, respondent filed a motion of
protest and judgment was rendered in favor of respondent, declaring him as the candidate-elect with
a majority of 3 votes over his rival. Petitioner now seeks said judgment for review alleging the ff:

a. In admitting and counting in favor of the respondent, 8 ballots either inadvertently or contrary
to the controlling decisions of this Honorable Court
b. In admitting and counting in favor of the respondent, 3 ballots marked "R. del Fierro."
c. In admitting and counting in favor of the respondent, 7 ballots marked "Ru´no del Firro."
d. In admitting and counting in favor of the respondent, 72 ballots marked "P. del Fierro."

ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner’s contentions are tenable

HELD: NO Republicanism, in so far as it implies the adoption of a representative type of government,

necessarily points to the enfranchised citizen as a particle of popular sovereignty and as the ultimate
source of the established authority. He has a voice in his Government and whenever called upon to
act in justiciable cases, to give it efficacy and not to stifle it. This, fundamentally, is the reason for the
rule that ballots should be read and appreciated, if not with utmost, with reasonable, liberality. It is
sufficient to observe, however, in this connection that whatever might have been said incases
heretofore decided, no technical rule or rules should be permitted to defeat the intention of the
voter, if that intention is discoverable from the ballot itself, not from evidence aliunde. This rule of
interpretation goes to the very root of the system. Rationally, also, this must be the justification for
the suggested liberalization of the rules on appreciation of ballots which are now incorporated in
section 144 of the Election Code (Commonwealth Act No.357).

Badelles vs. Cabili, 27 SCRA 11, February 27, 1969

Facts: Mariano Badelles together with Bonifacio P. Legaspi and Cecilia T. Barazon who along with the
five protestees were among those who were registered candidates voted for in such election for
councilors in the City of Iligan, who contested the election of Honorable Camilo P. Cabili to the Office
of City Mayor of the said city.

It was then alleged that there are irregularities on the said election and that illegal votes were cast by
those not qualified to do so. Protestees moved to dismiss in different suits the petition on the
following grounds:

1. That the protest was filed beyond the reglementary period allowed by the Revised Election Code;

2. That the lower court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the present case, the
Commission on Elections being the proper body to hear the same;

3. That the complaint states no cause of action.

On March 23, 1968, in a single order, the election protests were dismissed based on the lack of a
cause of action.

Issue: Whether or not the dismissal issued by COMELEC on March 23, 1968 is valid.
Held: No. The election law has no justification except as a means for assuring a free, honest and
orderly expression of their views. It is of the essence that corruption and irregularities should not be
permitted to taint the electoral process.