Inclusion and Exclusion Proceedings in Election Law

Inclusion and exclusion proceedings form a critical aspect of the electoral process in the Philippines. These proceedings are designed to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the voters' list by resolving disputes over the inclusion or exclusion of individuals in the official registry of voters. The legal framework governing these proceedings is primarily found in the Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881), the Voter’s Registration Act of 1996 (Republic Act No. 8189), and relevant jurisprudence.

A. Legal Basis

Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881)
- The Omnibus Election Code provides the general framework for the conduct of elections, including provisions on voters' qualifications and the registration process.
Voter’s Registration Act of 1996 (Republic Act No. 8189)
- This Act specifically addresses the system for continuing voter registration and includes detailed provisions on inclusion and exclusion proceedings.
COMELEC Rules and Regulations
- The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) issues specific rules and regulations that implement the provisions of the Omnibus Election Code and RA 8189 with respect to inclusion and exclusion proceedings.

B. Purpose of Inclusion and Exclusion Proceedings

Inclusion and exclusion proceedings are conducted to determine the rightful inclusion or exclusion of a person’s name in the voters' list. These proceedings are essential in maintaining the integrity of the electoral roll and ensuring that only qualified individuals are allowed to vote, while those who do not meet the qualifications are excluded.

Key Objectives:

Inclusion Proceedings:
- Filed to include an individual who claims that their name has been unlawfully omitted from the list of voters.
Exclusion Proceedings:
- Filed to exclude a person whose name is alleged to have been unlawfully included or should not appear on the list of voters, either because they do not meet the qualifications or due to other legal grounds.

C. Who May File?

For Inclusion Proceedings:

Any person whose application for registration has been disapproved by the Election Registration Board (ERB).
A person whose name has been omitted from the list of voters.

For Exclusion Proceedings:

Any registered voter in the same city or municipality where the person whose exclusion is sought is registered.
Political parties through their authorized representatives.
The Election Registration Board (ERB), when a person has been unlawfully registered.

D. Jurisdiction

Inclusion and exclusion proceedings are filed with the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) or Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of the city or municipality where the registration was made. The court is mandated to act on these cases promptly to ensure the timely finalization of the list of voters before election day.

E. Procedure for Inclusion and Exclusion Proceedings

1. Filing of Petition:

The petition must be filed within ten (10) days from the posting of the list of voters by the Election Registration Board (ERB) or within twenty-five (25) days after the last day of registration, whichever comes first.

2. Contents of the Petition:

The petition must state the full name and address of the petitioner, the facts constituting the grounds for inclusion or exclusion, and the names and addresses of witnesses, if any.

3. Notification:

For exclusion proceedings, the person whose exclusion is sought must be notified at least five (5) days before the scheduled hearing.
The court will notify the Election Officer who, in turn, will notify the public by posting the petition on the bulletin board of the local election office.

4. Summary Proceedings:

Inclusion and exclusion cases are summary in nature, meaning that the proceedings are conducted expeditiously and without the complexities of a full-blown trial.
The court is required to resolve the case within fifteen (15) days from the date the petition is filed.

5. Appeal:

Any party aggrieved by the decision of the trial court may file an appeal with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) within five (5) days from receipt of the decision.
The RTC must decide the appeal within ten (10) days from receipt of the appeal, and its decision is final and executory.

F. Grounds for Inclusion or Exclusion

Grounds for Inclusion:

The petitioner is a qualified voter but was erroneously omitted from the list of voters.
The petitioner’s registration application was wrongly denied by the ERB despite meeting all legal qualifications for registration.

Grounds for Exclusion:

The person is disqualified from voting under Article V, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution, which outlines the qualifications of voters.
- Age: Not at least eighteen (18) years of age.
- Citizenship: Not a Filipino citizen.
- Residency: Does not meet the six (6) months residency requirement in the locality where the person intends to vote.
- Disqualified by law: Includes persons who have been sentenced by final judgment for a crime punishable by more than one year of imprisonment, unless their rights have been restored, and those who have been declared insane or incompetent by a competent authority.
The person has transferred residence to another locality and is no longer a resident of the precinct where they are registered.
The registration was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation, or illegality.

G. Decision and Effect

The decision of the trial court in inclusion and exclusion cases has the following effects:

For Inclusion Proceedings:
- If the court grants the petition, the person’s name is ordered to be included in the official voters' list for the election.
For Exclusion Proceedings:
- If the court grants the petition, the person’s name is ordered to be stricken off the official voters' list.

In both cases, the court’s ruling is final and executory, subject only to a limited appeal as mentioned above. The final list of voters becomes the basis for determining who is eligible to vote in the upcoming election.

H. Key Jurisprudence

Abubakar v. Commission on Elections (2000)
- In this case, the Supreme Court reiterated the necessity of following due process in inclusion and exclusion proceedings, especially the requirement for timely notice to the parties involved.
Aquino v. Commission on Elections (2010)
- The Court emphasized the importance of substantial compliance with residency and citizenship requirements in exclusion proceedings.
Peñera v. Commission on Elections (2009)
- This case highlighted that a candidate’s act of filing a certificate of candidacy does not constitute automatic abandonment of residency for voter registration purposes.

I. Conclusion

Inclusion and exclusion proceedings serve as important mechanisms to safeguard the integrity of the voters' list, ensuring that only qualified individuals are permitted to vote in elections. The streamlined, summary nature of these proceedings allows for their timely resolution, which is crucial to the proper conduct of elections. Given the significant role these proceedings play, it is essential that courts, election officers, and parties adhere strictly to procedural rules to protect the sanctity of the electoral process.