This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2010-03-25 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Acting on petitioner's motion for reconsideration of the 1 December 2009 Resolution issued by the COMELEC Second Division, the COMELEC En Banc, as stated, initially issued the Resolution dated 8 February 2010, denying the motion for lack of merit and declaring the same resolution immediately executory. However, even before petitioner's filing of his Urgent Motion to Recall the Resolution Promulgated on 8 February 2010 and the instant Petition for Certiorari with an Urgent Prayer for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and/or a Status Quo Order and Writ of Preliminary Injunction, the record shows that the COMELEC En Banc issued the 10 February 2010 Resolution, ordering the re-hearing of the case on the ground that "there was no majority vote of the members obtained in the Resolution of the Commission En Banc promulgated on February 8, 2010." Having conceded one of the grounds subsequently raised in petitioner's Urgent Motion to Recall the Resolution Promulgated on February 8, 2010, the COMELEC En Banc significantly failed to obtain the votes required under Section 5(a), Rule 3 of its own Rules of Procedure[4] for a second time. | |||||
|
2010-03-25 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| When the handwritings on the ballots are the subject matter of the election contest, the best evidence would be the ballots themselves as the Comelec can examine or compare these handwritings even without the assistance from handwriting experts,[20] with due consideration to the presence of assisted voters, if any is reflected in the Minutes of Voting.[21] General appearance or pictorial effect is not enough to warrant that two writings are by the same hand. The ballots cannot be invalidated on such ground if they display but a single consistent dissimilarity in any feature which is fundamental to the structure of the handwriting, and whose presence is not capable of reasonable explanation. An exegesis of the semblances or similarities and differences or variations in the master patterns governing letter design is thus imperative. I thus agree with Justice Antonio Carpio's position that the Comelec abdicated its positive duty. | |||||