The Commission on Elections (Comelec) has ordered its Law Department to file in court criminal cases against three persons for alleged violations of the election laws during the 2022 congressional election in Santa Maria town in Laguna.

Ordered charged were then 2022 congressional candidate Antonio M. Carolino and his wife Santa Maria Mayor Ma. Rocelle Valdecantos Carolino, and municipal treasurer Ma Theresa L. Lontok.

Affirming the recommendation of its Law Department, the Comelec – as a full commission – ordered them charged with violation of Section 35 of Republic Act No. 8436 as amended by RA 9369, the law on Automated Election System.

Lontok was also ordered charged with violation of Section 261 (Z) (13) and (15) of the Omnibus Election Code.

However, the Comelec ordered the dismissal of the charges for violation of Section 261 (Z) (22) filed against the spouses Carolino and Lontok for lack of probable cause.

Those ordered charged in court by the Comelec could not be contacted as of posting time.

The order to file the cases in court was contained in the minutes of the Comelec’s executive session held last March 18.

It was signed by Comelec Chairman George Erwin M. Garcia and Commissioners Aimee P Ferolino, Rey E. Bulay, Ernesto Ferdinand P. Maceda Jr., Nelson J. Celis, Maria Norina S. Tangaro-Casingal, and Noli R. Pipo.

The complaints against the spouses Carolino, Lontok, and other persons were filed on Feb. 24, 2025 before the Comelec’s Law Department by then congresswoman Maria Jamina Katherine Baltazar Agarao.

Antonio Carolino lost in the 2022 congressional elections in Santa Maria town and in his district.  Agarao was proclaimed winner by the Comelec. Antonio Carolino then filed an election protest before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET).

In a decision handed down on Jan. 23, 2025, the HRET dismissed Antonio Carolino’s petition and affirmed the proclamation of Agarao as member of Congress for the fourth district of Laguna.

The issues on violations of elections laws like tampering of ballots and other election paraphernalia were referred by the HRET to the Comelec for appropriate investigation and prosecution.

In her complaints, Agarao alleged, among other issues, that the Carolinos, Lontok and other persons confederated, conspired and mutually assisted one another “in the tampering of ballots.”

She alleged that the plastic and metal seals of several ballot boxes were not properly affixed, and were merely secured with scotch tape on the top cover. 

At the same time, she alleged that markings and alterations were found on the physical ballots, particularly additional shading in the ovals for the congressional position, involving 16 precincts in Santa Maria town.

The spouses Carolinos and Lontok denied what they branded as “misrepresented allegations of the complainant that the ballot boxes were 'unsealed' and 'resealed only with packing tape.'”

They pointed out that “if the seals were indeed removed and reapplied, the Ballot Acknowledgment Receipt (BAR) which documented the condition of the ballot boxes during its retrieval would contain the same.”

They also said the BAR was acknowledged and signed by lawyers and representatives of the parties to confirm the condition of the boxes at the time of the retrieval.

They added that the “best way to prove whether there has been unauthorized access to the ballot boxes lies with the General Services Office (GSO) of the Municipality of Santa Maria, Laguna, who were tasked to maintain the security of the area.”

In recommending the filing of the charges in court, the Comelec’s Law Department invoked the HRET decision which said that “the integrity of the physical ballots in the subject precinct was compromised and, the physical ballots were considered as tainted and unreliable.”

Thus, it told the Comelec as a full commission: “This Department recommends to give judicial notice to the findings of the HRET and should be accorded substantial weight. Having been derived from a comprehensive revision, appreciation, actual ballot examination, comparison with decrypted ballot images, and sworn testimony in adversarial proceedings, such factual findings on ballot condition cannot be lightly disregarded.”

“Reading the same altogether, this Department is in the position that there is probable cause that the Respondents may have violated Section 35 (a)(1) of RA No. 8436, as amended,” it also said.

Approving the recommendation, the Comelec directed its Law Department to implement its order.