G.R. No. 122013 - JOSE C. RAMIREZ, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS OF GIPORLOS, EASTERN SAMAR AND ALFREDO I. GO. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly in Castromayor v. Commission on Elections, [9] and Mentang v. Commission on Elections, [10] this Court approved the assumption of jurisdiction by the COMELEC en banc over petitions for correction of manifest error directly filed with it. Our decision today in Torres v.COMELEC [11] again gives imprimatur to the exercise by the COMELEC en banc of the power to decide petition for correction of manifest error. In any event, petitioner is estopped from raising the issue of jurisdiction of the COMELEC en banc. Not only did he participate in the proceedings below but he also sought affirmative relief from the COMELEC en banc by filing a Counter-Protest in which he asked that entr[ies] in the statement of votes for Precinct Nos. 11, 11-A, 6, 1, 17, 7 and 10, be properly corrected for the petitioner, to reflect the correct mandate of the electorate of Giporlos, Eastern Samar. [12] It is certainly not right for a party taking part in proceedings and submitting his case for decision to attack the decision later for lack of jurisdiction of the tribunal because the decision turns out to be adverse to him. [13] Petitioner next contends that motu proprio the MBC already made a correction of the errors in the Statement of Votes in its certification dated May 22, 1995, which reads: [14] C E R T I F I C A T I O N To whom It May Concern: This is to certify that the hereunder candidates for Municipal Vice Mayor of Giporlos, Eastern Samar during the May 8, 1995 National and Local Elections got the number of Votes on the precincts listed hereunder in tabulation form based in our Canvassing of Votes per Precincts. Name of PRECINCT NUMBERS candidate : 11 : 11-A : 6 : 1 : 17 : 7 : 10 GO, Alfredo I. : 32 : 18 : 65 : 61 : 48 : 37 : 28 RAMIREZ, Jose C. : 18 : 32 : 98 : 52 : 15 : 67 : 13 This certification is issued upon request of the interested party for whatever legal purpose this may serve him. Giporlos, Eastern Samar. May 22, 1995 To begin with, the corrections should be made either by inserting corrections in the Statement of Votes which was originally prepared and submitted by the MBC, or by preparing an entirely new Statement of Votes incorporating therein the corrections. [15] The certification issued by the MBC is thus not the proper way to correct manifest errors in the Statement of Votes. More importantly, the corrections should be based on the election returns but here the corrections appear to have been made by the MBC on the bases of the Certificates of Votes issued. Thus, in its motion for clarification, the MBC said: a. The proclamation of Jose C. Ramirez was based on the results of the certificate of canvass and tally of votes garnered by both petitioner and private respondent which showed Jose C. Ramirez garnering 1,367 as against 1,235 by Alfredo I. Go, or a winning margin of 132 in favor of Jose C. Ramirez; b. Based on the certificate of votes in Precinct Nos. 11, 11-A, 6, 1, 17, 7, and 10,, Alfredo I. Go garnered only 32,18, 65,61,48,37 an