RULES-FOR-THE-APPRECIATION-OF-BALLOTS.pptx

RULES FOR THE
APPRECIATION OF
BALLOTS
SEC. 211 OMNIBUS ELECTION CODE
SEC. 450, COMELEC RESOLUTION
NO. 10924, BOOK OF DIRECTOR
DENNIS L. AUSAN

WHAT IS BALLOT
APPRECIATION
•It is the act of ascertaining the real
intent of the voter to whom he is
casting his vote for, on the basis of
what is shown on the face of the ballot.

GOVERNING PRINCIPLES ON
BALLOT APPRECIATION
•1. Will of voter is paramount
•2. Ballot is always presumed valid
•3. Technical rules are liberally construed
•4. Counting is Public and Uninterrupted

I. WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS PARAMOUNT
• A. Elections are all about people’s sovereignty
• B. Cardinal Objective is to give effect to the
choice of the voter
• C. Results are not subject to the discretion of
the candidate

I. WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS PARAMOUNT
•A ballot is indicative of the will of the
voter. It is not required that it should be
nicely or accurately written or spelled
and the object should be to ascertain and
carry into effect the intention of the voter
if it can be determined with reasonable
certainty.

II. BALLOT IS ALWAYS
PRESUMED VALID
Every ballot shall be presumed
valid unless there is a clear and
good reason to justify its
rejection. Bearing in mind that
the object of the election is to
obtain the expression of the
voter’s will.

III. TECHNICAL RULES ARE
LIBERALLY CONSTRUED
•In the appreciation of ballots, it must
be liberally construed to the end that
the will of the electorate in the choice
of public officials may not be defeated
by technical infirmities.

•No watcher, candidate, or any other
person inside the polling place shall be
allowed to participate in the
appreciation of ballots, except that any
watcher may file a protest which shall
be recorded in the minutes.

• In the event that no protest is filed, the
decision of the board stands. While in the
performance of their duties, the board enjoys
the presumption of regularity. Thus in the
course of appreciating the ballots, nobody
can compel them to decide contrary to their
collegial position. Their decision is final. No
motion, observation, or comment from whom
ever can force them to reverse their
appreciation of ballots. They cannot even
reverse themselves and count again what has
already been counted.

SPECIFIC RULES ON THE
APPRECIATION OF BALLOTS
• 1. The Intent Rule 9. Rule
Involving Appellation of Affection or
Friendship
2. Equity of the Incumbent Rule 10. Special Cases
• 3. Rule on Primacy of Surname 11. Rule on Misplaced Votes
• 4. Rules on Married Women 12. Rule on Disqualified
Candidates
• 5. Idem Sonans Rule 13. Marked Ballots
• 6. Rules on the Use of Nicknames 14. Ballots Written by One
• 7. Rule on the Use of Initials 15. Written by Two or More
Persons
• 8. Rule on the Use of Prefixes 16. Miscellaneous Cases

(A)
A.
Where only the first name of a
candidate or only his surname is
written, the vote for such candidate is
valid if there is no other candidate with
same first name or surname for the
same office.
Candidate for Punong Barangay
1. ALFARO, Renato “Nato”
Candidate for Kagawad
1. HANAY, Alvin “Ben”
APPRECIATION:
The vote “Renato” shall be counted in favor of
candidate Renato Alfaro, while the vote
shall be counted in favor of the candidate for
kagawad Alvin Hanay.

(AA)
If there is another candidate with the
same first name or surname, it shall be
considered as a stray vote
Candidates for Punong Barangay
1. CRUZ, Teodoro “Ted”
2. CRUZ, Uldarico “Toto”
Candidates for Kagawad
1. MARQUEZ, Elena “Elen”
2. RAMOS, Elena “Inday Lena”
Appreciation
Both “Cruz” and “Elena” shall be
deemed stray votes.

(I)
When in a space in the ballot there
appears a name of a candidate that is
erased and another clearly written, the
vote is valid for the latter.
1. CORDERO, Bethel “Neneng”
2. TIU, Arlene “Inday Dako”
Appreciation
The vote “TIU” shall be counted for
candidate Arlene Ti

(U)
Circles, crosses, or lines put on the spaces
on which the voter has not voted shall be
considered as signs to indicate his
desistance from voting and shall not
invalidate the ballot.
1. VILLA, Erlinda “Linda”
1. CERCADO, Eugene “Gene”
Appreciation
The ballot is deemed valid. The big “X”
written on blank spaces does not affect the
legitimacy of the ballot.

•RULE 2
• _____________________________________________________________________
•EQUITY OF INCUMBENT
RULE

(B)
Where only the first name of a candidate is written on the
ballot which when read has a sound similar to the surname of
another candidate, the vote shall be counted in favor of the
candidate with such surname. If there are two (2) or more
candidates with the same full name, first name or surname and
one of them is the incumbent, and on the ballot is written
only such full name or surname, the vote shall be counted in
favor of the incumbent.
1. ENRIQUEZ, Joy “Inday Joy”
2. LEDESMA, Joy “Nene” - (incumbent)
1. JOCSON, Alberto “Bert”
2. JOCSON, Glenn “Yoyong” - (incumbent)
“EQUITY OF THE INCUMBENT RULE”
Appreciation
The vote “Joy” shall be appreciated in favor of the
incumbent Punong Barangay Joy Ledesma and the
vote “Jocson” shall be counted in favor of candidate
Glenn Jocson who is the incumbent Barangay
Kagawad.

(D), PAR A.
When two (2) or more words are written on the
same line on the ballot, all of which are the
surnames of two (2) or more candidates, the
same shall not be counted for any of them
unless one is a surname of an incumbent who
has served for at least one (1) year, in which
case it shall be counted in favor of the latter.
1. GUMBAN, Ismael “Ma-it”
2. MAGNO, Paul “Pol” - (Incumbent
who has served for at least one year) Appreciation
The vote shall be counted in favor of the
candidate Magno.

•RULE 3
• _____________________________________________________________________
•PRIMACY OF SURNAME

RULE 3: PRIMACY OF SURNAMES RULE
Case 1
If It Is The First Name Of A Candidate But When Read Sounds Similar To The
Surname Of Another Candidate, The Vote Shall Be Appreciated In Favor Of The
Latter (1st Sentence, Par.2, Sec. 211)
1.TENTATIVA, Benzen “Moi”
2.VINCEN, Ligaya “Gay-Gay”

(E)
When on the ballot is written a
single word, which is the first
name of a candidate and which is
the same time the surname of his
opponent, the vote shall be
counted in favor of the latter.
1. ROMAN, Pablo “Pabs”
2. SULPICIO, Roman “Sonny”
Appreciation
The vote shall be counted in
favor of candidate Pablo Roman. “Primacy of Surname”

(F)
When two (2) words are written on the
ballot, one of which is the first name of a
candidate and the other is the surname
of his opponent, the vote shall not be
counted for either one.
1. CORPUZ, Esteban M.
2. IBAY, Isidro B.
Appreciation
The vote cast is deemed as a stray
vote.
(EXCEPTION)

•RULE 4
• _____________________________________________________________________
•RULES ON MARRIED WOMEN

RULE 4: RULES ON MARRIED WOMEN
Case 1
If It Is The Maiden Or Married Surname Or Both Of A Woman Candidate And There Is
No Other Candidate With Such Surname, Vote Shall Be Appreciated In Favor Of That
Candidate (Par. 1, Sec. 211)
1. ARNALDO-RUIZ, Alpha “Apang”
1. ARANAS-DIAZ, LOURDES “Lulu”
2. MARTEL-PORRAS, MAE “Mae”
Conui-Omega v. Samson, G.R. No. L-21910, November 11, 1963
Yniguez-Lerias v. HRET, G.R. No. 97105, October 15, 1991

RULE III
In case a candidate is a woman who uses her maiden or
married surname or both and there is another candidate
with the same surname, a ballot bearing only such
surname shall be counted in favor of a candidate who is
an incumbent.
1. ARNALDO-RUIZ, Alpha “Apang”
2. ARNALDO-RUIZ, Lydia “Lids” - (Incumbent)
1. ARANAS-DIAZ, Lourdes “Lulu”
2. ARANAS, Rodolfo “Rudy” - (Incumbent)
3. DIAZ, Arnulfo “Buddy” - (Incumbent)
Second where “EQUITY OF THE INCUMBENT
RULE” applies. Appreciation
All votes should be appreciated for all incumbents.

RULE 4: RULES ON MARRIED WOMEN
Case 3
If It Is The Maiden Or Married Surname Or Both Of A Woman Candidate And There Is
Another Candidate With Such Surname And One Of Them Is An Incumbent, Vote
Counted In Favor Of Incumbent. (Par. 3, Sec. 211)
1.ARNALDO-RUIZ, Alpha “Apang”
2.ARNALDO-RUIZ, Lydia
“Lids” (Incumbent)
1.ARANAS-DIAZ, LOURDES “Lulu”
2.ARANAS, Rodolfo
“Rudy” (Incumbent)

•RULE 5
• _____________________________________________________________________
IDEM SONANS RULE

(G)
A name or surname incorrectly written which,
when read, has a sound similar to the name or
surname of a candidate when correctly written
shall be counted in favor of such candidate.
1. PERFECTO, Querubin
1. ARZAGA, Emilio
2. CECILIO, Aurelio
3. GLORIA, Ricardo
4. JULIANO, Teodoro
5. LONTOC, Jose
6. MONTEZA, Pablo
“The Idem Sonans Rule”
Appreciation
All votes were counted in favor of candidates
Perfecto, Arzaga, Cecilio, Gloria, Juliano, Lontoc
and Monteza.

•RULE 6
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULES ON THE USE OF
NICKNAMES

(M)
If the nickname used is unaccompanied
by the name or surname of a candidate
and it is the one by which he is generally
or popularly known in the locality, the
name shall be counted in favor of the
said candidate for the same office with
the same nickname
1. FERRER, Danilo “Danny”
Appreciation
It being the registered nick name of
candidate Ferrer, the vote “Danny”
should counted in his favor.

(MM)
If t is the vote is the registered nickname
of a candidate, and at the same time, one
of the words of the nickname of another
candidate whose nickname is composed of
two or more words, the vote shall be
counted in favor of the former.
1. NG, Rudy “Toto Rudy”
2. REYES, Omar “Toto”
Appreciation
The vote shall be credited in favor of
candidate Omar Reyes.

(MMM)
If the nickname of a candidate is
composed of two or more words,
and the vote written is any one of
those words, and there is no other
candidate with the same name or
nickname, the vote is appreciated in
favor of that candidate.
1. LEE, May “Inday May”
Appreciation
The vote “Inday” should only be
duly credited to candidate May Lee.

•RULE 7
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULES ON THE USE OF
INITIALS

(J)
The erroneous initial of the first name
which accompanies the correct surname
of a candidate, the erroneous initial of
the surname accompanying the correct
first name of a candidate, or the
erroneous middle initial of the candidate
shall not annul the vote in favor of the
latter.
1. RODRIGUEZ, Teodoro
The vote should appreciated favorably
for candidate Rodriguez

(N)
Any vote containing initials only or
which illegible, or which does not
sufficiently identify the candidate for
whom it is intended shall be
considered as stray but shall not
invalidate the whole ballot.
1. GUPIT, Mark M. “Macmac”
Appreciation
The vote cast, being purely initials,
is deemed a stray vote.

•RULE 8
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULES ON THE USE OF
PREFIXES

(L)
Ballots which contain prefixes
such as “Mr.”, “Datu”, “Don”,
“Ginoo”, “Hon.”, or suffixes like
“Hijo”, “Jr.”, “Segundo” are valid.
1. CASTRO, Leon “Boy”
Appreciation
The appreciation “Hon. Leon
Castro” is deemed a valid vote and has
to be counted for candidate Castro

RULE 8: RULES ON THE USE OF PREFIXES
Notes on Prefixes
1
The prefixes enumerated in paragraph 12, section 211 OEC (Sr.,
Mr., Datu, Don, Ginoo, Hon., Gob) are just examples and are not
exclusive. Thus, expressions which connote respect and
something equivalent to the Tagalog “ka” or the English “Mr.”
were considered legitimate.
Prefixes, however, may be utilized as identification marks.
• in every ballot only one is given a prefix, the rest none
2

•RULE 9
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULES INVOLVING
APPELATIONS OF AFFECTION
OR FRIENDSHIP

(M)
The use of nicknames and appellations
of affections and friendship, if
accompanied by the first name or
surname of the candidate, does not
annul such vote, except when they were
used as a means to identify the voter, in
which case the whole ballot is invalid.
1. ANG, Jose “Joe”
Appreciation
The words “Pare Ko” will not affect
the validity of the vote, hence, it should
be counted in favor of candidate Ang.

•RULE 10
• _____________________________________________________________________
SPECIAL CASES

(D) PAR. B
When two (2) or more words are written on
different lines on the ballot, all of which are the
surnames of two (2) or more candidates bearing
the same surname for an office for which the law
authorizes the election of more than one and there
are the same number of such surnames written as
there are candidates with the surname, the vote
shall be counted in favor of all the candidates
bearing the surname.
1. GO, Arnold “Bongbong”
2. GO, Esther “Ma’am Esther”
3. GO, Noel “Noel”
Appreciation
The three “GO” votes should be given to the three
candidates surnamed Go.

(H)
When a name of a candidate appears in a space of
the ballot for an office for which he is a candidate
and in another space for which he is not a
candidate, it shall be counted in his favor for the
office for which he is candidate and the vote for
the office for which he is not a candidate shall be
considered as stray, except when it is used as a
means to identify the voter, in which case, the
whole ballot shall be void.
1. ALBAN, Romeo “Roming”
Appreciation
Being a candidate for Kagawad, Alban
should be credited with the vote written on the
space for Kagawad. However, the vote Alban
found in the space for Punong Barangay should be

(R)
If the candidates voted exceed the number of those to be
elected, the ballot is valid, but the votes shall be counted
only in favor of the candidates whose names were firstly
written by the voter within the spaces provided for said
office until the authorized number is covered.
1. ABAD, Gil “Nonong”
2. CO, Nancy “Nans”
3. DOLLEDO, Hans “Boy”
4. ELLANGA, Aida “Nang Ayda”
5. MORENO, William “Bill”
6. SOTERO, Eden “Pangga”
7. TORRE, Jay “Jay”
8. VILLA, Ma. Teresita “Teray”
Appreciation
Considering that the voter wrote eight names for the
office where only a maximum of seven is authorized, only
the seven names written first shall be counted and the
vote “Teray” shall be stary vote.

(SS)
If what is written is a name of a non-
candidate, the vote shall be considered
a stray vote.
1. AUSTRIA, Artemio “Toto”
2. SEMOY, Alicia “Gingging)
Appreciation
The vote “Rex Abalo,” being that of a
non-candidate should be treated as a
stray vote

(O)
If on the ballot is correctly written the
first name of a candidate but with a
different surname or the candidate
written but with a different first name,
the vote shall not be counted in favor of
any candidate having such first name
and/or surname, but the ballot shall be
considered valid for other candidates.
1. VILLAVERT, Alberto A.
Appreciation
The vote cannot be counted in favor
of a candidate Villavert. It is deemed a
stray vote.3

(K)
The fact that there exists another person
who is not a candidate with the first name
or surname of a candidate shall not
prevent the adjudication of the vote of the
latter.
1. JIMENEZ, Ralph “Nonoy”
2. NADAL, Francisco “Boc”
Appreciation
The vote shall be credited in favor of
candidate Ralph Jimenez.

(Q)
Where there are two (2) or more candidates voted for
an office for the law authorizes the election of only
one, the vote shall not be counted in favor of any of
them, but this shall not affect the validity of the other
votes therein.
1. BEDIA, Myla “Maymay”
2. CALVO, Michael “Mike”
Appreciation
The vote as written should not be appreciated in
favor of any of the candidate. In the same manner for
which that of what written are all surnames of
candidates, then it is a stray vote except if one is an
incumbent who has served for at least one year, then it
should be appreciated in his favor.

If It Is Illegible Or Cannot Sufficiently Identify The Candidate For
Whom It Is Intended, Stray Vote. (Par. 14, Sec. 211)
1.LAPUZ, John “Jon”
1.DOJILLO, Nilo “Calong”
2.VIDAL, Rodrigo “Jing”
RULE 10: SPECIAL CASES
Case 8
Dojillo v. Comelec, G.R. No. 166542, July
25, 2006

•RULE 1I
• _____________________________________________________________________
RULE ON MISPLACED VOTES

CORRECT SEQUENCE RULE
A general misplacement of an entire series of
names intended to be voted for the successive
offices appearing in the ballot.
,
1. CASTILLO, Angie “Ging”
1. AMADOR, Leah “Bing”
2. CERCADO, Manuel “Manny”
3. GONZALES, Leo “Parts”
4. GUMBAN, Daisy “Meg”
5. MALLADA, Rose “Rose”
6. ROMULO, Adrian “Bords”
7. SABAN, Marie “Mar”
8. TOLEDO, Daphne “Dapdap”
Appreciation
The vote for candidate Castillo should be
counted even if found on the first line for
Kagawad.

•RULE 12
• _____________________________________________________________________
EVIDENT INTENT RULE

1. EVIDENT INTENT RULE
A single or double misplacement of names
where such names were preceded or
followed by the title of the contested
office.
1. LAO, Mary “May”
1. GO, Eduard “Ed”
2. TORRES, Irene “Princess”
Appreciation
The vote “Lao” should be credited in
favor of the candidate for Punong
Barangay Mary Lao

2. EVIDENT INTENT RULE
Where the voter wrote after the candidate’s
name a directional symbol indicating the
correct office for which the misplace name
was intended.
1. RUIZ, Juan “Jun”
1. GO, Eduard “Ed”
2. TORRES, Irene “Princess”
Appreciation
As may be clearly seen on the ballot, the
voter’s intention is really to vote for
candidate Ruiz for Punong Barangay; hence

EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE ON MISPLACED
VOTES
•RULE
• _____________________________________________________________________
NEIGHBORHOOD RULE

1. NEIGHBORHOOD RULE
A single misplacement of a name
written off-center from the
designated space.
1. LEDONIO, Marlon “Lonion”
Appreciation
The vote should be counted in
favor of the candidate Marlon
Ledonio.

written slightly underneath the
line for the contested office.
1. PO, Mario “Mayok”
Appreciation
The vote “Po” is considered for
the candidate Mario Po.

written immediately above the
title for the contested office.
1. SINON, Betty “Bet”
Appreciation
The vote should be counted in
favor of the candidate Sinon.

written in the space for an office
immediately following that for which
the candidate presented himself.
1. BARON, Angel “Angie”
Appreciation
As an illustration of this rule, the
vote Baron as written on the first space
for Kagawad and leaving blank that
intended for Punong Barangay, should
be credited in favor of Angel Baron.

RULE 11: MISPLACED VOTES (exception)
3. Neighborhood Rule – Cases 5 and 6
Ranilo A. Velasco v. Commission on Elections and Benigno C. Layesa, Jr., G.R. No.
166931, February 22, 2007
Marife Estomagulang v. Commission on Elections and Antonio Durango, G.R. No.

•RULE 13
• _____________________________________________________________________
•RULE ON DISQUALIFIED
CANDIDATE

If It Is The First Name Or Surname Of A Candidate Disqualified By Final
Judgment, Considered As Stray Vote (Par. 24, Sec. 211)
1.FULLON, Ken “Bords” (Disqualified)
RULE 12: RULE ON DISQUALIFIED CANDIDATES
Case 1
Ticzon v. Comelec, G.R. No. 52451, March
31, 1981

1. Votes cast in favor of a candidate who has been DISQUALIFIED by final
judgment shall be considered STRAY VOTES based on paragraph 24, Section 211
2. Votes cast in favor of a candidate whose certificate of candidacy
was CANCELLED or DENIED DUE COURSE shall be considered STRAY votes based
on paragraph 19, section 211 for being a non-candidate
3. Votes cast in favor of a candidate who has WITHDRAWN shall be
considered STRAY votes based on paragraph 19, Section 211; and
4. Votes cast in favor of a candidate who has been declared NUISANCE due to the
same name and/or surname with a bona fide candidate shall not be deemed stray votes
but may be COUNTED in favor of the latter.
RULE 12: RULE ON DISQUALIFIED CANDIDATES
A Run Through

•RULE 14
• _____________________________________________________________________
•MARKED BALLOT

What is a Marked Ballot?
RULE 13: MARKED BALLOTS
One which is marked by the voter for the purpose of identifying the ballot as one that he
accomplished. As it violates the sacredness of votes, it results in the invalidation of the entire
ballot.
What are its Elements?
(a) The voter must have placed the mark; and
(b) The mark was placed deliberately for the purpose of identifying the voter or the ballot.
Note: Marks made by the voter unintentionally do not invalidate the ballot. Neither do
marks made by some person other than the voter.

Kinds of Marked Ballots
RULE 13: MARKED BALLOTS
Marked Ballot Due to Unnecessary Markings (MB-UM)
-invalidation may immediately be done
1
Marked Ballots Due to Pattern Voting (MB-PV)
- requires presentation of evidence aliunde to be invalidated
2

MARKED BALLOT
• _____________________________________________________________________
•DUE TO UNNECESSARY
MARKINGS (MB-UM)

EXAMPLES OF MARKED BALLOTS
If the ballot is signed by the
voter. It is deemed a marked
ballot.
1. IRENEA, Grace
1. AVELINO, Carlo

EXAMPLE OF MARKED BALLOT
If the names are written in
extraordinarily big letters,
the ballot is considered
marked.
1. BARCE, Lito

If in several ballots names are written
twice in a single space, such are
deemed marked ballot.
1. CHAVEZ, Mark “Macoy”
1. ANAD, Andres “Gingging”
2. BANOY, Eleuterio “Primo”
3. CALVAN, Mae “Maymay”

If the candidate’s name is
written more than twice on a
single ballot is considered
marked.
1. NABAR, Porferio “Peryong”

Irrelevant remarks, impertinent
words, and/or derogatory
expressions found on ballots
render such ballot invalid.
1. LIM, Isidro “Sarge”

1. Names of candidates are written upside down1;
2. Presence of irrelevant expressions (e.g. ”Have a good time Mr. Pacito”,
“Forget Me Not”, “Tse na Lang”, “Jugador” (Gambler), My Vote is Heartily
Dedicated, etc.)2;
3. Names of candidates were written in ordinary writing except for one which
was written in big Gothic letters3;
OTHER INSTANCES OF MARKED BALLOTS
(UM)
1 Jose M. Lontoc v. Gregorio G. Pineda and Teodoro Rodriguez, G.R. No. L-37106, June 30, 1975
2 Jaime T. Torres v. HRET and Ninfa Garin, G.R No. 144491, February 6, 2001; Vicente Ferrer v. Josefin DeAlban, G.R. No. L-12083,
July 31, 1957; Sulpicio Gadon v. Pedro Gadon, G.R. No. 20015, November 30, 1963; Lloren v. CA, G.R. No. L-25907, January 25, 1967
3 Rafael B. Hilao v. Teodulo Bernados, G.R. No. L-7704, December 14, 1954

MARKED BALLOT
• _____________________________________________________________________
•DUE TO PATTERN VOTING
(MB-PV)

1. Appearance of the same names on several ballots on precisely the same space,
cast only in one precinct1
2. Name of one candidate is clearly and markedly indented to the right as
to render the ballot easily distinguishable2
3. Fourteen (14) ballots are marked with the word "Joker”, six (6) with
"Alas”, seven (7) with "Queen”, and seven (7) ballots with the word "Kamatis,
all in the number 7 space for Kagawad
4. Fifteen (15) ballots in the same precinct contain the letter "C" after the name
"Galido”4
5. In every ballot only one candidate is given a prefix, the rest none. In
several ballots the prefixes given to one and the same candidate are of
different nature5
6. Candidates surname is accompanied by different first names, nicknames, and
appellations6
INSTANCES OF MARKED BALLOTS DUE TO PATTERN VOTING
1 Mariano B. Delgado v. Angel B. Tiu, et al., G.R. No. L-18027, June 29, 1962
2 Alejandro Sarmiento v. Serafin Quemado, G.R. No. L-18027, June 29, 1962
3 Felomino Villagracia v. Comelec, G.R. No. 168296, January 31, 2007
4Perfecto Galido v. Comelec, G.R. No. 95346, January 18, 1991
5Jesus Jimenez Sr. v. Margarito Lofranco, G.R. L-21124, November 8, 1963
6Paulino Tumakay v. Orbiso, G.R. No. L-8354, August 22, 1955

1. The names voted for are in very large block letters. The writing could well
be the voter’s habitual one, there being no evidence to show otherwise1;
2. Voters tend to follow the arrangement appearing in the sample
ballots distributed by each candidate. This, standing alone does not render
the ballot marked2;
3. The writing of the name of the candidate twice in the space for Mayor
would indicate only the enthusiasm of the voter voting for the said
candidate3; and
4. Having voters belonging to the same precinct writing the names
of particular candidates in an identical manner in a ballot is not necessarily
invalid.4
Some Instances Where Ballots are Deemed Valid and Not Marked
1 Santiago A. Silverio v. Pedro Castro and Misael Clamor, G.R. No. L-23827, February 28, 1967
2 Jose Katigbak v. Ricardo Mendoza, G.R. No. L-24477, February 28, 1987.
3 Teodoro Juliano v. Court of Appeals and Datu Mando Sinsuat, G.R. No. L-27477, July 28, 1987
4 Jose Katigbak v. Ricardo Mendoza, supra.

•RULE 15
• _____________________________________________________________________
•BALLOTS WRITTEN BY ONE

Q. When can there be multiple ballots “Written by One” person?
Written by One
A. This arises when there are several ballots with similar handwriting in excess of
the number of officially recognized disabled and illiterate voters in a polling
place plus the voter himself.
Q. Are “Written by One” ballots valid?
A. Yes, provided the handwritings thereon are similar to the signature of a register assistor
found in the Minutes of Voting; one ballot by the assistor and for not more than three
illiterate or disabled voters unless the assistor is a member of the Electoral Board.
Otherwise, the ballots should be rejected.

Q. How can one determine that a handwriting is that of one person only?
Written by One
A. When the writings in the subject ballots are strikingly alike, with presence not
only of class characteristics but also individual characteristics or dents and
scratches in sufficient quantity.
Q. Is there a need for technical examination of ballots?
A. The rule is, the Commission or the Electoral Tribunal may or may not make
the determination without need of calling handwriting experts.

•RULE
• _____________________________________________________________________
•BALLOTS WRITTEN BY TWO
OR MORE PERSONS

Q. When can we say that the ballot was filled out by two or more persons?
Written by Two or More Persons
A. When the ballot shows distinct and marked dissimilarities in the writing of the names of
some candidates from the rest.
Q. What are it effects?
A. If the tampered entries were made after the ballot was cast, it is valid. If it bears the
fillings of two or more persons when cast, the ballot is deemed marked, thus, void., 2007],
Q. What is the presumption if there are such dissimilarities found on the ballot?
A. That such dissimilarities were made before the ballot was deposited in the ballot box.

Q. How do we resolve doubts?
Written by Two or More Persons
A. When there is doubt as to whether the names were written by two persons, the
doubt must be resolved in favor of the validity of the ballot.
Q. Are all dissimilarities indications of marked ballots?
A. No. It is very rare that two specimens of a person’s handwriting or signature
are exactly alike.
Minor and insignificant variations in handwriting are even perceived
as indicia of genuineness rather than falsity.

•RULE 16
• _____________________________________________________________________
•MISCELANEOUS CASES

Use Of Any Type Of Writing Instrument Does Not Invalidate The
Ballot. (Par. 16, Sec. 211)
1. RUIZ, Leopoldo “Polding”
1. BRIONES, Lourdes “Lulu”
2. SALIDO, Daisy, “Nene”
3. SOLIS, Raul “Toto”
RULE 16: MISCELANEOUS CASES
Case 1
Manalo v. Sevilla, G.R. No. L-8515, March
29, 2013

(T)
A ballot containing the name of a
candidate printed and pasted on a
blank space of the ballot or affixed
thereto through any mechanical
process is totally null and void.
1. RODRIGUEZ, Tomas “Tom”
Appreciation
The vote having been printed on a
slip of paper and pasted on the ballot
is considered marked, hence, renders
the entire ballot null and void.

(V)
Unless it should clearly appear that they have
been deliberately put by the voter to serve as
identification marks, commas, dots, lines, or
hyphens between the first name and surname of a
candidate, or in other parts of the ballot, traces of
the letter “T”, “J”, and other similar ones, the first
letters or syllables of names which the voter does
not continue, the use of two (2) or more kinds of
writing and unintentional or accidental flourishes,
strokes, or strains shall not invalidate the ballot.
1. BORJA, Miguel “Miki”
1. JEREOS, Angel “Pards”
Appreciation
The ballot is considered valid.

(Y)
Ballots wholly written in Arabic in localities
where it is of general use are valid. To read it,
the Electoral Board may employ an interpreter
who shall take an oath that he/she shall read
the votes correctly.
1. BAHADUR, Ahwaz
2. SHAZIL, Aalimah
1. BAHARAH, Noralia
2. LAMAH, Haadi
3. SAAHIR, Alyssa
Appreciation : The votes are considered valid.

(Z)
The accidental tearing or perforation
of a ballot does not annul it.
1. SY, Magdalena “Magdal”
1. ACSAY, Ben “Ben”
Appreciation
The ballot is deemed valid and all
the votes written thereon should be
accordingly counted.

(AA)
Failure to remove the detachable
coupon from the ballot does not annul
such ballot.
1. YAP, Joseph “Yao”
Appreciation
The ballot is considered valid.

(P)
Any ballot written
with crayon, lead
pencil or ink, wholly
or in part, shall be
valid.

(S)
Any in vote in favor of a person who has
not filed a certificate of candidacy or in
favor of a candidate for an office for
which he did not present himself shall
be considered as a stray vote, but it
shall not invalidate the whole ballot.
1. GABITO, Sergio “Sarge”
1. DAGANI, Girlie “Paday”
2. JACOBA, Andrea “Nene”
3. PRADO, Marivic “Becbec”
Appreciation
The vote “Gabito” on the space for
Kagawad is a stray vote.

(W)
Any ballot which clearly appears to have been filled by
two (2) distinct persons before it was deposited in the
ballot box during the voting is totally null and void.
(x)
Any vote cast in favor of a candidate who has been
disqualified by final judgment shall be considered as
stray and shall not be counted but it shall not invalidate
the ballot.

OTHER INSTANCES OF MARKED BALLOTS
• 1. Names of candidates are written upside down.
• 2. Ballots contain names of non-candidates who are
historical figures, TV or movie personalities, and
basketball players.
• 3. Names of candidates were written in ordinary
writing except for one which was written in big
Gothic letters.
• 4. Appearance of the same names on several ballots
on precisely the same space, cast only in one
precinct.

•“ YOU CAN NEVER MAKE
SAME MISTAKE TWICE
BECAUSE THE SECOND TIME
YOU MAKE IT, IT’S NOT A
MISTAKE IT’S A CHOICE”

RULES-FOR-THE-APPRECIATION-OF-BALLOTS.pptx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (10)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

RULES-FOR-THE-APPRECIATION-OF-BALLOTS.pptx