ChanRobles Virtual law Library

Presidential Electoral Tribunal

LOREN B. LEGARDA, Protestant,

-versus-��������������������������������������������� PET Case No. 003

NOLI L. DE CASTRO, Protestee.

x ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- x

ORDER

Acting on the "Request for Subpoena Ad Testificandum and Duces Tecum, dated 14 November 2006, filed by protestant, through counsel, for the issuance of a new subpoena ad testificandum and duces tecum on "The duly authorized official/officer and/or personnel of the political party, LAKAS-CMD (hereafter referred to as 'LAKAS Party' for brevity), who is currently in actual physical possession and custody of the National ELECTION RETURNS(4^th copy), given and turned over to the said LAKAS Party, as the Comelec-Designated DOMINANT MAJORITY Party, during the May 10, 2004 elections) x x x x and to BRING with him/her the NATIONAL Election Returns, 4^th Copy for the Lakas Party as the Dominant Majority Party from [1] the Municipality of BALINDONG, Lanao del Sur, if available and in his/her current possession/custody; [2] The Municipality of TARAKA, Lanao del Sur, also if available and in his/her current possession and custody; and [3] from ONE OTHER municipality of Lanao del Sur which are available and in his/her current possession and custody, which ERs copies were used in the May 10, 2004 election." The undersigned designated Hearing Commissioner hereby denies the request for the following reasons:

1. The request does not state the full name of the specific person to whom the subpoena will be addressed/issued. A subpoena cannot be addressed/issued to or served on an unknown or unidentified person.

2. In the same manner, the subpoena duces tecum in addition must contain a reasonable description of the document to be brought to the Tribunal, which must appear to be prima facie relevant. In this case, the document requested to be brought-election returns, 4^th copy, from "one other municipality of Lanao del Sur" is not reasonably described or identified; hence, it is a "fishing expedition" not permitted to be done.

3. The precise document must be so designated or described that it may be clearly identified (See Universal Rubber Products, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 130 SCRA 104, 110 [1984]). The subpoena duces tecum cannot leave it to the addressee to bring any election return, 4^th copy, from any municipality of Lanao del Sur, which may not be prima facie relevant.

IN VIEW WHEREOF, the request for subpoena, dated 14 November 2006, filed by the protestant, through counsel, is hereby denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Manila, 15 November 2006.

(Sgd.) BERNARDO P. PARDO

Ret. Associate Justice, Supreme Court

Designated Hearing Commissioner

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE