Practice question
A candidate claims a board conducted a predetermined sham canvass through threats and inadequate notice. Explain why the substance may fit illegal proceedings, while merely alleging that a candidate deserved more votes would not establish that ground.
Legal references
- COMELEC Resolution No. 8804, Rules 3 and 4, pre-proclamation controversies in an automated election system: https://lawphil.net/administ/comelec/comres2010/comres_8804_2010.html
- Marcos v. Robredo, P.E.T. Case No. 005, February 16, 2021, main decision, automated-election pre-proclamation grounds: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/feb2021/pet_005_2021.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.