G.R. No. 126977, September 12, 1997.
ELVIRA B. NAZARENO, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and EDWINA P. MENDOZA, respondents.

FACTS

The case involves an election protest. The ponente, Justice Davide, Jr., demonstrated that the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in the election protest case (EPC No. NC-7) was based on mere photocopies of contested ballots, which were never offered in evidence. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused to execute the RTC decision pending appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the Supreme Court’s decision in the instant case conflicts with its prior decision in Lindo v. COMELEC, et al., G.R. No. 127311, dated June 19, 1997.

RULING

No, there is no conflict between the two decisions. In the instant case (Nazareno), the Supreme Court found as a fact that the RTC based its decision on mere photocopies of ballots not offered in evidence. In Lindo, the Supreme Court treated the issue of whether the RTC relied on xerox copies as a factual matter to be resolved by the COMELEC, which was then hearing Lindo’s appeal. The COMELEC’s Second Division later decided Lindo’s appeal on the merits by opening the ballot boxes and examining the original contested ballots, a procedural step not taken in the RTC proceeding in Nazareno. This underscores the decisive factual difference between the two cases regarding the alleged use of photocopies.