G.R. No. 264661 , July 30, 2024
CLARYLYN A. LEGASPI, ET AL., PETITIONERS, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioners, citizens and voters of Pangasinan, filed an “APELA” (appeal) requesting a manual recount of the votes cast in the province during the May 9, 2022 elections. They alleged widespread fraud, claiming the election results were contrary to the votes of the majority. The Commission on Elections acted upon this appeal. Subsequently, petitioners filed a Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus. The vote-counting machines functioned and counted the votes during the election, unlike in the cited case of Loong v. Commission on Elections where the machines failed to read the ballots.

ISSUE

Whether the denial of a manual recount violated petitioners’ constitutional rights to suffrage, to petition the government, and to information on matters of public concern.

RULING

No, there was no violation of petitioners’ constitutional rights.
1. Right to Suffrage: There was no showing that petitioners were prevented from voting. The manual recount they insist upon is a remedy not provided for by law or jurisprudence. The case of Loong is inapplicable because here, the vote-counting machines functioned properly, whereas in Loong, the machines failed, necessitating a manual count.
2. Right to Petition: Petitioners’ right was not violated as they were able to file their APELA, and the Commission on Elections acted upon it.
3. Right to Information: There was no denial of this right because, upon reading the APELA, there was no demand for access to any official record, document, or paper pertaining to official acts. Furthermore, the APELA cannot be considered an initiative under the law, as it proposed no constitutional amendments or legislation.
The Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus was dismissed.