Practice question
A group of voters that includes no candidate files a general signature appeal demanding a province-wide recount for all offices, invokes only broad rights to information and petition, and satisfies none of the applicable election-protest requirements. It asserts that the signatures necessarily substitute for a proper election protest. Under Legaspi, which assessment is sound?
- The signatures automatically confer every electoral tribunal's jurisdiction
- A general appeal is necessarily identical to a proper protest for one specified office
- Every voter may bypass the governing election remedies by offering to pay recount costs
- The general appeal does not become a compliant election protest merely through signatures or invocation of broad constitutional rights
- The petitioners automatically become proclaimed candidates
Legal references
- Legaspi v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 264661, July 30, 2024, main decision, election remedies and general recount demands: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/jul2024/gr_264661_2024.html
- 1987 Constitution, Article IX-C, Section 2(2), election-contest jurisdiction: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/3/353
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.