G.R. No. 204828 - JAIME C. REGIO, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND RONNIE C. CO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the proclamation of protestee Jaime C. Regio as the duly elected Punong Barangay or Barangay Chairman of Barangay 296, District III, Manila by the Barangay Board of Canvassers is affirmed by this court. The election protest filed by the protestant Ronnie C. Co is dismissed for lack of merit. [5] According to the trial court, before it can accord credence to the results of the revision, it should first be ascertained that the ballots found in the box during the revision are the same ballots deposited by the voters. In fine, the court should first be convinced that the ballots counted during the revision have not been tampered with before it can declare the ballots a) as superior evidence of how the electorate voted, and b) as sufficient evidence to set aside the election returns. For the ballots to be considered the best evidence of how the voters voted, their integrity should be satisfactorily established. [6] Invoking Rosal v. COMELEC , [7] the trial court ruled that Co failed to sufficiently show that the integrity of the contested ballots had been preserved. It then cited the presumption that election returns are genuine, and that the data and information supplied by the board of election inspectors are true and correct. [8] The trial court said: A closer scrutiny of the premise made by the protestant will reveal that he is trying to prove the misreading, miscounting, and misappreciation of ballots by introducing as evidence the marked difference of the results of the revision and of the results in the election returns. This premise is too presumptuous. The marked difference cannot be used to prove the misreading, miscounting, and misappreciation of ballots because the misreading, miscounting, and misappreciation of ballots is precisely what the protestant needs to prove to justify the marked difference in the results. Prudence dictates that the protestant should first explain where this huge discrepancy is coming from before using it as evidence. In other words, the misreading, miscounting, and misappreciation of ballots should be proven by other independent evidence. Without any evidence, the allegation of misreading, miscounting, and misappreciation of ballots remains a mere allegation without any probative value. [9] Traversing the allegations of post-elections tampering, the trial court rejected Cos allegation that the ballot boxes were properly locked and sealed. In fact, the trial court said, the envelope containing the ballots for CP Nos. 1302A/1303A was glued on both sides, prompting protestees revisor to comment that the envelope appears to be re-pasted and tampered. In CP No. 1306A, the report stated that the ballots were not placed in a sealed envelope. [10] Corollarily, the trial court stated the observation that Regio has presented credible witnesses to prove that there were no irregularities or anomalies during the casting and counting of votes. Aggrieved, Co filed an appeal before the COMELEC, arguing that th