Scribd
Upload
48 views2 pages

04 Loong Vs Comelec

The COMELEC ordered a manual count of votes in the 1998 gubernatorial election in Sulu province after automated counting machines malfunctioned in six municipalities due to printing errors on the ballots. Petitioner Loong contested the manual count, arguing it allowed for election cheating. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the COMELEC was within its broad constitutional powers to administer elections in ordering the manual count, as it was the only way to determine the will of the voters in those municipalities affected by the machine errors. The manual count was a reasonable exercise of COMELEC's authority to ensure a credible election.

Uploaded by

Janno Sangalang
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
48 views2 pages

04 Loong Vs Comelec

The COMELEC ordered a manual count of votes in the 1998 gubernatorial election in Sulu province after automated counting machines malfunctioned in six municipalities due to printing errors on the ballots. Petitioner Loong contested the manual count, arguing it allowed for election cheating. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the COMELEC was within its broad constitutional powers to administer elections in ordering the manual count, as it was the only way to determine the will of the voters in those municipalities affected by the machine errors. The manual count was a reasonable exercise of COMELEC's authority to ensure a credible election.

Uploaded by

Janno Sangalang
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 2

04 Loong vs COMELEC

Background Facts:
 To improve elections, Congress enacted R.A. No. 8436 on December 22, 1997 prescribing
the adoption of an automated election system. The new system was used in the May 11,
1998 regular elections held in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) which
includes the Province of Sulu.
 Petitioner Tupay Loong. Respondeng Abdusakur Tan. Both ran in the 1998 elections to be
the Governor of Sulu.
Major Facts:
 The problem started during the automated counting of votes for the local officials of Sulu.
At about 6 a.m. of May 12, 1998, election inspectors and watchers noticed discrepancies
between the election returns and the votes cast for the mayoralty candidates in the
municipality of Pata. Some ballots picked at random confirmed that votes in favor of a
mayoralty candidate were not reflected in the printed election returns.
 The COMELEC suspended the automated counting of ballots in Pata. The experts on the
automated machines found out that the problem was caused by the misalignment of the
ovals opposite the names of candidates in the local ballots. They found nothing wrong with
the automated machines. The error was in the printing of the local ballots. As a result, the
automated machines failed to read them correctly.
 COMELEC issued resolutions ordering the manual counting of votes and the guidelines in
doing so (instead of automated counting) to still assure fair elections. COMELEC started
the manual count on the same date, May 18,1998.
 On June 8, 1998, private respondent Tan was proclaimed governor- elect of Sulu based on
the manual count.
 Petitioner Loong contends that the manual counting gave "opportunity to election
cheatings”. Petitioner then prayed for a temporary restraining order enjoining the
COMELEC from conducting manual counting of the votes and to instead proceed with
the automated counting.

Ballots in five municipalities were also malfunctional for having the wrong sequence code.

Issue:
Whether or not COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction
in ordering a manual count.

Held: NO.

Ruling:

The order for a manual count cannot be characterized as arbitrary, capricious or whimsical.

Section 2(1) of Article IX(C) of the Constitution gives the COMELEC the broad power "to enforce
and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative,
referendum and recall."
Undoubtedly, the text and intent of this provision is to have COMELEC all the necessary and
incidental powers for it to achieve the objective of holding free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and
credible elections.

The manual counting was the only way to count the decisive local votes in the six (6) municipalities
of Sulu where the automated machines malfunctioned. The bottom line is that by means of the
manual count, the will of the voters of Sulu was honestly determined. We cannot kick away the
will of the people by giving a literal interpretation to R.A. 8436. R.A. 8436 did not prohibit manual
counting when machine count does not work. Counting is part and parcel of the conduct of an
election which is under the control and supervision of the COMELEC. It ought to be self-evident
that the Constitution did not envision a COMELEC that cannot count the result of an election.

You might also like