[ G. R. No. 18947. April 29, 1922 ] 43 Phil. 352
[ G. R. No. 18947. April 29, 1922 ]
BONIFACIO YSIP, PETITIONER, VS. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF CABIAO, NUEVA ECIJA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS. D E C I S I O N
MALCOLM, J.:
The issue squarely raised in this case concerns the rights of the Partido Nacionalista Colectivista to election inspectors at the approaching election.
The facts are undisputed. At the last general election in 1919, two parties, the Partido Democrata and the Partido Nacionalista, contested for supremacy in the municipality of Cabiao, Nueva Ecija. The highest number of votes was cast for the Partido Nacionalista, and the second highest number for the Partido Democrata. Recently, however, as appears from the record, and as a matter of current political history of which the courts can take judicial notice, the Partido Nacionalista divided into two parties, the Partido Nacionalista, commonly known as Unipersonalista, and the Partido Nacionalista Colectivista; or, if this statement be objected to by partisans of the Partido Nacionalista, a new party known as Partido Nacionalista Colectivista was organized. The Partido Nacionalista Colectivista was inaugurated in the municipality of Cabiao, Nueva Ecija, on February 28, 1922. By exhibits presented, the court is given to understand that in Cabiao, and, in fact, in other towns in Nueva Ecija, the adherents of the old Nacionalista Party have gone over to the Partido Nacionalista Colectivista.
The law applicable to the facts is equally certain. A portion of section 11 of Act No. 3030 of the Philippine Legislature, reads:
“Should there be in such municipality one or more political parties or branches or fractions thereof, or political groups, then two of said inspectors and two substitutes for the same shall belong to the party which polled the largest number of votes in said municipality at such preceding election and the other inspector and his substitute shall belong to the party, branch or fraction thereof, or political group which polled the next largest number of votes at said election; and the inspectors so appointed shall be persons proposed by the legitimate representative or representatives of such political parties, branches or fractions thereof, or political group.”
When the court comes to apply the law, with reference to not only the case before it but to a general condition of political affairs, it must be frankly admitted that difficulties are encountered.
A strict construction of the law would necessarily result in the Nacionalista Party being granted two inspectors in many municipalities, since no one can deny that this is “the party which polled the largest number of votes,” in such municipalities at the preceding election. Nor can it be denied that the law contemplates bi-partisan elections and only takes into account the successful party, and the party which polled the next largest number of votes. In certain instances, as where the Democrata Party obtains two inspectors in an election precinct and where only one inspector remains for another party, the courts are forced to rely on the letter of the law, and to assign the minority inspector to the Nacionalista Party. Other states of facts could be imagined, such as where the Nacionalista Party might have divided into three, four, or more branches, and which necessarily would make impossible a division of two election inspectors among the various new parties and which again would force the courts to return to the exact terminology of the law.
A liberal construction of the law will, on the other hand, permit the Nacionalista Colectivista Party to have representation on election boards in all municipalities in which the old Nacionalista Party polled the largest number of votes at the last election. Such interpretation and application of the law will not do violence to it, in view of the notorious fact that the party which won the election in many municipalities, such as Cabiao, Nueva Ecija, the Nacionalista Party has now split its forces between the old party and a new party. Such interpretation and application of the law would, moreover, be in accord with the underlying purpose of the Election Law, which is to provide as complete a method as possible to obtain a clean election.
If we must choose between a strict and literal interpretation of the law and a liberal and reasonable interpretation of the law, if we must choose between the letter of the law which “killeth” and the spirit of the law which “giveth life,” can any one doubt what our decision will be? We adopt that construction which will produce the most beneficial results.
We hold that, in municipalities where it is shown that the Partido Nacionalista polled the largest number of votes at the last election and the Partido Democrata the next largest number of votes at said election, and where in such municipalities, in addition to the Partido Nacionalista there has been duly organized a new party known as the Partido Nacionalista Colectivista, one election inspector and one substitute shall belong each to the Partido Nacionalista, the Partido Nacionalista Colectivista, and the Partido Democrata.
As the municipal council of Cabiao, Nueva Ecija, following the circular of the Chief of the Executive Bureau, named one election inspector for each election precinct for the Partido Nacionalista, the Partido Nacionalista Colectivista, and the Partido Democrata, the writ prayed for must be denied, with costs against the petitioner. So ordered.
Ostrand, Johns, and Romualdez, JJ., concur.