Scribd
Upload
99 views1 page

Panotes v. Hret

The document discusses whether picture images of ballots scanned by Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) machines can be considered official ballots equivalent to the original paper ballots filled out by voters. There are two types of automated election systems - paper-based and direct recording electronic. The 2010 election used a paper-based system where votes are recorded on paper ballots. The court agrees with both the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal and the petitioner that the scanned ballot images captured electronically by PCOS machines are also considered official ballots, as they faithfully record the votes cast. As such, the printouts of the scanned images can be used in electoral protests for revising votes, equivalent to the original paper ballots.

Uploaded by

LD
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
99 views1 page

Panotes v. Hret

The document discusses whether picture images of ballots scanned by Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) machines can be considered official ballots equivalent to the original paper ballots filled out by voters. There are two types of automated election systems - paper-based and direct recording electronic. The 2010 election used a paper-based system where votes are recorded on paper ballots. The court agrees with both the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal and the petitioner that the scanned ballot images captured electronically by PCOS machines are also considered official ballots, as they faithfully record the votes cast. As such, the printouts of the scanned images can be used in electoral protests for revising votes, equivalent to the original paper ballots.

Uploaded by

LD
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

G.R. No.

201350

ELMER E. PANOTES, Petitioner,


vs.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL and LIWAYWAYVINZONS-CHATO,
Respondents.

PERLAS -BERNABE, J.:

The crucial issue posed by Chato is whether or not the picture images of the ballots may be considered
as the "official

ballots" or the equivalent of the original paper ballots which the voters filled out.

There are two types of AES identified under R.A. No. 9369: (1) paper-based election system; and (2)
direct recording

electronic election system. A paper-based election system, such as the one adopted during the May 10,
2010

elections, is the type of AES that "use paper ballots, records and counts votes, tabulates,
33
consolidates/canvasses and transmits electronically the results of the vote count." On the other hand,
direct recording electronic election system

"uses electronic ballots, records, votes by means of a ballot display provided with mechanical or electro-
optical

component that can be activated by the voter, processes data by means of computer programs, record
voting data and

34
ballot images, and transmits voting results electronically."

We agree with both the HRET and Panotes that the picture images of the ballots, as scanned and
recorded by the PCOS, are likewise "official ballots" that faithfully captures in electronic form the votes
cast by the voter, as defined by

Section 2 (3) of R.A. No. 9369. As such, the printouts thereof are the functional equivalent of the paper
ballots filled out

by the voters and, thus, may be used for purposes of revision of votes in an electoral protest.

You might also like