GR L 12293; (January, 1917) (Digest)

G.R. No.: L-12293

FACTS:
1. In the June 6, 1916, election for township president of Pola, Mindoro, the certified returns showed Gregorio Basa receiving 50 votes and Hilarion Senatin 48 votes.
2. On June 7, 1916, within the three-day period prescribed by law, Hilarion Senatin presented a written election protest to the board of election inspectors of Pola. The board refused to accept it and advised him to forward his protest to the provincial board.
3. Following this advice, Senatin filed his protest with the provincial governor (the president of the provincial board) on June 8, 1916.
4. On June 12, 1916, Senatin also filed a motion contesting the election in the Court of First Instance. The court, however, certified the case to the provincial board, holding that the latter had exclusive jurisdiction over township election contests.
5. Before the provincial board, Basa moved to dismiss the contest, arguing it was filed late (on June 12) and not with the election inspectors as required. The board found that the protest was timely presented to the inspectors on June 7 and proceeded to hear the merits.
6. After examining the ballots, the provincial board found Senatin received 62 votes and Basa 50, and declared Senatin duly elected.
7. Basa then filed an original action for prohibition with the Supreme Court to stop the provincial board from proceeding. By the time the case was submitted, the board had already decided in Senatin’s favor. The Supreme Court treated the petition as one for certiorari, focusing on the board’s jurisdiction.

ISSUE: Did the provincial board of Mindoro have jurisdiction to hear and decide the election contest filed by Hilarion Senatin?

RULING:
YES, the provincial board had jurisdiction.

1. The protest was timely filed. The Supreme Court upheld the provincial board’s factual finding that Senatin presented his protest to the board of election inspectors on June 7, 1916, well within the three-day period required under subsection (b) of Section 9 of Act No. 1397 (reenacted as Section 2303 of the Administrative Code, Act No. 2657). The board’s refusal to accept it and its advice to file with the provincial board did not negate its timeliness. The subsequent filing with the provincial governor on June 8 was also within the statutory period.

2. The provincial board properly acquired jurisdiction. The Court rejected the argument that Senatin abandoned his protest before the provincial board by filing in the Court of First Instance. Senatin’s simultaneous filing was done to ensure his protest would be heard by the proper tribunal at a time when the question of jurisdiction (between the court and the board) was unsettled. He did not withdraw his protest from the provincial board.

3. Dissent: Justice Moreland dissented, arguing that under the law, election contests must originate with the board of election inspectors, which then certifies the proceedings to the provincial board for secondary review. He contended that the provincial board had no original jurisdiction to entertain a contest filed directly with it, and thus all its actions were void.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION: The petition was dismissed, with costs against petitioner Gregorio Basa.