[ G.R. No. L-1679. October 16, 1947 ] 79 Phil. 352
[ G.R. No. L-1679. October 16, 1947 ]
EMILIO P. CORTEZ, PETITIONER, VS. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS ET AL., RESPONDENTS. D E C I S I O N
MORAN, C.J.:
In the plebiscite which took place last March, the polling places corresponding to the barrios in the municipalities of Bacolor, Candaba, Arayat, Sta. Ana, San Luis, San Simon, Apalit, Sexmoan, Macabebe, Minalin, Mexico and Lubao, were transferred to the poblacion by resolution of the respondents municipal councils. In connection with the coming election, the approval of such transfer was sought by said municipal councils from the respondent Commission on Elections, approval which was granted because of the abnormal conditions of peace and order obtaining in the aforementioned municipalities. The approval was given over the objection of Dr. Emilio P. Cortez, candidate to the position of Provincial Governor in the Province of Pampanga. Hence, this petition for review. At the hearing before this court, attorney Rodrigo Perez of the Commission on Elections appeared for all the respondents.
The pertinent provisions of the law are sections 62, 63 and 66 of the Revised Election Code (Republic Act No. 180). They are as follows:
“SEC. 62. Designation of polling places.—At least seventy days before each regular election, the municipal council shall designate in each election precinct a place as provided in this Code where the meetings of the board of inspectors for registration and the election shall be held. (C. A., 357-56.)
“SEC. 63. Requirements for polling places.—* * * The polling place shall be located as centrally as possible with respect to the residence of the voters of the precinct, but it may be located also in the poblacion of the municipality upon petition of the majority of the voters of the precinct or by agreement of all the political parties, or by resolution of the municipal council, in subsequent elections after the election to be held on the second Tuesday of November, nineteen hundred and forty-seven. * * * (C.A., 357-57.)
“SEC. 66. Change of polling places.—After a polling place has been designated, its location shall not be changed until the next regular election, unless it is so ordered by competent authority, except in case it is destroyed or it cannot be used. (C.A., 357-60.)”
The general rule, therefore, under sections 62 and 63 is that a polling place shall be located “in each election precinct” and “as centrally as possible with respect to the residence of the voters of the precinct.” There are, however, three exceptions in which, under section 63, the polling places may be located in the poblacion, namely: 1. When the majority of the voters so request; 2. By agreement of all the political parties; and 3. By a resolution of the municipal council, but this last-named exception shall take effect in elections subsequent to that of November of this year. The express inclusion of those three exceptions is an implied exclusion of all others.
Thus, section 66 cannot be construed as another exception giving the Commission on Elections authority to transfer a polling place from a barrio to the poblacion, not only because there is nothing in its language that may warrant such construction but also because by such construction the exceptions provided in section 63 may become nugatory.
Section 66 should be construed in conjunction with section 63, the latter being a provision regarding location of polling places and the former a provision concerning changes that may be made after the polling places are located. Section 66 does not undertake to establish a new procedure for the making of such changes; it only provides that the changes may be made by competent authority, that is, by the officials designated by law and in the manner provided by law. Hence, when the location of a polling place is to be changed from a barrio precinct to the poblacion, the case comes within the purview of section 63, and the change should be made in the manner therein provided, namely, either by petition of the majority of the voters or by agreement of all the political parties.
The theory that section 63 is applicable only under normal conditions is contrary to the very wording of said section which contains provisions precisely to meet abnormal conditions. When for any serious difficulty a polling place cannot be located within the corresponding election precinct, a remedy is provided in said section consisting of a petition by the majority of the voters or by agreement of all the political parties for the transfer of the polling place to the poblacion. And when for any serious cause the holding of an election shall become impossible in any political division or subdivision, the remedy lies in the hands of the President who, upon recommendation of the Commission on Elections, may postpone such election for such time as he may deem necessary (section 8, Rev. Election Code).
The power given to the Commission by section 2, Article X of the Constitution, “to decide” all administrative questions concerning location of polling places, is a power that should be exercised when a question is brought before the Commission, and its decision should be rendered in accordance with law and not in contravention of law. The functions and powers of the Commission on Elections are limited by law. It has no legislative power to change or modify the law, nor may such power be delegated to the Commission. In the instant case, the action taken by the Commission on Elections finds no support in law.
Two writs of preliminary injunction have already been issued in this case, one prohibitory and another mandatory. The prohibitory injunction is directed against the respondents, ordering them to desist from placing or transferring to the poblacion the polling places corresponding to the barrio precincts, and the mandatory injunction is also directed to the respondents to restore to the respective barrios, as centrally as possible with respect to the residence of the voters, the polling places already transferred from said barrios to the poblacion.
For all the foregoing, the order issued by the Commission on Elections approving the resolution of the respondents municipal councils is reversed, and the preliminary writs of prohibitory and mandatory injunction issued in this case are made permanent, without costs.
Feria, Pablo, Hilado, Briones, Padilla, and Tuason, JJ., concur.