Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions

"G.R. No. 191410 (PROSPERO C. NOGRALES v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS.) - On March 12, 2010, petitioner filed this petition for mandamus praying that after due hearing, judgment be rendered by this Court, commanding respondent Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to clean the list of voters for Davao City of double/multiple and dead registrants and that a new list of voters covering the three congressional districts be prepared and used as basis in the conduct of the May 10, 2010 National and Local Elections.

The facts are as follows:

Petitioner was a candidate for the position of mayor in Davao City in the May 10, 2010 elections.

Petitioner submits that on February 9, 2010, in accordance with COMELEC Resolution No. 8646, the certified list of voters for Davao City was posted, certified by the respective Election Registration Boards of the three Congressional Districts to be clean, complete, permanent and updated, in accordance with the State policy enunciated in Section 2 of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8189, otherwise known as The Voters Registration Act of 1996. Based on the said certified list of voters, the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting, an accredited citizens' arm of respondent, filed with respondent a Manifestation stating that the certified list of voters in Davao City was padded with about 40,000 double/multiple registrants and about 940 dead registrants.

Petitioner alleges that instead of cleaning and updating the list of voters in Davao City from double/multiple registrants and dead persons still registered therein, the COMELEC, through its officials, made it known that it will not clean the questionable list of voters anymore. Instead, it would give "watch-lists" to the Board of Election Inspectors (BEIs) with instructions to follow pursuant to COMELEC Minute Resolution No. 09- 0696^[1] promulgated on October 20, 2009, which resolution contained the policy on the issue of double/multiple registration, thus:

1. In all cases where registrants are found to be registered in two (2) or more districts/cities/municipalities, the latest registration shall prevail which is deemed to be more in consonance with the intent of the concerned registered voters. Accordingly, they shall be allowed to vote only in the district/city/municipality of their latest registration. This is distinguished from the policy on double/multiple registrants found within the same district/city/municipality where their original registration shall prevail over subsequent registrations.
    
2. The [Information Technology Department (ITD)] of the Commission shall print a list of double/multiple registrants per precinct and per district/municipality/city indicating therein the dates of registration.
    
3. Copies of the list shall be provided by the ITD to the Election Officers of the districts/cities/municipalities where the double/multiple registrants have earlier registered with instructions to inform the BEIs not to allow these registrants to vote in their precincts on the ground that they will be allowed to vote only in the district/city/municipality where they last registered.^[2]

Petitioner contends that COMELEC's refusal to cleanse the list of voters in Davao City means that it is going to conduct the May 10, 2010 elections in Davao City based on the questionable list of voters, which is contrary and repugnant to the declared State policy, enunciated in Section 2 of R.A. No. 8189, to systematize the present method of registration in order to establish a clean, complete, permanent and updated list of voters.

Hence, petitioner prays that this Court render judgment commanding respondent COMELEC to clean the list of voters for Davao City of double/multiple and dead registrants and that a new list of voters covering the three congressional districts be prepared and used as basis in the conduct of the May 10, 2010 National and Local Elections.

On March 16, 2010, the Court resolved to require respondent to comment on the petition within a non-extendible period of five days.

On March 23, 2010, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a Motion to Suspend Period Within Which to File Comment,^[3] as it had not yet been furnished with a copy of the petition and its annexes, which motion was granted by the Court in a Resolution^[4] dated April 6, 2010. The Court required petitioner to furnish the OSG with a copy of the petition and its annexes within five days from notice thereof.^[5]

In a Resolution dated September 21, 2010, the Court required the OSG to show cause why it should not be disciplinary dealt with or held in contempt for failure to file the required Comment.

On October 18, 2010, the OSG filed a Manifestation and Motion,^[6] stating that it received a copy of the petition on June 11, 2010.^[7] The Associate Solicitor, to whom the case was assigned, stated that due to the voluminous documents being received by the OSG, the petition and its annexes were attached to another case folder, and she apologized for the oversight, and prayed that the attached Comment be admitted in the interest of substantial justice.

On November 23, 2010, the Court issued a Resolution resolving to (a) note and grant the Manifestation and Motion dated October 15, 2010 of the OSG; (b) note the OSG's Comment on the Petition; and (c) require petitioner to file a Reply to the Comment within ten days from notice thereof.

Petitioner received the Resolution dated November 23, 2010 on January 18, 2011. On January 25, 2011, petitioner filed a Motion for Extension^[8] often days from January 25, 2011 within which to file a Reply, which motion was granted by the Court. On February 16, 2011, the Court received petitioner's Reply.

In its Comment, respondent COMELEC, represented by the OSG, submits that the petition for mandamus is moot and academic as it (respondent) had already accomplished prior to the May 10, 2010 elections what petitioner seeks to be done, and the winners of the said election had already been proclaimed. It already took the necessary steps to cleanse the certified list of voters to ensure that voters with multiple records would only be able to vote once with the issuance of the following resolutions.

On October 20, 2009, the COMELEC issued Minute Resolution No. 09-0696, resolving to observe the following guidelines in dealing with double registrants: (1) If there are two registrations of a voter in the same district, city or municipality, the second registration would not be considered; and (2) if the registration is in two or more districts, cities or municipalities, the latest registration would be considered. Pursuant to the resolution, the ITD of the COMELEC printed a list of voters whose registration records are not valid per precinct and per district/municipality/city, and disseminated the same to all election officers.

On March 10, 2010, the COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. 8791^[9] to abate the registration records of voters found to have double or multiple registration. The COMELEC also ordered all members of the BEI not to allow such voters to vote in their respective precincts in the May 10, 2010 elections, and to delete their registration records in the next Election Registration Board hearings.

On April 5, 2010, the COMELEC issued Resolution No. 8817,^[10]  further directing all Election Officers to manually cross out from the Election Day Computerized Voters Lists, Posted Computerized Voters Lists, and the Supplemental Lists of Voters, if any, the names of voters whose registration records have been abated, and to indicate on top of the crossed-out name, the annotation: "PER RESOLUTION NO. 8791" followed by the signature of the Election Officer.

On May 7, 2010, the COMELEC issued Resolution No. 8882,^[11] resolving to adopt the policies and guidelines relative to the Automated Fingerprints Identification System cleansing of the lists of voters, and reiterating its directives in Minute Resolution No. 09-0696 dated October 20, 2009; Resolution No. 8791 dated March 10, 2010; and Resolution No. 8817 dated April 5, 2010.

The petition is dismissed for being moot and academic.

Indeed, the case became moot and academic even before petitioner was able to furnish respondent COMELEC, represented by the OSG, with a copy of his petition in accordance with due process. The election was held on May 10, 2010, while petitioner furnished respondent with a copy of his petition on June 11, 2010.

The Comment of the OSG and the COMELEC Resolutions issued for the 2010 National and Local Elections show that the COMELEC had addressed the concern of petitioner by issuing, among others, Resolution No. 8791^[12] on March 10, 2010; Resolution No. 8817^[13] on April 5, 2010; and Resolution No. 8882^[14] on May 7, 2010.

Notably, three days before the elections, on May 7, 2010, the COMELEC issued Resolution No. 8882, entitled CLEANSING OF THE LISTS OF VOTERS THROUGH THE AUTOMATED FINGERPRINT IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM (AFIS), which resolved to adopt the following policies and guidelines:

1. To abate the other registration records of voters found to have double or multiple registration records pursuant to the policy reinstated in Comelec Minute Resolution No. 09-0696 dated October 20, 2009, quoted as follows:

In all cases where registrants are found to be registered in two (2) or more districts/cities/municipalities the latest registration shall prevail which is deemed to be more in consonance with the intent of the concerned registered voters. Accordingly, they shall be allowed to vote only in the district/city/municipality of their latest registration.
 
This is distinguished from the policy on double/multiple registrants found within the same district/city/municipality where their original registration shall prevail.

2. To direct the Board of Election Inspectors not to allow these voters to vote in their respective precincts in the May 10, 2010 elections;
   
   
3. To direct all Election Officers to manually cross out from the Election Day Computerized Voters Lists (EDCVLs), Posted Computerized Voters Lists (PCVLs), and the Supplemental Lists of Voters, if any, the names of voters whose registration records have been abated, and to indicate on top of the crossed-out name, the following annotation: "PER RESOLUTION NO. 8791" followed by the signature of the Election Officer;
   
   
4. To delete the registration records of said voters in the next Election Registration Board (ERB) hearings;
   
   
5. To direct the Education and Information Department (EID) of the Commission on Elections to cause the publication of this Resolution in two (2) daily newspapers of general circulations in the Philippines, and give it the widest dissemination; and
   
   
6. To direct the Election and Barangay Affairs Department in coordination with the Information Technology Department (ITD) to implement this Resolution.cralaw

WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED  for being moot and academic."

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA E. VIDAL
Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Entitled In the Matter of the Policy on Double/Multiple Registrants, rollo, p. 111.

^[2] Rollo, pp. 111-112. (See also Resolution No. 7893, rollo, p. 114.) 

^[3] Id. at 116. 

^[4] Id. at 119. 

^[5] Id. 

^[6] Id. at 127. 

^[7] Id. at 128. 

^[8] Id. at 148. 

^[9] IN THE MATTER OF THE ABATEMENT OF PREVIOUS OR SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION RECORDS OF VOTERS FOUND TO HAVE REGISTERED MORE THAN ONCE

x x x x 

NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the powers vested in it by the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, the Omnibus Election Code, Republic Act No. 8189, and other election laws, the Commission on Elections RESOLVED as it hereby RESOLVES: 

1. To abate the other registration records of voters found to have double or multiple registration records as listed by the ITD; 

2. To direct the Board of Election Inspectors not to allow these voters to vote in their respective precincts in the May 10, 2010 elections; 

3. To delete the registration records of said voters in the next Election Registration Board (ERB) hearings. 

4. To direct the Education and Information Department (EID) of the Commission on Elections to cause the publication of this Resolution in two (2) daily newspapers of general circulations in the Philippines, and give it the widest dissemination; and 

5. To direct the Election and Barangay Affairs Department in coordination with the ITD to implement this Resolution.

^[10] ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS TO THE ELECTION OFFICERS IN THE MATTER OF THE ABATEMENT OF PREVIOUS OR SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION RECORDS OF VOTERS FOUND TO HAVE REGISTERED MORE THAN ONCE. 

^[11] CLEANSING OF THE LISTS OF VOTERS THROUGH THE AUTOMATED FINGERPRINT IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM (AFIS). 

^[12] IN THE MATTER OF THE ABATEMENT OF PREVIOUS OR SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION RECORDS OF VOTERS FOUND TO HAVE REGISTERED MORE THAN ONCE. 

^[13] ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS TO THE ELECTION OFFICERS IN THE MATTER OF THE ABATEMENT OF PREVIOUS OR SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION RECORDS OF VOTERS FOUND TO HAVE REGISTERED MORE THAN ONCE. 

^[14] CLEANSING OF THE LISTS OF VOTERS THROUGH THE AUTOMATED FINGERPRINT IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM (AFIS).