Importance of Impartiality and Proper Procedure in Election Cases

CLARA BEEGAN, COMPLAINANT, VS. TEOTIMO BORJA, CLERK OF COURT AND ARNULFO BALANO, CLERK II, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, LEYTE, RESPONDENTS. [A.M. NO. 8733-RET. SEPTEMBER 6, 1996]

Imagine a scenario where the integrity of an election hangs in the balance. Every ballot, every procedure, must be handled with utmost care and impartiality. This case underscores the critical importance of maintaining proper protocols when dealing with election materials, even seemingly minor actions can raise questions about fairness and influence the outcome.

This case revolves around a complaint filed against two court employees who allowed a party in an election case to photocopy ballots. While their intentions may have been benign, their actions sparked a legal challenge, highlighting the need for strict adherence to rules and procedures. The central legal question is whether the actions of the court employees constituted misconduct, even if no direct prejudice was proven.

Understanding Election Law and Court Procedures

Philippine election law is designed to ensure free, fair, and honest elections. This includes strict rules on the handling of ballots and other election materials. These rules are in place to prevent tampering, fraud, and any appearance of impropriety. The Comelec Rules of Procedure mandate that election documents involved in court contests be securely held in a place designated by the Court, under the care of the Clerk of Court.

When an election protest is filed, the court often appoints a Revision Committee to review the ballots. This committee is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the count. However, their authority is limited to the revision process itself, and any further handling of the ballots must be done with proper authorization and in accordance with established procedures.

“[E]lection documents and paraphernalia involved in election contests before courts of general jurisdiction shall be kept and held secure in a place to be designated by the Court in the care and custody of the Clerk of Court.” This provision highlights the Clerk of Court’s responsibility in safeguarding the integrity of election materials.

For example, imagine a local election where the results are contested. The losing candidate alleges that some ballots were improperly counted. The court orders a revision of the ballots, and a Revision Committee is formed. The Committee must follow strict procedures to ensure that the revision is fair and accurate, maintaining a detailed record of all changes made.

The Case Story: Photocopying Ballots in Leyte

In 1994, after barangay elections in Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte, an election contest was filed. Clara Beegan, an intervenor in the case, filed a complaint against Teotimo Borja, the Clerk of Court, and Arnulfo Balano, a Clerk II. Beegan alleged that Borja and Balano improperly allowed the reopening of ballot boxes and photocopying of ballots without leave of court.

Here’s a breakdown of the key events:

• Election Protest Filed: Arnulfo Santillano filed a protest against Juan Egonio, with Clara Beegan as an intervenor.
• Revision Committee Appointed: Arnulfo Balano chaired the committee, with members representing both sides.
• Revision Completed: The committee finished its work in October 1994 and submitted its report in November.
• Complaint Filed: Beegan complained that Borja and Balano allowed the reopening of ballot boxes and photocopying of ballots on November 17, 1994.

The case went through several stages:

1. The Ombudsman endorsed the complaint to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).
2. The OCA referred the complaint to the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Tacloban, Leyte, for investigation.
3. The Investigating Judge initially absolved the respondents but admonished them to be more careful in the future.
4. The OCA disagreed, finding the respondents to have violated the rules and recommending reprimands.

The Supreme Court, in its resolution, emphasized the role of the Clerk of Court in safeguarding court records. The Court also acknowledged the common practice of photocopying case records with the Clerk’s permission, as long as it’s not disallowed by rules and a court representative oversees the process.

The Court quoted, “Undoubtedly, misconduct in office was committed by both respondents no matter how well-meaning their intention was… It is to be noted that the rules and the mandate of propriety cannot be dispensed with on account of expediency.” This quote highlights the importance of adhering to rules, regardless of intentions.

The Court, however, ultimately exonerated the respondents, finding no prejudice to the complainant. The Court noted that the presiding judge did not find the photocopying highly irregular. The Court stated that “as long as no tampering or alteration was manifest in the xeroxing/photocopying of court records, no liability attaches to anyone.”

Practical Implications and Lessons Learned

This case provides valuable lessons for court employees and anyone involved in election-related matters. It underscores the importance of following established procedures and seeking proper authorization before handling sensitive election materials.

Here are some key lessons:

• Strict Adherence to Rules: Always follow established procedures when handling election materials.
• Seek Authorization: Obtain proper authorization before taking any action that could be perceived as improper.
• Maintain Impartiality: Avoid any actions that could create an appearance of bias or favoritism.
• Document Everything: Keep a detailed record of all actions taken, including who authorized them and why.

For example, a court clerk should never allow a party to access or copy election materials without a court order and proper supervision. Doing so could lead to accusations of impropriety and undermine public confidence in the election process.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the role of the Clerk of Court in election cases?

A: The Clerk of Court is responsible for the safekeeping and security of election documents and paraphernalia involved in court contests.

Q: Can parties in an election case access the ballots?

A: Yes, but only with proper authorization from the court and under the supervision of a court representative.

Q: What constitutes misconduct in handling election materials?

A: Any action that violates established procedures, creates an appearance of impropriety, or prejudices the fairness of the election can be considered misconduct.

Q: What should I do if I suspect improper handling of election materials?

A: Report your concerns to the proper authorities, such as the Commission on Elections (Comelec) or the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).

Q: What are the potential consequences of mishandling election materials?

A: Depending on the severity of the offense, consequences can range from administrative reprimands to criminal charges.

Q: Does the presence of revisors from both parties excuse a violation of protocol?

A: No. The presence of revisors does not automatically excuse a violation of protocol. The court emphasizes that rules and propriety cannot be dispensed with for expediency.

Q: What is the significance of a completed ballot revision?

A: Even after the actual revision of ballots, the Revision Committee’s task is not complete until the Revision Report is submitted for court approval and the ballot boxes are returned to the Presiding Judge.

ASG Law specializes in election law and administrative investigations. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.