You're currently signed in as:
User

HADJI HAMID LUMNA PATORAY v. COMELEC

This case has been cited 1 times or more.

2006-06-23
QUISUMBING, J.
In this case, Jaberael challenged, not the election returns, but the 95 ballots reflected in the returns of Precincts Nos. 15A and 17A.  Well-settled is the rule that issues relative to the appreciation of ballots cannot be raised in a pre-proclamation controversy.[17] Appreciation of ballots is the task of the board of election inspectors, not the board of canvassers, and questions related thereto are proper only in election protests.[18]  In a regular election protest, the parties may litigate all the legal and factual issues raised by them in as much detail as they may deem necessary or appropriate.[19]