P.E.T. Case No. 005, February 16, 2021
FERDINAND “BONGBONG” R. MARCOS, JR., PROTESTANT, VS. MARIA LEONOR “LENI DAANG MATUWID” G. ROBREDO, PROTESTEE.

FACTS

Protestant Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos, Jr. filed an election protest challenging the election and proclamation of protestee Maria Leonor “Leni Daang Matuwid” G. Robredo as Vice President in the May 9, 2016 elections, where protestee won by a margin of 263,473 votes. The Protest, filed on June 29, 2016, was premised on two causes of action: (1) the nullity of protestee’s proclamation due to allegedly inauthentic Certificates of Canvass (COCs), and (2) massive electoral fraud, anomalies, and irregularities in 92,509 clustered precincts. Protestee filed an Answer with a Counter-Protest contesting results in 7,547 clustered precincts in 13 provinces.
The Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) confirmed its jurisdiction and the Protest’s sufficiency in form and substance. During the preliminary conference, the PET categorized the causes of action into three: (1) Annulment of Proclamation, (2) Revision and Recount of ballots in Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental, and (3) Annulment of Elections in Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, and Basilan. The PET later dismissed the first cause of action as “meaningless and pointless.” It directed that the revision of ballots begin with the three pilot provinces (Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental) as test cases. The revision process involved authenticating ballots, segregating them by vote, and recounting. Protestant also filed a separate Motion for Technical Examination of voters’ signatures for his third cause of action, which the PET deferred pending results from the pilot provinces.

ISSUE

Whether the election protest filed by protestant Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos, Jr. should be dismissed.

RULING

The Presidential Electoral Tribunal DISMISSED the election protest. The PET held that an election protestant bears the heavy burden of clearly and specifically alleging, and then proving, the irregularities alleged. When the protestant fails to meet the strict requirement of specificity and established rules on evidence to support the allegations of election irregularities, the election protest must be dismissed. The Tribunal’s resolution was based on the results and proceedings from the pilot provinces, which served as test cases. Protestant failed to substantiate his allegations of fraud and irregularities with sufficient evidence during the revision and recount process in the designated pilot provinces. Consequently, the protest could not proceed to the other contested areas.