1/27/25, 2:47 PM Pimentel, Jr. vs.
Commission on Elections
Title
Pimentel, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections
Case Decision Date
G.R. No. 133509 Feb 9, 2000
Pimentel contested vote discrepancies in Pasig City's 1995 elections, alleging Enrile's
padded votes. SC ruled COMELEC erred, ordering charges against canvassers for
election offenses under R.A. 6646.
Jur.ph - Case Digest (G.R. No. 133509)
Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
Background:
Petitioner Aquilino Q. Pimentel Jr. ran as a senatorial candidate in the May 8, 1995, national
elections. The case arose from alleged discrepancies in the Statement of Votes (SoVs) and
Certificate of Canvass (CoC) for Pasig City, which showed a significant increase in votes for
senatorial candidate Juan Ponce Enrile and a decrease in votes for Pimentel.
Discrepancies in Election Documents:
1. Election Returns vs. Certificate of Canvass (CoC):
Petitioner’s votes decreased by 4,337 in the CoC compared to the election returns.
Enrile’s votes increased by 37,402 in the CoC.
2. Election Returns vs. Statement of Votes (SoVs):
Petitioner’s votes decreased by 4,441 in the SoVs.
Enrile’s votes increased by 35,765 in the SoVs.
3. Excess Votes in Precincts:
In 101 precincts, Enrile’s votes totaled 11,255 despite only 9,031 voters actually voting,
indicating padded votes.
Complaint and Investigation:
On September 17, 1996, Pimentel filed a complaint with the Commission on Elections
(COMELEC) alleging violations of Section 27(b) of Republic Act No. 6646 (Electoral Reforms
Law of 1987) by private respondents Ligaya Salayon, Antonio Llorente (members of the City
Board of Canvassers), and Reynaldo San Juan (Enrile’s Campaign Manager).
COMELEC Resolutions:
1. January 8, 1998: COMELEC dismissed the complaint for lack of probable cause,
attributing discrepancies to honest mistakes or fatigue.
2. March 10, 1998: COMELEC denied Pimentel’s motion for reconsideration.
Issue:
1. Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing Pimentel’s
complaint for lack of probable cause.
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/digest/pimentel-jr-v-commission-on-elections?q=ra+9995 1/2
1/27/25, 2:47 PM Pimentel, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections
2. Whether the discrepancies in the vote counts constitute probable cause for election
offenses under Section 27(b) of R.A. No. 6646.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court granted the petition, annulling and setting aside the COMELEC
Resolutions. The Court ordered the filing of criminal charges against Salayon and Llorente
for violation of Section 27(b) of R.A. No. 6646. However, the Court found no probable cause
against San Juan due to insufficient evidence.
Ratio:
1. Probable Cause:
The magnitude of discrepancies (e.g., Enrile’s votes exceeding actual voters) cannot
be dismissed as mere clerical errors or fatigue. These discrepancies constitute
probable cause for election offenses.
Probable cause does not require absolute certainty but only a reasonable belief that
an offense was committed.
2. Section 27(b) of R.A. No. 6646:
The law penalizes tampering, increasing, or decreasing votes received by a
candidate. The discrepancies in the CoC and SoVs fall under this provision.
3. Defenses of Honest Mistake and Ministerial Duty:
Private respondents claimed honest mistakes and ministerial duty. However, the
sheer magnitude of errors renders these defenses incredible.
4. Lack of Probable Cause Against San Juan:
The only evidence against San Juan was a letter he wrote, which did not establish
strong suspicion of involvement in vote padding.
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/digest/pimentel-jr-v-commission-on-elections?q=ra+9995 2/2
