G.R. No. 157007 & 157019; March 17, 2004
Rasmia Romato Salic, petitioner, vs. The Commission on Elections, and Dimnatang L. Pansar, respondents. / Pauli Dimnatang Ditual, A.B.M., petitioner, vs. The Commission on Elections, Monabantog Kiram, Rasmia Salic, Dimnatang Pansar and Mesug Palawan, respondents.

FACTS

In the 2001 elections in Butig, Lanao del Sur, two conflicting Municipal Boards of Canvassers (MBC) proclaimed different sets of winners. The first board, composed of Chairman Musa Macabayao and Third Member Catambac Mimbantas, proclaimed Rasmia Salic as mayor and Pauli Ditual as vice-mayor on June 10, 2001, based on returns from 36 of 40 precincts. This board excluded four election returns, deeming them false and manufactured. A second board, composed of Vice-Chairman Mesug Palawan and Ismael Magarang (claiming to be the rightful Third Member), proclaimed Dimnatang Pansar as mayor on June 17, 2001, based on a canvass including all 40 precincts. This created a dual proclamation scenario, prompting Salic to file a petition (SPC No. 01-337) with the COMELEC to nullify the second COC.

ISSUE

Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in annulling the proclamations made by the Macabayao-Mimbantas board and ordering the constitution of a new MBC.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court upheld the COMELEC’s resolutions. The legal logic centers on the COMELEC’s constitutional and statutory mandate to enforce election laws. First, the Court found the COMELEC correctly determined the Macabayao-Mimbantas board’s composition was irregular, as the appointment of Mimbantas lacked proper documentation, casting doubt on its authority. Second, and decisively, the board committed a grave error by excluding the four election returns. A municipal board of canvassers has no jurisdiction to rule on the authenticity of election returns or to exclude them on grounds of being “false and manufactured.” Its function is purely ministerial—to tally votes from returns that appear authentic on their face. Questions affecting the validity of returns must be raised in a proper pre-proclamation controversy before the COMELEC itself. By excluding the returns, the board arrogated a quasi-judicial power it did not possess, rendering its canvass and subsequent proclamations void. The COMELEC, acting within its plenary powers to ensure the conduct of free and honest elections, properly nullified the conflicting proclamations and ordered a new canvass by a properly constituted board to count all returns, with any challenges to be resolved in the appropriate forum.