This is an appeal from a decision of the Court of First Instance of the Province of Ambos Camarines in an election contest. It appears from the record that on the 6th day of June, 1916, an election was held in said province for governor, and other provincial and municipal officers. At said election, Andres Garchitorena, Manuel Crescini, Engracio Imperial, and Francisco Botor were candidates for the office of governor. The election was closed. The returns were made by the inspectors of the various municipalities to the provincial board of inspectors which, after an examination of said returns, reached the conclusion that Andres Garchitorena had received 2,468 votes; that Manuel Crescini had received 3,198 votes; that Engracio Imperial had received 1,954 votes and Francisco Botor had received 692 votes. Upon that result the provincial board of inspectors decided that Manuel Crescini had received a plurality of all votes cast, made a proclamation declaring that he had been elected Governor, and issued to him a certificate to that effect.

Immediately upon notice of said proclamation, Andres Garchitorena presented a protest against said election, alleging that many frauds and irregularities had been committed in various municipalities of said province, and that he had, in fact, received a majority of all legal votes cast. To said protest answer was duly made, issue was joined, and a trial was had, after which the Honorable Maximino Mina, judge, in a very carefully prepared opinion, declared that Andres Garchitorena had, in fact, received a majority of the legal votes cast, and ordered the provincial board of inspectors to correct its report theretofore made, accordingly. Later, for certain reasons, a new trial was ordered (37 Phil. Rep., 675),^[1] which was had before the Honorable Isidro Paredes, judge, who, after considering all the proof adduced during the trial of the cause, reached exactly the conclusion which Judge Maximino Mina had theretofore reached, and issued the same order to the provincial board of inspectors, requiring them to correct their report or canvass in accordance with said decision. From that decision, Manuel Crescini and Engracio Imperial appealed to this Court, briefs were presented, and the cause was finally submitted for decision on the 16th day of December, 1918.

The following table discloses the votes of the various municipalities to which the protest related, as declared by the provincial board of inspectors, as well as the result found by both Judges Mina and Paredes:

Election protest Ambos Camarines.

Municipalities.	Prov. B. of Insp.		Mina.			Paredes			Gar.		Cre.
	Gar.	Cre.	P.	Gar.	Cre.	P.	Gar.	Cre.	G.	L.	G.	L.
Capalonga.....	1	6	65	11	6	2	11	6	10	00	00	000
Minalabac......	10	00	108	Ann.		2	Ann.		00	10	00	00
Mambulao.....	73	00	109	82	2	3	82	2	9	00	2	00
Nabua..........	164	110	110	164	110	4	164	110	00	00	00	00
Sagnay........	11	173	110	Ann.		10	Ann.		00	11	00	173
Baao............	6	133	2	5	126	14	5	126	00	1	00	7
Bato.............	32	292	13	Ann.		22	Ann.		00	32	00	292
Buhi..............	39	280	32	52	186	26	50	149	13	00	00	94
Calabanga....	81	134	46	62	45	31	62	45	00	19	00	89
Iriga.............	8	926	66	Ann.		35	Ann.		00	8	00	926
Lagonoy.......	30	91	99	Ann.		5	Ann.		00	30	00	91
Total gains and losses.................................................................									32	111	2	1,672
Net losses (total gains subtracted from total losses)..................									79		1,670

Total vote as result of this decision:
(a) Garchitorena................................................................................................. 2389 (8287)
(b) Crescini......................................................................................................... 1428 (1441)

Note. Abbreviations used.
Prov. B. of Insp. = Provincial Board of Inspectors.
Gar. = Garchitorena.
Cre. = Crescini.
P. = page.
G. = grains.
L. = losses.
Ann. = annulled.

The carefully prepared opinions of Judges Mina and

Paredes present such a complete analysis of the proof that we deem them of sufficient value and importance, in relation with the questions presented by the appellants, to attach to and make them a part of this decision as Exhibits A and B, respectively.^[2]

An examination of the table above inserted shows that because of the frauds mentioned in the decision of Judges Mina and Paredes, the entire vote in the municipalities of Minalabac, Sagnay, Bato, Iriga, and Lagonoy, were annulled. Judges Mina and Paredes, after discussion of the various frauds committed in said municipalities, arrived at the same conclusion, to wit: that said frauds and irregularities were such as to absolutely defeat the honest expression of the desires of the voters of said municipalities. Courts, of course, should be slow in nullifying and setting aside the election in particular municipalities or precincts, and they should not nullify the vote until it is shown that the irregularities and frauds are so numerous as to show an unmistakable intention or design to defraud, and which does actually and in fact defeat the true expression of the opinion of the voters of said precinct or municipality. A reading of the evidence adduced during the trial of the cause, in relation with the facts stated in connection therewith, in said municipalities, shows an unmistakable intention and design on the part not only of the election inspectors but of many of the voters, to defeat, by the methods adopted, the true expression of opinion, through the ballot, of the people of said municipalities. The presumption is that an election is honestly conducted, and the burden of proof to show it otherwise is on the party assailing the return. But when the return is clearly shown to be wilfully and corruptly false, the whole of it becomes worthless as proof. When the election has been conducted so irregularly and fraudulently that the true result cannot be ascertained, the whole return must be rejected. It is list of all the frauds which will invalidate an election. Each case must rest upon its own evidence. The rule, however, is so well established that authorities need no longer be cited in its support, that whenever the irregularities and frauds are sufficient to defeat the will of the people of the particular municipality or precinct, the entire vote should be rejected, and those who are guilty of such frauds and irregularities should be punished to the very limit of the law. (Patton vs. Watkins, 131 Ala., 387; Gardiner vs. Romulo, 26 Phil. Rep., 521; The State vs. Sullivan, 44 Kan., 43; Londoner vs. People, 15 Colo., 557; Washburn vs. Voorhis, 2 Bart., 54; People vs. Cook, 8 N. Y., 67; The State vs. Malo, 42 Kan., 54, 120, 164.)

The record of the frauds and irregularities committed in the said municipalities in which Judges Mina and Paredes annulled the entire vote, not only shows that legal voters were prevented from voting, but in some instances, legal ballots were tampered with and destroyed after they had been cast, to such an extent that no confidence can be placed in the return. The return in no sense discloses the expressed will of the voters. Search has been made in vain for cases in jurisprudence in which the frauds and irregularities committed were more glaring and more atrocious, and in which the real will of the voters were more effectively defeated, than is found in the records in said municipalities in the present case. The statements of fact made by Judges Mina and Paredes relating to said frauds and irregularities are fully sustained by the evidence adduced during the trial of the cause.

When two able, impartial, independent and conscientious judges, such as Judges Mina and Paredes, each examine in detail the proof adduced in the trial of the cause and in an extended and carefully prepared opinion, each reach the same conclusion, there is little left to be added.

After a careful examination of the proof adduced during the trial, we are fully persuaded that the conclusions reached by the court a quo is fully supported thereby. While perhaps some errors were committed in rejecting some of the votes of analfabetos (illiterates persons), the same, even though they were counted, would not be sufficient to change the general result.

Therefore, and without a further detailed discussion at this time of the various assignments of error, of the facts, and of the law, the judgment and order of Judge Isidro Paredes is hereby confirmed, with costs against the appellant, Manuel Crescini, with the provision that whatever costs Engracio Imperial had incurred shall be paid by him. And it is hereby further ordered and decreed that the record be immediately returned to the lower court with direction that an order be entered immediately in accordance herewith. So ordered.

We are not disposed to close this decision without taking note of the recommendation with reference to the criminal prosecution of the election inspectors and other persons of various municipalities, who wilfully and maliciously participated in the various irregularities and frauds. The record demonstrates that not only the inspectors in said municipalities, but other persons, wilfully and maliciously violated the Election Law, and should therefore be punished criminally under the provisions of section 29 of Act No. 1582, as amended by section 2632 of Act No. 2657 (as amended by section 2639 of Act No. 2711). We most earnestly recommended that the Attorney-General immediately investigate the conduct of the various election inspectors and other persons, in the municipalities of Bato, Buhi, Calabanga, Iriga and Sagnay, as well as others, in which frauds were committed, who were instrumental in defeating the will of the voters in the full and legal exercise of their elective franchise, and to instigate criminal actions against all such persons, if the facts are found to be sufficient, to the end that in the future voters may be permitted to participate in the affairs of their government, through the ballot, untrammelled and unmolested.

In democracies the people, combined, represent the sovereign power of the State. Their sovereign authority is exercised through the ballot, of the qualified voters, in duly appointed elections held from time to time, by means of which they choose their officials for definite and fixed periods, and to whom they entrust, for the time being, as their representatives, the exercise of the powers of government.

It is just such conduct, on the part of those in authority, as is described in the records in the present case which breeds dissension, disorder, distrust, and unrest among the people; it creates enmity, animosity and hatred among otherwise friendly neighbors; it gives birth to a spirit of anarchism and despair in organized governments; through it socialists are born and communism runs riot; it engenders distrust and hatred of public officials, creates a spirit of nihilism and a disregard for individual and property rights; it is just such conduct, on the part of public officers, upon which Bolshevists feed, thrive, and survive, and which results in the overthrow of governments, and the establishment of reigns of terror. The pages of history are filled with incidents showing the disastrous results to governments where the officials have their winked at, or actually participated in acts which result in depriving the people of their right to have a voice in the affairs of their government, and to express it without let, hindrance, or molestation. And it is not necessary to search ancient history for examples of what we have said. A people, no matter how patient and peace-loving, will not endure the deprivation of their rights and liberties forever.

Arellano, C. J., Torres, Araullo, Malcolm, and Avanceña, JJ., concur.

Street, J., reserves his vote.

---

^[1] Garchitorena vs. Crescini,

^[2] See pages 264 and 398, post.

tags