G.R. No. 86362-63 October 27, 1989
RAMON D. DUREMDES, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, PROVINCIAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS OF ILOILO, LAKAS NG BANSA and CIPRIANO B. PENAFLORIDA, respondents.

FACTS

In the 1988 elections for Vice-Governor of Iloilo, petitioner Ramon Duremdes and private respondent Cipriano Penaflorida were among the candidates. During the provincial canvass, Penaflorida objected to 110 election returns. The Provincial Board of Canvassers overruled these objections and included the returns. On January 31, 1988, the Board proclaimed Duremdes as the winner based on his “Manifestation and Motion” asserting that the contested returns would not affect the uncontested results, as he led by 7,286 uncontested votes. Duremdes then took his oath and assumed office. Penaflorida appealed the Board’s rulings to the COMELEC via a Petition for Review and also filed a separate Petition (SPC Case No. 88-448) seeking annulment of returns and suspension of proclamation.
The COMELEC Second Division, on September 20, 1988, issued a Resolution sustaining both the Board’s rulings on the objections and the validity of Duremdes’ proclamation. It ordered the Board to reconvene, include the questioned returns in the canvass, and proclaim the winners for the remaining Sangguniang Panlalawigan slots. Penaflorida moved for reconsideration, and the case was elevated to the COMELEC en banc. On December 10, 1988, the COMELEC en banc issued a Resolution reversing the Second Division, annulling Duremdes’ proclamation, and ordering a new canvass of all returns, excluding the 110 contested ones. Duremdes filed this petition to annul the COMELEC en banc Resolution.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the COMELEC en banc acted with grave abuse of discretion in annulling Duremdes’ proclamation and ordering a recanvass that excluded the contested returns, despite the Second Division’s ruling that the proclamation was valid under Section 245 of the Omnibus Election Code.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, annulling the COMELEC en banc Resolution. The legal logic centers on the application of Section 245 of the Omnibus Election Code, which allows a board of canvassers to proclaim a candidate if the contested returns will not adversely affect the election results. The Court held that the COMELEC Second Division correctly sustained Duremdes’ proclamation. The tabulation showed Duremdes leading by 7,286 votes in the uncontested returns. Even if all 13,373 of his contested votes were excluded and all 4,427 of Penaflorida’s contested votes were included—a scenario overwhelmingly favorable to Penaflorida—Duremdes would still lead by a margin of 17,232 votes. This mathematical certainty satisfied the condition in Section 245, making the proclamation valid.
The COMELEC en banc committed grave abuse of discretion by disregarding this conclusive numerical analysis and the Second Division’s factual findings, which were supported by the records. By ordering a recanvass that excluded the contested returns, the en banc effectively ruled on the merits of the objections—a function proper for an election contest, not a pre-proclamation controversy. Once a valid proclamation is made, the remedy for the losing candidate is to file an election protest. The Court emphasized that pre-proclamation controversies are summary proceedings, and the COMELEC en banc’s detailed re-evaluation of the returns exceeded its authority, undermining the finality of