G.R. No. 190734 March 26, 2010
BAI SANDRA S.A. SEMA, Petitioner, vs. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL and DIDAGEN P. DILANGALEN, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Bai Sandra S.A. Sema and respondent Didagen P. Dilangalen were candidates for Representative of the Lone District of Shariff Kabunsuan with Cotabato City in the May 14, 2007 elections. Dilangalen was proclaimed winner. Sema filed an election protest before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) covering 195 precincts in Datu Odin Sinsuat, alleging various election irregularities including misappreciation of ballots, use of fake ballots, vote-buying, intimidation, and tampering of election returns. Dilangalen filed an Answer with a Counter-Protest covering 248 precincts in Sultan Kudarat and Sultan Mastura. During the revision of ballots, it was discovered that only one out of the 248 counter-protested precincts’ ballot boxes contained ballots; the other 247 were empty. In the 195 protested precincts, the HRET found that the majority of ballots were fake or spurious, lacking COMELEC security features, and the ballot boxes lacked self-locking metal seals. The HRET, in its assailed Decision, ruled that Sema failed to prove by convincing evidence that election irregularities materially affected the results. It held that in the absence of valid ballots, the untampered election returns and other documents constituted the best evidence of the votes. The HRET thus dismissed Sema’s protest and affirmed Dilangalen’s proclamation. Sema filed a Petition for Certiorari before the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing Bai Sandra S.A. Sema’s election protest.

RULING

No, the HRET did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The Supreme Court affirmed the HRET’s Decision and Resolution. The Court held that the HRET’s factual findings, including its determination that the ballots were spurious and that the election returns were untampered, are conclusive upon the Court, absent a showing of grave abuse of discretion. Jurisprudence establishes that where ballot boxes have been compromised or are empty, and the election returns are intact and show no signs of tampering, these returns constitute the best evidence of the results. The HRET merely acted in accordance with this settled rule when it relied on the election returns after finding the ballots unreliable or missing. The Court found no showing that the HRET committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. The petition was dismissed.