Supreme Court nixes Bulacan gov's appeal for vote recount

The Supreme Court Wednesday junked with finality a petition of Bulacan Gov. Joselito “Jonjon” Mendoza against recounting of votes cast in the May 2007 gubernatorial poll by the Commission on Elections in connection with a protest of losing candidate and former Agrarian Reform Secretary Roberto “Obet” Pagdanganan.

In a full court session, justices of the High Tribunal voted to deny the motion of Mendoza asking the court to reconsider its earlier ruling allowing the Comelec to proceed with the poll protest of Pagdanganan involving alleged irregularities in the election.

The dismissal of the appeal of Mendoza makes the ruling of the SC final, explained lawyer Jose Midas Marquez, spokesman of the court.

In its earlier decision penned by Associate Justice Arturo Brion and released Oct. 15, the SC ruled that there was “no grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction committed by the Comelec in its deliberation on the Bulacan election contest and the appreciation of ballots this deliberation entailed.”

In his petition, Mendoza alleged that the Comelec violated his right to due process when it unilaterally conducted examinations, appreciation and proceedings relative to ballots and other materials relevant to the case without his knowledge.

He also questioned the alleged “secret proceedings” at the Comelec in connection with the election protest filed against Mendoza by Pagda¬nganan and the April 29, 2009 and May 26, 2009 orders of the Comelec Second Division allowing the continuation of the revision of ballots, which are presently in the custody of the Senate Electoral Tribunal pursuant to the election protest filed by Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III against Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri.

But the SC ruled that there was nothing wrong in the moves of the poll body: “The Comelec is under no legal obligation to notify either party of the steps it is taking in the course of deliberating on the merits of the provincial election contest.”

The SC stressed that the contested proceedings at the SET were no longer part of the adversarial aspects of the election contest that would require notice of hearing and the participation of the parties.

It stressed that what took place at the SET were the internal deliberations of the Comelec, as a quasi-judicial body, in the course of appreciating the evidence presented and deciding the provincial election contest on the merits.

These deliberations, the court stressed, are no different from its judicial deliberations that are considered confidential and privileged