May the Comelec be empowered to canvass the votes and proclaim the winning candidates for president and vice-president?

Sec. 4 of the Philippine Constitution provides:

xxx 

The returns of every election for President and Vice-President, duly certified by the board of canvassers of each province or city, shall be transmitted to the Congress, directed to the President of the Senate. Upon receipt of the certificates of canvass, the President of the Senate shall, not later than thirty days after the day of the election, open all certificates in the presence of the Senate and the House of Representatives in joint public session, and the Congress, upon determination of the authenticity and due execution thereof in the manner provided by law, canvass the votes.

The person having the highest number of votes shall be proclaimed elected, but in case two or more shall have an equal and highest number of votes, one of them shall forthwith be chosen by the vote of a majority of all the Members of both Houses of the Congress, voting separately.

The Congress shall promulgate its rules for the canvassing of the certificates.

Sec. 18.5 of R.A. 9189 (Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003), insofar as it grants sweeping authority to the Comelec to proclaim all winning candidates, is unconstitutional as it is repugnant to Sec. 4, Art. VII of the Constitution vesting in Congress the authority to proclaim the winning candidates for the positions of President and Vice-President.

Congress could not have allowed the COMELEC to usurp a power that constitutionally belongs to it or, as aptly stated by petitioner, to encroach on the power of Congress to canvass the votes for president and vice-president and the power to proclaim the winners for the said positions. The provisions of the Constitution as the fundamental law of the land should be read as part of The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003 and hence, the canvassing of the votes and the proclamation of the winning candidates for president and vice-president for the entire nation must remain in the hands of Congress. (Makalintal vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 157013, July 10, 2003)

May the Congress continue to canvass the presidential and vice-presidential election results even if it has adjourned its regular session without need of any call for a special session?

Petitioner's argument is that "the existence and proceedings of the Joint Committee of Congress are invalid, illegal and unconstitutional following the adjournment sine die of both Houses of Congress of their regular sessions on June 11, 2004," He cites in support thereof Section 15, Article VI of the Constitution which reads:

Sec. 15. The Congress shall convene once every year on the fourth Monday of July for its regular session, unless a different date is fixed by law, and shall continue to be in session for such number of days as it may determine until thirty days before the opening of its next regular session, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. The President may call a special session at any time.

Contrary to petitioner's argument, however, the term of the present Twelfth Congress did not terminate and expire upon the adjournment sine die of the regular session of both Houses on June 11, 2004.

Section 15, Article VI of the Constitution cited by petitioner does not pertain to the term of Congress, but to its regular annual legislative sessions and the mandatory 30-day recess before the opening of its next regular session (subject to the power of the President to call a special session at any time).

Section 4 of Article VIII also of the Constitution clearly provides that "[t]he term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election." Similarly, Section 7 of the same Article provides that "[t]he Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of three years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election." Consequently, there being no law to the contrary, until June 30, 2004, the present Twelfth Congress to which the present legislators belong cannot be said to have "passed out of legal existence."

The legislative functions of the Twelfth Congress may have come to a close upon the final adjournment of its regular sessions on June 11, 2004, but this does not affect its non-legislative functions, such as that of being the National Board of Canvassers. In fact, the joint public session of both Houses of Congress convened by express directive of Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution to canvass the votes for and to proclaim the newly elected President and Vice-President has not, and cannot, adjourn sine die until it has accomplished its constitutionally mandated tasks. For only when a board of canvassers has completed its functions is it rendered functus officio. Its membership may change, but it retains its authority as a board until it has accomplished its purposes. 

Since the Twelfth Congress has not yet completed its non-legislative duty to canvass the votes and proclaim the duly elected President and Vice-President, its existence as the National Board of Canvassers, as well as that of the Joint Committee to which it referred the preliminary tasks of authenticating and canvassing the certificates of canvass, has not become functus officio.

In sum, despite the adjournment sine die of Congress, there is no legal impediment to the Joint Committee completing the tasks assigned to it and transmitting its report for the approval of the joint public session of both Houses of Congress, which may reconvene without need of call by the President to a special session. (Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. vs. Joint Committee of Congress, G.R. No 163783, June 22, 2004)

May the Congress validly delegate the initial determination of the authenticity and due execution of the certificates of canvass to a Joint Congressional Committee?

Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution expressly empowers Congress “to promulgate its rules for the canvassing of the certificates.” In the exercise of this power, Congress may validly delegate the initial determination of the authenticity and due execution of the certificates of canvass to a Joint Congressional Committee, composed of members of the House of Representatives and of the Senate. The creation of the Joint Committee does not constitute grave abuse and cannot be said to have deprived petitioner and the other members of Congress of their congressional prerogatives, because under the very Rules under attack, the decisions and final report of the said Committee shall be subject to the approval of the joint session of both Houses of Congress, voting separately. 

In Arroyo vs. de Venecia (277 SCRA 268, August 14,1997), the Court ruled that it had no power to review the internal proceedings of Congress, unless there is a clear violation of the Constitution. Likewise, Santiago vs. Guingona, (298 SCRA 756, November 18, 1998) held that the Court – under the doctrine of separation of powers – has “no authority to interfere” in the “exclusive realm” of a co-equal branch, absent a showing of grave abuse of discretion. The Court has no authority to restrict or limit the exercise of congressional prerogatives granted by the Constitution (Ruy Elias Lopez vs. Senate of the Philippines, G.R. No. 163556, June 8, 2004)

May the Comelec conduct an unofficial quick count of the votes cast for the positions of President and Vice-President?

There is no constitutional or statutory basis for Comelec to undertake a separate and an “unofficial” tabulation of, results, whether manually or electronically. By conducting such “unofficial” tabulation, the Comelec descends to the level of a private organization, spending public funds for the purpose. This not only violates the exclusive prerogative of NAMFREL to conduct an “unofficial” count, but also taints the integrity of the envelopes containing the election returns and the election returns themselves. Thus, if the Comelec is proscribed from conducting an official canvass of the votes cast for the President and Vice-President, the Comelec is, with more reason, prohibited from making an “unofficial” canvass of said votes.

The assailed resolution usurps, under the guise of an unofficial tabulation of election results based on a copy of the election returns, the sole and exclusive authority of Congress to canvass the votes for the election of President and Vice-President. Article VII, Section 4 of the Constitution provides in part:

The returns of every election for President and Vice-President duly certified by the board of canvassers of each province or city, shall be transmitted to the Congress, directed to the President of the Senate. Upon receipt of the certificates of canvass, the President of the Senate shall, not later than thirty days after the day of the election, open all the certificates in the presence of the Senate and the House of Representatives in joint public session, and the Congress, upon determination of the authenticity and due execution thereof in the manner provided by law, canvass the votes. (Brillantes vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 163193, June 15, 2004)