Source: http://lawlibrary.chanrobles.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=82321:56233&catid=1574&Itemid=566
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 10:56:41+00:00

Document:
G.R. No. 206987, September 10, 2013 - ALLIANCE FOR NATIONALISM AND DEMOCRACY (ANAD), Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
ALLIANCE FOR NATIONALISM AND DEMOCRACY (ANAD), Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
Before the Court is a Petition for Certiorari with Urgent Prayer for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and Writ of Mandamus, seeking to compel the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to canvass the votes cast for petitioner Alliance for Nationalism and Democracy (ANAD) in the recently held 2013 Party-List Elections.
Petitioner ANAD does not belong to, or come within the ambit of, the marginalized and underrepresented sectors enumerated in Section 5 of R.A. No. 7941 and espoused in the cases of Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v. Commission on Elections and Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v. Commission on Elections.
There is no proof showing that nominees Arthur J. Tariman and Julius D. Labandria are actually nominated by ANAD itself. The Certificate of Nomination, subscribed and sworn to by Mr. Domingo M. Balang, shows that ANAD submitted only the names of Pastor Montero Alcover, Jr., Baltaire Q. Balangauan and Atty. Pedro Leslie B. Salva. It necessarily follows, that having only three (3) nominees, ANAD failed to comply with the procedural requirements set forth in Section 4, Rule 3 of Resolution No. 9366.
ANAD failed to submit its Statement of Contributions and Expenditures for the 2007 National and Local Elections as required by Section 14 of Republic Act No. 7166 (“R.A. No. 7166”).
ANAD went before this Court challenging the above-mentioned resolution. In Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. Comelec,2 the Court remanded the case to the COMELEC for re-evaluation in accordance with the parameters prescribed in the aforesaid decision.
In the assailed Resolution dated 11 May 2013,3 the COMELEC affirmed the cancellation of petitioner’s Certificate of Registration and/or Accreditation and disqualified it from participating in the 2013 Elections. The COMELEC held that while ANAD can be classified as a sectoral party lacking in well-defined political constituencies, its disqualification still subsists for violation of election laws and regulations, particularly for its failure to submit at least five nominees, and for its failure to submit its Statement of Contributions and Expenditures for the 2007 Elections.
ANAD, nonetheless, insists that the COMELEC should have called for another summary hearing after this Court remanded the case to the COMELEC for re-evaluation in accordance with the parameters laid down in Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. Comelec. This is a superfluity.
ANAD was already given the opportunity to prove its qualifications during the summary hearing of 23 August 2012, during which ANAD submitted documents and other pieces of evidence to establish said qualifications. In re-evaluating ANAD’s qualifications in accordance with the parameters laid down in Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. COMELEC, the COMELEC need not have called another summary hearing. The Comelec could, as in fact it did,8 readily resort to documents and other pieces of evidence previously submitted by petitioners in re-appraising ANAD’s qualifications. After all, it can be presumed that the qualifications, or lack thereof, which were established during the summary hearing of 23 August 2012 continued until election day and even thereafter.
Compliance with Section 8 of R.A. No. 7941 is essential as the said provision is a safeguard against arbitrariness. Section 8 of R.A. No. 7941 rids a party-list organization of the prerogative to substitute and replace its nominees, or even to switch the order of the nominees, after submission of the list to the COMELEC.
The prohibition is not arbitrary or capricious; neither is it without reason on the part of lawmakers. The COMELEC can rightly presume from the submission of the list that the list reflects the true will of the party-list organization. The COMELEC will not concern itself with whether or not the list contains the real intended nominees of the party-list organization, but will only determine whether the nominees pass all the requirements prescribed by the law and whether or not the nominees possess all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications. Thereafter, the names of the nominees will be published in newspapers of general circulation. Although the people vote for the party-list organization itself in a party-list system of election, not for the individual nominees, they still have the right to know who the nominees of any particular party-list organization are. The publication of the list of the party-list nominees in newspapers of general circulation serves that right of the people, enabling the voters to make intelligent and informed choices. In contrast, allowing the party-list organization to change its nominees through withdrawal of their nominations, or to alter the order of the nominations after the submission of the list of nominees circumvents the voters’ demand for transparency. The lawmakers’ exclusion of such arbitrary withdrawal has eliminated the possibility of such circumvention.
And such other information that the Commission may require.
The prescribed form for the Statement of Election Contributions and Expenses is attached to these Rules as Annex “F.” The Schedules of Contributions and Expenditures (Annexes “G” and “H”, respectively) should be supported and accompanied by certified true copies of official receipts, invoices and other similar documents.
An incomplete statement, or a statement that does not contain all the required information and attachments, or does not conform to the prescribed form, shall be considered as not filed and shall subject the candidate or party treasurer to the penalties prescribed by law.
As found by the COMELEC, ANAD failed to comply with the above-mentioned requirements as the exhibits submitted by ANAD consisted mainly of a list of total contributions from other persons, a list of official receipts and amounts without corresponding receipts, and a list of expenditures based on order slips and donations without distinction as to whether the amounts listed were advanced subject to reimbursement or donated.13 This factual finding was neither contested nor rebutted by ANAD.
As empowered by law, the COMELEC may motu proprio cancel, after due notice and hearing, the registration of any party-list organization if it violates or fails to comply with laws, rules or regulations relating to elections.15 Thus, we find no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the COMELEC when it issued the assailed Resolution dated 11 May 2013.
In any event, the official tally results of the COMELEC show that ANAD garnered 200,972 votes.16 As such, even if petitioner is declared qualified and the votes cast for it are canvassed, statistics show that it will still fail to qualify for a seat in the House of Representatives.
Sereno, C.J., Carpio, Leonardo-De Castro, Brion, Peralta, Bersamin, Del Castillo, Abad, Villarama, Jr., Mendoza, Reyes, Perlas-Bernabe, and Leonen, JJ., concur.
Velasco, Jr., J., No part.
16 NBOC Resolution No. 0008-13, In the Matter of the Proclamation of Additional Winning Party-List Groups, Organizations and Coalitions in Connection with the 13 May 2013 Automated National and Local Elections, promulgated on 28 May 2013.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.