G.R. No. L-8921; January 9, 1914
ERNESTO GARDINER, protestant-appellant, vs. GREGORIO ROMULO, protestee-appellee.

FACTS:
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance in an election protest for the office of provincial governor of Tarlac. The protestant, Ernesto Gardiner, contested the election results from the municipality of Camiling. The Supreme Court, in a prior short opinion, had already annulled the entire election held in Camiling. This extended opinion sets forth the reasons for that annulment. The record revealed numerous and pervasive frauds and irregularities in the conduct of the election in Camiling’s five precincts, which were grouped under the following headings: (1) irregularities in the selection of polling stations and the construction of voting booths; (2) the disappearance of blank ballots after delivery to the municipal treasurer and the subsequent marking of the remainder by election boards; (3) frauds by inspectors in preparing ballots for illiterate voters; (4) other irregularities and frauds in the preparation and counting of ballots; and (5) intimidation and threats employed by Romulo and his partisans on election day. Specific evidence showed polling places were not on the lower floor as required, voting booths were improperly constructed allowing others to see voters mark their ballots, a guard rail was not properly placed, and there was a significant and unexplained discrepancy in the number of ballots received, delivered, and retained. The trial court had found Romulo won by a plurality of 138 votes.

ISSUE:
Whether the frauds and irregularities in the conduct of the election in the municipality of Camiling were so pervasive as to justify the annulment of the election returns from that entire municipality.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court annulled the entire election held in the municipality of Camiling. The Court held that the frauds and irregularities were not minor or incidental but constituted a fatal flaw in the conduct of the election. These included a systematic and intentional disregard of mandatory provisions of the Election Law (Act No. 1582) designed to ensure secrecy and integrity, such as those governing the location and construction of polling places and booths. This was compounded by evidence of fraud by election officials (including the disappearance and improper marking of ballots) and intimidation of voters. The Court rejected a technical objection regarding the admissibility of evidence, emphasizing that election contests are special summary proceedings where technicalities are disfavored. The Court reasoned that to uphold an election conducted with such bold and widespread disregard of the law would make representative government a farce. By annulling the Camiling returns, the protestant, Gardiner, obtained a plurality of 143 votes. The provincial board of canvassers was ordered to correct its returns accordingly. No costs were awarded.