GR 124089; (November, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. No. 124089 November 13, 1996
HADJI NOR BASHER L. HASSAN, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, et al., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Hadji Nor Basher L. Hassan and private respondent Mangondaya P. Hassan Buatan were candidates for Vice-Mayor of Madalum, Lanao del Sur in the May 8, 1995 elections. Due to threats of violence and terrorism, there was a failure of elections in six precincts. The COMELEC scheduled special elections for these precincts on May 27, 1995, but the Board of Election Inspectors (BEI) failed to report. The elections were rescheduled to May 29 at a new venue 15 kilometers away, with notice given only on the night of May 28. The regular BEI members again failed to report, forcing the COMELEC team to appoint military/police substitutes.
Petitioner filed a petition with the COMELEC to declare a failure of the May 29 special elections, citing forcible closure due to gunfire, the distant and hastily notified transfer of venue, and the resultant disenfranchisement of about 78% of registered voters. The COMELEC en banc denied the petition, reasoning that even if the votes from the one remaining uncounted precinct were all for petitioner, he would still lose, and thus directed the proclamation of private respondent as the winning candidate.
ISSUE
Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in not declaring a failure of elections for the May 29, 1995 special elections in Madalum, Lanao del Sur.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition, ruling that the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion. The legal logic centers on the proper application of Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code concerning the declaration of a failure of election. The COMELEC’s analysis was erroneously confined to a numerical computation of whether the outcome could change, which is not the sole criterion. The paramount consideration is whether the will of the electorate was defeated. Here, the circumstances—including the last-minute change of venue with insufficient notice, the substitution of BEIs with military personnel, the violence that cut voting short, and the massive disenfranchisement of voters—collectively indicate that the election did not reflect the genuine will of the people. The right to vote was effectively suppressed. The Court emphasized that the COMELEC’s duty is to ensure that elections express the people’s will, not merely to mathematically ascertain a probable winner. Consequently, the Court enjoined the proclamation and ordered the COMELEC to conduct special elections in the affected precincts.