‘Petition to disapprove’ filed against 439 registered voters in Tinglayan

Tinglayan, Kalinga - Attorney Rafie Gumilab filed a petition to Commission on Election (COMELEC) of Tinglayan to “deny and/or disapprove the application” of 439 registered voters in Barangay Tulgao East.

Gumilab said the move was based on certain observation of the community questioning the registration of the supposed voters in the area.

“Adda metlang nag-report ta di ba nu apan tayo agregister idiay ket siyempre, dagiay tattao idiay, masmasdaaw da nu sino ngata dagituy a tattao a nagad-adu nga um-umay dituy agreg-register,” the lawyer said.

Grounds

In his petition, Gumilab cited that the registrants are not residents of the barangay, therefore making material misrepresentation in their application forms for registration as voters.

These respondents-registrants registered between April 5, 2021 to June 30 this year, where some registered as new registrants while the others applied to transfer their registration records.

In their application forms for registration, they filled out as new residents of Tulgao East, adding the periods of their residents.

Discussions and Arguments

1. Respondents-registrants never established their personal presence at Tulgao East

According to Gumilab, “it is very clear that in order for one to be able to register as voter, it is necessary that he/she is a residents of the place where he/she proposed to vote for at least 6 months,” citing Article V, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution, qualification of voters under Omnibus Election Code, and Voter’s Registration Act of 1996.

The lawyer also cited the Supreme Court held in the case of Jalosjos v. COMELEC, “requirement of residence is synonymous with domicile, meaning that a person must not only intend to reside in a particular place but must also have personal presence in such place coupled with conduct indicative of such intention.”

Moreover, the petition states the birth certificates of the respondents-registrants show that most, if not all of them were neither born in Tinglayan nor their parents a residents thereof nor have any ties whatsoever to consider them a residents therein.

2. Surnames of the registrants cannot be identified by the people of Tinglayan

In Tinglayan, when somebody introduces his/her name with surname, one can tell if that person is from a certain barangay.

In the case of the respondents-registrants, their surnames cannot in any way be identified to be that of the people of Tulgao East.

“Dagiay apelyedo ket sab-sabali. Ta nu taga-Tinglayan ka ket medyo familiar ka metlang ti apelyedo di ba,” Gumilab pointed out.

3. Most, if not all of the registrants cannot speak the dialect in Tulgao East

The ability to speak the dialect of a particular barangay is other indication of knowing whether a person who claims to be resident of Tinglayan, particularly of a certain barangay.

4. Voting population is higher than the total population due to “flying voters”

“Maysa pay ket nagadu unay, nu ikomparam ti total population idiay, based sa records ng COMELEC, sumobra ang voting population sa total population so kasla questionable talaga,” Gumilab disclosed.

In the petition of the lawyer, he pointed out that it is very apparent that the registrants of barangay Tulgao East this year have an unprecedented increase even without any proportional increase in their population for the past years. This, he said, is if the respondents-registrants will be included in the list of the voters.

The unusual increase, as Gumilab explained, could only be a result of flying-voters from other municipalities, cities or province who are not residents of Tinglayan.

“This is buttressed by the fact that if you see their previous voters’ registrations, most of them are registered voters of other municipalities and/or provinces where they maintain their residence ever since,” the petition reads.

5. Survey shows no significant increase in households

The lawyer stated that “if we are to believe that these respondents-registrants are indeed residents of Tulgao East, then they must have had a house therein.”

The survey, however, revealed that there is no significant increase in the number of the households in the barangay that would commensurate to the increase of its residents.

“Deny and/or disapprove the applicants for voter registration”

Gumilab affirmed that allowing the registrants to be registered as voters is depriving the constituents of Tinglayan, as well as Kalinga, their right to choose their elected officials which is a primordial purpose of our constitutional right to suffrage.

The lawyer argued that “it is as if the constituents of Tinglayan and Kalinga surrendered their right to these unscrupulous registrants to choose who would be elected because it can happen that their votes are the deciding factor who among the candidates will be victorious.”

According to Gumilab, the hearing on petition is done and “we'll just await the decision of the COMELEC either approving or disapproving the application for registrations of those registrants.”

Guru Press Cordillera has sought to obtain a statement from the COMELEC but has not received a response yet.

Follow Guru Press Cordillera on Facebook for more News and Information