G.R. No. L-2051; May 21, 1948
BERNARDO TORRES, protestant-appellant, vs. MAMERTO S. RIBO and ALEJANDRO BALDERIAN, respondents-appellees.

FACTS

In the 1947 general elections, Bernardo Torres, Mamerto S. Ribo, and Alejandro Balderian were candidates for provincial governor of Leyte. The provincial governor (Ribo) and two provincial board members, being candidates, were disqualified from serving on the provincial board of canvassers under the Revised Election Code. The Commission on Elections, via telegram received November 21, appointed the division superintendent of schools, district engineer, and district health officer as substitute members. However, on November 22, before the appointed substitutes (division superintendent and district engineer) had returned to Tacloban, a canvass was conducted by a group including the provincial treasurer (chairman), provincial fiscal, and two individuals—Vicente Tizon (assistant civil engineer) and Evaristo Pascual (chief clerk)—who purported to represent the absent district engineer and division superintendent, respectively. This board proclaimed Ribo as governor-elect. On November 24, the properly constituted board, including the appointed substitutes, met again, recanvassed the votes, and again proclaimed Ribo. Torres filed an election protest, which the trial court dismissed as filed out of time, counting the period from the November 22 proclamation.

ISSUE

Whether the proclamation made on November 22, 1947, by the provincial board of canvassers was valid, such that the period for filing an election protest should be counted from that date.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s order. The November 22 proclamation was illegal and void. The individuals who acted as members representing the district engineer and division superintendent of schools (Tizon and Pascual) were not lawful members of the provincial board of canvassers. Under Sections 158 and 159 of the Revised Election Code, only the specifically enumerated officers or their appointed substitutes (by the Commission on Elections) may serve. The power to appoint substitute members is exclusive to the Commission on Elections and cannot be delegated. Furthermore, the board exercises quasi-judicial functions, which are non-delegable. The board on November 22 also lacked a quorum, as only three lawful members were present. Therefore, the valid proclamation was the one made on November 24 by the lawfully constituted board. Consequently, the period for filing the election protest should be counted from November 24, making the protest timely filed.

AI Generated by Armztrong.