|
|
|
|
TECHNICAL EXAMINATION OF FINGERPRINTS IN THE VOTING RECORDS As regards the second issue, it is petitioner’s
stand that a revision and examination of the ballots, rather than a
technical examination of the fingerprints in the voting records, is the
proper method for the COMELEC to adopt in resolving the election dispute.
Petitioner contends that only through a revision of ballots may the
spurious and fraudulent votes be identified.
Petitioner’s contention is untenable. Firstly, petitioner is not really contesting the method of the COMELEC in conducting a technical examination, but only the correctness thereof, petitioner theorizing double deductions in the appreciation of the results. But petitioner is estopped from adopting inconsistent positions. He cannot contest the method of dispute resolution, while at the same time affirm the validity thereof. It is worthy to note that the petitioner is contesting only the correctness of the report and not the method of dispute resolution. Then too, the Court has already sanctioned the method of technical examination of the thumbprints of voters, over revision of ballots, where a recount or revision of the ballots will not be reflective of the sovereign will due to the irregularities committed during the elections: "Where due to the stated serious irregularities, there has been, as in this instance, a consequent declaration of nullity of the election itself and the election returns in the voting centers mentioned, no fault whatsoever may be attributed to the action of the Comelec in declining to order a revision of the ballots cast in those election centers. A recount or revision of the ballots in those election centers can no longer possess any significance due to the nullity of the election itself in said places. xxx.......xxx.......xxx It is, therefore, quite
apparent that a revision of ballots is not always mandatory in election
protest cases because such revision should be granted by the Commission
only when, in the opinion of the Commission, the interest of justice so
demands or that the allegations of the parties in the protest cases so
warrant the same."9
[Pimping v. Comelec, 140 SCRA 192,
220, 222.] "xxx of course, there may be election protests which may be disposed of without a recount of the ballots cast. There may be cases where, by reason of the fraudulent manner on which the entire election was conducted, the Court would be justified in annulling and setting the election aside without an examination of the ballots. There may be cases also where all the ballots used at the election need not be examined."10 [De la Merced v. Comelec, 40 Phil. 190.] XXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXX Since a revision and recount of the votes cast will unearth nothing except the fraudulent and spurious result of the elections, the COMELEC was justified in ordering a technical examination of the thumbprints of the voters based on the voters affidavits and the Computerized Voters List. The COMELEC was well within its authority to order such approach considering the circumstances obtaining in the election dispute.
For any
inquiries or comment, you may contact the WEBMASTER
|
CCHOPE ELECTION
2001 
