| Date post: | 04-Jun-2018 |
| Category: |
Documents |
| Upload: | tigerlilyicedtea1 |
| View: | 214 times |
| Download: | 0 times |
of 13
8/14/2019 Aratea.doc
1/13
G.R. No. 195229 October 9, 2012EFREN RACEL ARA TEA,Petitioner,vs.COMMISSiON ON ELECTIONS and ESTELA .ANT!"OLO,Respondents.
D E C I S I O NCAR"IO, J.:T#e Ca$eThis is a special civil action for certiorari1seeking to reviewand nllif! the Resoltion"dated 2 #e$rar! "%&& and the
Order'
dated &" (anar! "%&& of the Co))ission onElections *CO+EEC- En anc in Dra. Sigrid S. Rodolfo v.Romeo D. Lonzanida, docketed as SP/ No. %01&23 *DC-.The petition asserts that the CO+EEC issed theResoltion and Order with grave a$se of discretiona)onting to lack or e4cess of 5risdiction.T#e Fact$Ro)eo D. on6anida *on6anida- and Estela D. /ntipolo*/ntipolo- were candidates for +a!or of San /ntonio,7a)$ales in the +a! "%&% National and ocal Elections.on6anida filed his certificate of candidac! on & Dece)$er"%%0.8 On 3 Dece)$er "%%0, Dra. Sigrid S. Rodolfo*Rodolfo- filed a petition nder Section 93 of the O)ni$sElection Code to dis:alif! on6anida and to den! de
corse or to cancel on6anida;s certificate of candidac! onthe grond that on6anida was elected, and had served, as)a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales for for *8- consectiveter)s i))ediatel! prior to the ter) for the +a! "%&%elections. Rodolfo asserted that on6anida )ade a false)aterial representation in his certificate of candidac! whenon6anida certified nder oath that he was eligi$le for theoffice he soght election. Section 3, /rticle < of the &039Constittion2 and Section 8'*$- of the ocal =overn)entCode> $oth prohi$it a local elective official fro) $eingelected and serving for )ore than three consective ter)sfor the sa)e position.The CO+EEC Second Division rendered a Resoltion 9on&3 #e$rar! "%&% cancelling on6anida;s certificate of
candidac!. Pertinent portions of the &3 #e$rar! "%&%Resoltion read?Respondent on6anida never denied having held the officeof )a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales for )ore than nineconsective !ears. Instead he raised arg)ents to forestallor dis)iss the petition on the gronds other than the )ainisse itself. @e find sch arg)ents as wanting.Respondent on6anida, for holding the office of )a!or for)ore than three consective ter)s, went against the three1ter) li)it rleA therefore, he cold not $e allowed to rnanew in the "%&% elections. It is ti)e to infse new $lood inthe political arena of San /ntonio.@BERE#ORE, pre)ises considered, the instant petition ishere$! =R/NTED. The Certificate of Candidac! of
Respondent Ro)eo D. on6anida for the position of )a!orin the )nicipalit! of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales is here$!C/NCEED. Bis na)e is here$! ordered STRICEN O##the list of Official Candidates for the position of +a!or ofSan /ntonio, 7a)$ales in +a! &%, "%&% elections.SOORDERED.3
on6anida;s )otion for reconsideration $efore theCO+EEC En anc re)ained pending dring the +a!"%&% elections. on6anida and Efren Racel /ratea */ratea-garnered the highest n)$er of votes and wererespectivel! proclai)ed +a!or and ice1+a!or./ratea took his oath of office as /cting +a!or $eforeRegional Trial Cort *RTC- (dge Ra!)ond C. ira! of
ranch 92, Olongapo Cit! on 2 (l! "%&%.0On the sa)edate, /ratea wrote the Depart)ent of Interior and oca=overn)ent *DI=- and re:ested for an opinion onwhether, as ice1+a!or, he was legall! re:ired to ass)ethe Office of the +a!or in view of on6anida;sdis:alification. DI= egal Opinion No. &&9, S. "%&%&
stated that on6anida was dis:alified to hold office $!reason of his cri)inal conviction. /s a conse:ence oon6anida;s dis:alification, the Office of the +a!or wasdee)ed per)anentl! vacant. Ths, /ratea shold ass)e
the Office of the +a!or in an acting capacit! withopre5dice to the CO+EEC;s resoltion of on6anida;s)otion for reconsideration. In another letter dated > /gs"%&%, /ratea re:ested the DI= to allow hi) to take theoath of office as +a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales. In hisresponse dated "8 /gst "%&%, then Secretar! (esse +Ro$redo allowed /ratea to take an oath of office as theper)anent +nicipal +a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$aleswithot pre5dice however to the otco)e of the casespending $efore the FCO+EECG.&&
On && /gst "%&%, the CO+EEC En anc issed aResoltion&"dis:alif!ing on6anida fro) rnning for +a!oin the +a! "%&% elections. The CO+EEC En anc;sresoltion was $ased on two gronds? first, on6anida had
$een elected and had served as +a!or for )ore than threeconsective ter)s withot interrptionA andsecondon6anida had $een convicted $! final 5dg)ent of ten *&%conts of falsification nder the Revised Penal Codeon6anida was sentenced for each cont of falsification toi)prison)ent of for *8- !ears and one *&- da! ofprisincorreccional as )ini)), to eight *3- !ears and one *&- da!of prisin mayor as )a4i)). The 5dg)ent of conviction$eca)e final on "' Octo$er "%%0 in the Decision of thisCort in Lonzanida v. People,&'$efore on6anida filed hiscertificate of candidac! on & Dece)$er "%%0. Pertinenportions of the && /gst "%&% Resoltion read?Prescinding fro) the foregoing pre)ises, on6anida, fohaving served as +a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales for )ore
than three *'- consective ter)s and for having $eenconvicted $! a final 5dg)ent of a cri)e pnisha$le $!)ore than one *&- !ear of i)prison)ent, is clearl!dis:alified to rn for the sa)e position in the +a! "%&%Elections.@BERE#ORE, in view of the foregoing, the +otion foReconsideration is here$! DENIED. SO ORDERED.&8
On "2 /gst "%&%, /ntipolo filed a +otion for eave toIntervene and to /d)it /ttached Petition1inIntervention.&2She clai)ed her right to $e proclai)ed as+a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales $ecase on6anidaceased to $e a candidate when the CO+EEC SecondDivision, throgh its &3 #e$rar! "%&% Resoltion, orderedthe cancellation of his certificate of candidac! and the
striking ot of his na)e fro) the list of official candidates fothe position of +a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales in the +a!"%&% elections.In his Co))ent filed on "> (anar! "%&&, /ratea assertedthat /ntipolo, as the candidate who received the secondhighest n)$er of votes, cold not $e proclai)ed as thewinning candidate. Since on6anida;s dis:alification wasnot !et final dring election da!, the votes cast in his favocold not $e declared stra!. on6anida;s s$se:endis:alification reslted in a per)anent vacanc! in theOffice of +a!or, and /ratea, as the dl!1elected ice+a!or, was )andated $! Section 88&> of the oca=overn)ent Code to scceed as +a!or.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt18/14/2019 Aratea.doc
2/13
T#e COMELEC%$ R&!in'$The CO+EEC En anc issed an Order dated &" (anar!"%&&, stating?/cting on the +otion for eave to Intervene and to /d)it/ttached Petition1in1Intervention filed $! Estela D. /ntipolo*/ntipolo- and prsant to the power of this Co))ission tosspend its Rles or an! portion thereof in the interest of5stice, this Co))ission here$! RESOES to?&. =R/NT the aforesaid +otionA". /D+IT the Petition1in1Intervention filed $! /ntipoloA
'. REHIRE the Respondent, RO+EO D+/OON7/NID/, as well as E#REN R/CE /R/TE/,proclai)ed ice1+a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales, to filetheir respective Co))ents on the Petition1in1 Interventionwithin a non1e4tendi$le period of five *2- da!s fro) receiptthereofA8. SET the a$ove1)entioned Petition1in1Intervention forhearing on (anar! ">, "%&& at &%?%% a.). CO+EECSession Ball, 3th #loor, Palacio del =o$ernador,Intra)ros, +anila.@BERE#ORE, frnish copies hereof the parties for theirinfor)ation and co)pliance.SO ORDERED.&9
In its Resoltion dated " #e$rar! "%&&, the CO+EEC Enanc no longer considered on6anida;s :alification as an
isse? It is $e!ond cavil that on6anida is not eligi$le tohold and discharge the fnctions of the Office of the +a!orof San /ntonio, 7a)$ales. The sole isse to $e resolved atthis 5nctre is how to fill the vacanc! reslting fro)on6anida;s dis:alification.&3 The Resoltion frtherstated?@e cannot sstain the s$)ission of Oppositor /ratea thatIntervenor /ntipolo cold never $e proclai)ed as the dl!elected +a!or of /ntipolo FsicG for $eing a second placer inthe elections. The teachings in the cases of Codilla vs. Deenecia and Na6areno and Do)ino vs. CO+EEC, et al.,while the! re)ain sond 5risprdence find no application inthe case at $ar. @hat sets this case apart fro) the cited5risprdence is that the notoriet! of on6anida;s
dis:alification and ineligi$ilit! to hold p$lic office isesta$lished $oth in fact and in law on election da! itself.Bence, on6anida;s na)e, as alread! ordered $! theCo))ission on #e$rar! &3, "%&% shold have $eenstricken off fro) the list of official candidates for +a!or ofSan /ntonio, 7a)$ales.@BERE#ORE, in view of the foregoing, the Co))issionhere$!?&. Declares N and OID the procla)ation ofrespondent RO+EO D. ON7/NID/A". =R/NTS the Petition for Intervention of Estela D./ntipoloA'. Orders the i))ediate CONSTITTION of a Special+nicipal oard of Canvassers to PROC/I+ Intervenor
Estela D. /ntipolo as the dl! elected +a!or of San/ntonio, 7a)$alesA8. Orders ice1+a!or Efren Racel /ratea to cease anddesist fro) discharging the fnctions of the Office of the+a!or, and to case a peacefl trn1over of the said officeto /ntipolo pon her procla)ationA and2. Orders the Office of the E4ective Director as well as theRegional Election Director of Region III to case thei)ple)entation of this Resoltion and disse)inate it to theDepart)ent of Interior and ocal =overn)ent. SOORDERED.&0
/ratea filed the present petition on 0 #e$rar! "%&&.T#e I$$&e$
The )anner of filling p the per)anent vacanc! in theOffice of the +a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales is dependenpon the deter)ination of on6anida;s re)oval. @hetheon6anida was dis:alified nder Section >3 of theO)ni$s Election Code, or )ade a false )ateriarepresentation nder Section 93 of the sa)e Code t#are$&!ted in #i$ certi(icate o( candidac) bein' *oid abinitio, is deter)inative of whether /ratea or /ntipolo is therightfl occpant to the Office of the +a!or of San /ntonio7a)$ales.
The dissenting opinions reverse the CO+EEC;s "#e$rar! "%&& Resoltion and &" (anar! "%&& OrderThe! hold that /ratea, the dl! elected ice1+a!or of San/ntonio, 7a)$ales, shold $e declared +a!or prsant tothe ocal =overn)ent Code;s rle on sccession.The dissenting opinions )ake three grave errors? first, the!ignore prevailing 5risprdence that a false representation inthe certificate of candidac! as to eligi$ilit! in the n)$er oter)s elected and served is a )aterial fact that is a grondfor a petition to cancel a certificate of candidac! ndeSection 93A second, the! ignore that a false representationas to eligi$ilit! to rn for p$lic office de to the fact that thecandidate sffers fro) perpetal special disqualification is a)aterial fact that is a grond for a petition to cancel a
certificate of candidac! nder Section 93A and tird, the!resort to a strained stattor! constrction to conclde thathe violation of the three1ter) li)it rle cannot $e a grondfor cancellation of a certificate of candidac! nder Section93, even when it is clear and plain that violation of thethree1ter) li)it rle is an ineligi$ilit! affecting the:alification of a candidate to elective office.The dissenting opinions tread on dangeros grond whenthe! assert that a candidate;s eligi$ilit! to the office heseeks election )st $e strictl! constred to refer on!) to thedetails, i.e., age, citi6enship, or residenc!, a)ong otherswhich the law re:ires hi) to state in his COC, and whichhe )st swear nder oath to possess. The dissentingopinions choose to view a false certification of a candidate;s
eligi$ilit! on the three1ter) li)it rle not as a grond fofalse )aterial representation nder Section 93 $t as agrond for dis:alification nder Section >3 of the sa)eCode. This is clearl! contrar! to well1esta$lished5risprdence.T#e Co&rt%$ R&!in'@e hold that /ntipolo, the alleged second placer, shold$e proclai)ed +a!or $ecase on6anida;s certificate ocandidac! was void a! initio. In short, on6anida was nevea candidate at all. /ll votes for on6anida were stra! votesThs, /ntipolo, the onl! :alified candidate, actall!garnered the highest n)$er of votes for the position o+a!or."ualifications and Disqualifications
Section >2 of the O)ni$s Election Code points to theocal =overn)ent Code for the :alifications of electivelocal officials. Paragraphs *a- and *c- of Section '0 andSection 8% of the ocal =overn)ent Code provide inpertinent part?Sec. '0. "ualifications. *a- /n elective local official )s$e a citi6en of the PhilippinesA a registered voter in the$aranga!, )nicipalit!, cit! or province 4 4 4A a residentherein for at least one *&- !ear i))ediatel! preceding theda! of the electionA and a$le to read and write #ilipino oan! other local langage or dialect.4 4 4 4*c- Candidates for the position of )a!or or vice1)a!or o
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt198/14/2019 Aratea.doc
3/13
independent co)ponent cities, co)ponent cities, or)nicipalities )st $e at least twent!1one *"&- !ears of ageon election da!.4 4 4 4Sec. 8%. Disqualifications. 1 The following persons aredis:alified fro) rnning for an! elective local position?*a- T#o$e $entenced b) (ina! +&d'ent (or an o((en$ein*o!*in' ora! t&r-it&de or (or an o((en$e -&ni$#ab!eb) one 1/ )ear or ore o( i-ri$onent, it#in to 2/)ear$ a(ter $er*in' $entenceA
*$- Those re)oved fro) office as a reslt of anad)inistrative caseA*c- Those convicted $! final 5dg)ent for violating the oathof allegiance to the Rep$licA*d- Those with dal citi6enshipA*e- #gitives fro) 5stice in cri)inal or non1political caseshere or a$roadA*f- Per)anent residents in a foreign contr! or those whohave ac:ired the right to reside a$road and contine toavail of the sa)e right after the effectivit! of this CodeA and*g- The insane or fee$le1)inded. *E)phasis spplied-Section &" of the O)ni$s Election Code provides?Sec. &". Disqualification. J /n! person who has $eendeclared $! co)petent athorit! insane or inco)petent, or
has $een $entenced b) (ina! +&d'ent for s$version,insrrection, re$ellion or (or an) o((en$e (or #ic# #e a$$entenced to a -ena!t) o( ore t#an ei'#teen ont#$or (or a crie in*o!*in' ora! t&r-it&de, shall $edis:alified to $e a candidate and to hold an! office, nlesshe has $een given plenar! pardon or granted a)nest!.The dis:alifications to $e a candidate herein provided shall$e dee)ed re)oved pon the declaration $! co)petentathorit! that said insanit! or inco)petence had $eenre)oved or after the e4piration of a period of five !earsfro) his service of sentence, nless within the sa)e periodhe again $eco)es dis:alified. *E)phasis spplied-The gronds for dis:alification for a petition nder Section>3 of the O)ni$s Election Code are specificall!
en)erated?Sec. >3. Disqualifications. /n! candidate who, in an action or protest in which he is a part! is declared $! finaldecision $! a co)petent cort gilt! of, or fond $! theCo))ission of having a/ 'i*en one) or ot#er ateria!con$ideration to in(!&ence, ind&ce or corr&-t t#e *oter$or -&b!ic o((icia!$ -er(orin' e!ectora! (&nction$ b/coitted act$ o( terrori$ to en#ance #i$ candidac)c/ s-ent in #i$ e!ection ca-ai'n an ao&nt in ece$$o( t#at a!!oed b) t#i$ Code d/ $o!icited, recei*ed orade an) contrib&tion -ro#ibited &nder Section$ 39,95, 94, 9 and 106 e/ *io!ated an) o( Section$ 30, 37,35, 34 and 241, -ara'ra-#$ d, e, 8, *, and cc,$&b-ara'ra-# 4, shall $e dis:alified fro) contining as a
candidate, or if he has $een elected, fro) holding the office./n! person who is a per)anent resident of or an i))igrantto a foreign contr! shall not $e :alified to rn for an!elective office nder this Code, nless said person haswaived his stats as per)anent resident or i))igrant of aforeign contr! in accordance with the residencere:ire)ent provided for in the election laws. *E)phasisspplied-/ petition for dis:alification nder Section >3 clearl! refersto the co))ission of prohi$ited acts and possession of aper)anent resident stats in a foreign contr!. "% A!! t#eo((en$e$ entioned in Section 43 re(er to e!ectiono((en$e$ &nder t#e Onib&$ E!ection Code, not to
*io!ation$ o( ot#er -ena! !a$. There is a$soltel! nothingin the langage of Section >3 that wold 5stif! incldingviolation of the three1ter) li)it rle, or conviction $! fina5dg)ent of the cri)e of falsification nder the RevisedPenal Code, as one of the gronds or offenses coverednder Section >3. In #odilla, Sr. v. de $enecia,"&this Corrled?FTGhe 5risdiction of the CO+EEC to dis:alif! candidatesis li)ited to those en)erated in Section >3 of the O)ni$sElection Code. /ll other election offenses are $e!ond the
a)$it of CO+EEC 5risdiction. The! are cri)inal and noad)inistrative in natre. 4 4 4Clearl!, the violation $! on6anida of the three1ter) li)irle, or his conviction $! final 5dg)ent of the cri)e ofalsification nder the Revised Penal Code, does noconstitte a grond for a petition nder Section >3.%alse &aterial RepresentationSection 93 of the O)ni$s Election Code states that acertificate of candidac! )a! $e denied or cancelled whenthere is (a!$e ateria! re-re$entation o( t#e content$ ot#e certi(icate o( candidac)?Sec. 93. Petition to deny due course to or cancel acertificate of candidacy. / verified petition seeking to den!de corse or to cancel a certificate of candidac! )a! $e
filed $! the person ec!&$i*e!) on t#e 'ro&nd t#at an)ateria! re-re$entation contained t#erein a$ re&ired&nder Section 6 #ereo( i$ (a!$e . The petition )a! $e filedat an! ti)e not later than twent!1five da!s fro) the ti)e othe filing of the certificate of candidac! and shall $edecided, after de notice and hearing, not later than fifteenda!s $efore the election. *E)phasis spplied-Section 98 of the O)ni$s Election Code details t#econtent$ o( t#e certi(icate o( candidac)?Sec. 98. #ontents of certificate of candidacy. T#ecerti(icate o( candidac) $#a!! $tate t#at t#e -er$on (i!in'it is annoncing his candidac! for the office stated thereinand that he i$ e!i'ib!e (or $aid o((iceA if for +e)$er of theatasang Pa)$ansa, the province, inclding its co)ponen
cities, highl! r$ani6ed cit! or district or sector which heseeks to representA the political part! to which he $elongscivil statsA his date of $irthA residenceA his post officeaddress for all election prposesA his profession ooccpationA that he will spport and defend the Constittionof the Philippines and will )aintain tre faith and allegiancetheretoA that he will o$e! the laws, legal orders, anddecrees pro)lgated $! the dl! constitted athoritiesthat he is not a per)anent resident or i))igrant to aforeign contr!A that the o$ligation i)posed $! his oath isass)ed volntaril!, withot )ental reservation or prposeof evasionA and that the facts stated in the certificate ocandidac! are tre to the $est of his knowledge.4 4 4 4 *E)phasis spplied-
/ candidate for )a!or in the "%&% local elections was thsre:ired to provide &" ite)s of infor)ation in the certificateof candidac!?"" na)eA nickna)e or stage na)eA genderageA place of $irthA political part! that no)inated thecandidateA civil statsA residenceKaddressA profession ooccpationA post office address for election prposeslocalit! of which the candidate is a registered voterA andperiod of residence in the Philippines $efore &% +a! "%&%The candidate also certifies for state)ents? a state)enthat the candidate is a natral $orn or natrali6ed #ilipinociti6enA a state)ent that the candidate is not a per)anenresident of, or i))igrant to, a foreign contr!A a $tateent#at t#e candidate i$ e!i'ib!e (or t#e o((ice #e $ee8$
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt228/14/2019 Aratea.doc
4/13
e!ectionA and a state)ent of the candidate;s allegiance tothe Constittion of the Rep$lic of the Philippines."' Thecertificate of candidac! shold also $e &nder oat#, andfiled within the period prescri$ed $! law.The conviction of on6anida $! final 5dg)ent, with thepenalt! of prisin mayor, di$&a!i(ie$ #i -er-et&a!!)(ro #o!din' an) -&b!ic o((ice, or (ro bein' e!ected toan) -&b!ic o((ice. T#i$ -er-et&a! di$&a!i(ication too8e((ect &-on t#e (ina!it) o( t#e +&d'ent o( con*iction,be(ore Lon:anida (i!ed #i$ certi(icate o( candidac). The
pertinent provisions of the Revised Penal Code are asfollows?/rt. "9. Reclusion perpetua. J 4 4 4Prisin mayor and temporary disqualification. J T#ed&ration o( t#e -ena!tie$ o( prisin mayor andte-orar) di$&a!i(ication $#a!! be (ro $i )ear$ andone da) to te!*e )ear$, ece-t #en t#e -ena!t) o(di$&a!i(ication i$ i-o$ed a$ an acce$$or) -ena!t), in#ic# ca$e, it $#a!! be t#at o( t#e -rinci-a! -ena!t).4 4 4 4/rt. '%. 'ffects of te penalties of perpetual or temporarya!solute disqualification. J The penalties of -er-et&a! orte-orar) ab$o!&te di$&a!i(ication for p$lic office shallprodce the following effects?
&. T#e de-ri*ation o( t#e -&b!ic o((ice$ ande-!o)ent$ #ic# t#e o((ender a) #a*e #e!d, e*en i(con(erred b) -o-&!ar e!ection.". T#e de-ri*ation o( t#e ri'#t to *ote in an) e!ection (oran) -o-&!ar e!ecti*e o((ice or to be e!ected to $&c#o((ice.'. T#e di$&a!i(ication (or t#e o((ice$ or -&b!ice-!o)ent$ and (or t#e eerci$e o( an) o( t#e ri'#t$entioned.In case of te)porar! dis:alification, sch dis:alificationas is co)prised in paragraphs " and ' of this article shalllast dring the ter) of the sentence.8. The loss of all rights to retire)ent pa! or other pensionfor an! office for)erl! held.
/rt. '&. 'ffects of te penalties of perpetual or temporaryspecial disqualification. J The penalties of -er-et&a! orte-orar) $-ecia! di$&a!i(ication (or -&b!ic o((ice,profession or calling shall prodce the following effects?&. T#e de-ri*ation o( t#e o((ice, e)plo!)ent, professionor calling affected.". The dis:alification for holding si)ilar offices ore)plo!)ents either perpetall! or dring the ter) of thesentence, according to the e4tent of sch dis:alification./rt. '". 'ffects of te penalties of perpetual or temporaryspecial disqualification for te e(ercise of te rigt ofsuffrage. J The -er-et&a! or te-orar) $-ecia!di$&a!i(ication (or t#e eerci$e o( t#e ri'#t o( $&((ra'e$#a!! de-ri*e t#e o((ender -er-et&a!!) or d&rin' t#e
ter o( t#e $entence, according to the natre of saidpenalt!, of the right to vote in an! poplar election for an!p$lic office or to be e!ected to $&c# o((ice .Moreo*er, t#eo((ender $#a!! not be -eritted to #o!d an) -&b!ic o((iced&rin' t#e -eriod o( #i$ di$&a!i(ication./rt. 8". Prisin mayor ) *ts accessory penalties. J Thepenalt! of prision )a!or shall carr! with it that ofte-orar)ab$o!&te di$&a!i(ication and that of -er-et&a! $-ecia!di$&a!i(ication fro) the right of sffrage which theoffender shall sffer althogh pardoned as to the principalpenalt!, nless the sa)e shall have $een e4pressl!re)itted in the pardon. *E)phasis spplied-The penalt! ofprisin mayor ato)aticall! carries with it, $!
operation of law,"8 the accessor! penalties of te)porar!a$solte dis:alification and -er-et&a! $-eciadi$&a!i(ication. nder /rticle '% of the Revised PenaCode, te)porar! a$solte dis:alification prodces theeffect of deprivation of the right to vote in an! election foan! poplar elective office or to !e elected to suc office.The dration of te)porar! a$solte dis:alification is thesa)e as that of the principal penalt! ofprisin mayor. Onthe other hand, nder /rticle '" of the Revised Penal Code-er-et&a! $-ecia! di$&a!i(ication )eans that t#e
o((ender $#a!! not be -eritted to #o!d an) -&b!ic o((iced&rin' t#e -eriod o( #i$ di$&a!i(ication,L which isperpetually. oth te)porar! a$solte dis:alification andperpetal special dis:alification constitte ineligi$ilities tohold elective p$lic office. A -er$on $&((erin' (ro t#e$eine!i'ibi!itie$ i$ ine!i'ib!e to r&n (or e!ecti*e -&b!ico((ice, and coit$ a (a!$e ateria! re-re$entation i( #e$tate$ in #i$ certi(icate o( candidac) t#at #e i$ e!i'ib!eto $o r&n.In Lacuna v. +!es *Lacuna-,"2the Cort, speaking throgh(stice (... Re!es, e4plained the i)port of the accessor!penalt! of -er-et&a! $-ecia! di$&a!i(ication;On the first defense of respondent1appellee /$es, it )s$e re)e)$ered that appellee;s conviction of a cri)e
penali6ed with prision )a!or which carried the accessor!penalties of te)porar! a$solte dis:alification andperpetal special dis:alification fro) the right of sffrage*/rticle 8", Revised Penal Code-A and Section 00 of theRevised Election Code dis:alifies a person fro) voting ihe had $een sentenced $! final 5dg)ent to sffer one !eaor )ore of i)prison)ent.The accessor! penalt! of te)porar! a$soltedis:alification dis:alifies the convict for p$lic office andfor the right to vote, sch dis:alification to last onl! dringthe ter) of the sentence */rticle "9, paragraph ', M /rticle'%, Revised Penal Code- that, in the case of /$es, woldhave e4pired on &' Octo$er &0>&.t this does not hold tre with respect to the othe
accessor! penalt! of perpetal special dis:alification fothe e4ercise of the right of sffrage. This accessor! penalt!deprives the convict of the right to vote or to !e elected toor old pu!lic office perpetually, as distingished fro)te)porar! special dis:alification, which lasts dring theter) of the sentence. /rticle '", Revised Penal Codeprovides?/rt. '". 'ffects of te penalties of perpetual or temporaryspecial disqualification for te e(ercise of te rigt osuffrage. J The perpetal or te)porar! speciadis:alification for the e4ercise of the right of sffrage shaldeprive the offender perpetall! or dring the ter) of thesentence, according to the natre of said penalt!, of theright to vote in an! poplar election for an! p$lic office or
to $e elected to sch office. +oreover, the offender shall no$e per)itted to hold an! p$lic office dring the period odis:alification.The word perpetall! and the phrase dring the ter) othe sentence shold $e applied distri$tivel! to theirespective antecedentsA ths, the word perpetall! refersto the perpetal kind of special dis:alification, while thephrase dring the ter) of the sentence refers to thete)porar! special dis:alification. The dration $etweenthe perpetal and the te)porar! *$oth special- arenecessaril! different $ecase the provision, instead o)erging their drations into one period, states that schdration is according to the natre of said penalt! J
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt258/14/2019 Aratea.doc
5/13
which )eans according to whether the penalt! is theperpetal or the te)porar! special dis:alification.*E)phasis spplied-Clearl!, Lacuna instrcts that the accessor! penalt! ofperpetal special dis:alification de-ri*e$ t#e con*ict o(t#e ri'#t to *ote or to be elected to or hold public officeperpetually.LT#e acce$$or) -ena!t) o( -er-et&a! $-ecia!di$&a!i(ication ta8e$ e((ect iediate!) once t#e
+&d'ent o( con*iction becoe$ (ina!. The effectivit! of
this accessor! penalt! does not depend on the dration ofthe principal penalt!, or on whether the convict serves his5ail sentence or not. The last sentence of /rticle '" statesthat the offender shall not $e per)itted to hold an! p$licoffice dring the period of his Fperpetal specialGdis:alification. Once the 5dg)ent of conviction $eco)esfinal, it is i))ediatel! e4ector!. /n! p$lic office that theconvict )a! $e holding at the ti)e of his conviction$eco)es vacant pon finalit! of the 5dg)ent, and t#econ*ict becoe$ ine!i'ib!e to r&n (or an) e!ecti*e-&b!ic o((ice -er-et&a!!). In the case of Lonzanida, hebecame ineligible perpetually to hold, or to run for, anyelective public office from the time the judgment ofconviction against him became final. he judgment of
conviction was promulgated on !" July !""# andbecame final on !$ %ctober !""#, before Lonzanidafiled his certificate of candidacy on & 'ecember !""# .!(
"er-et&a! $-ecia! di$&a!i(ication is a grond for apetition nder Section 93 of the O)ni$s Election Code$ecase this accessor! penalt! is an ine!i'ibi!it), which)eans that the convict is not eligi$le to rn for p$lic office,contrar! to the state)ent that Section 98 re:ires hi) tostate nder oath in his certificate of candidac!. /s this Cortheld in %ermin v. #ommission on 'lections,"9 the false)aterial representation )a! refer to &a!i(ication$ ore!i'ibi!it).L One who sffers fro) perpetal specialdis:alification is ineligi$le to rn for p$lic office. If a
person sffering fro) perpetal special dis:alification filesa certificate of candidac! stating nder oath that he iseligi$le to rn for *p$lic- office, a$ e-re$$!) re&ired&nder Section 6, then he clearl! )akes a(a!$e ateria!re-re$entation that is a grond for a petition nder Section93. /s this Cort e4plained in%ermin?est it $e )isnderstood, the denial of de corse to or thecancellation of the CoC is not $ased on the lack of:alifications $t on a finding that the candidate )ade a)aterial representation that is false, #ic# a) re!ate tot#e &a!i(ication$ re&ired o( t#e -&b!ic o((ice #e
8/14/2019 Aratea.doc
6/13
e4plicitl! )akes availa$le )ltiple re)edies.'0 Section 93allows the filing of a petition to den! de corse or to cancela certificate of candidac! $efore the election, while Section"2' allows the filing of a petition for :o warranto after theelection. Despite the overlap of the gronds, one shold notconfse a petition for dis:alification sing grondsen)erated in Section >3 with a petition to den! decorse or to cancel a certificate of candidac! nder Section93.The distinction $etween a petition nder Section >3 and a
petition nder Section 93 was discssed in Loong v.#ommission on 'lections8%with respect to the applica$leprescriptive period. Respondent Nr Bssein ttal) fileda petition nder Section 93 to dis:alif! petitioner en5a)inoong for the office of Regional ice1=overnor of the/tono)os =overn)ent of +sli) +indanao for falserepresentation as to his age. The petition was filed &> da!safter the election, and clearl! $e!ond the prescri$ed "2 da!period fro) the last da! of filing certificates of candidac!.This Cort rled that ttal);s petition was one $ased onfalse representation nder Section 93, and not fordis:alification nder Section >3. Bence, the "21da!prescriptive period provided in Section 93 shold $e strictl!applied. @e recogni6ed the possi$le gap in the law?
It is tre that the discover! of false representation as to)aterial facts re:ired to $e stated in a certificate ofcandidac!, nder Section 98 of the Code, )a! $e )adeonl! after the lapse of the "21da! period prescri$ed $!Section 93 of the Code, throgh no falt of the person whodiscovers sch )isrepresentations and who wold want thedis:alification of the candidate co))itting the)isrepresentations. It wold see), therefore, that therecold indeed $e a gap $etween the ti)e of the discover! ofthe )isrepresentation, *when the discover! is )ade afterthe "21da! period nder Sec. 93 of the Code has lapsed-and the ti)e when the procla)ation of the reslts of theelection is )ade. Dring this so1called gap the wold1$epetitioner *who wold seek the dis:alification of the
candidate- is left with nothing to do e4cept to wait for theprocla)ation of the reslts, so that he cold avail of are)ed! against the )isrepresenting candidate, that is, $!filing a petition for :o warranto against hi). RespondentCo))ission sees this gap in what it calls a procedralgap which, according to it, is nnecessar! and shold $ere)edied./t the sa)e ti)e, it can not $e denied that it is the prposeand intent of the legislative $ranch of the govern)ent to fi4a definite ti)e within which petitions of protests related toeligi$ilit! of candidates for elective offices )st $e filed, asseen in Sections 93 and "2' of the Code. RespondentCo))ission )a! have seen the need to re)ed! this so1called procedral gap, $t it is not for it to prescri$e what
the law does not provide, its fnction not $eing legislative.The :estion of whether the ti)e to file these petitions orprotests is too short or ineffective is one for the egislatreto decide and re)ed!.8&
In %ermin v. #ommission on 'lections,8" the isse of acandidate;s possession of the re:ired one1!ear residenc!re:ire)ent was raised in a petition for dis:alificationnder Section >3 instead of a petition to den! de corse orto cancel a certificate of candidac! nder Section 93.Despite the :estion of the one1!ear residenc! $eing aproper grond nder Section 93, Dilangalen, the petitioner$efore the CO+EEC in %ermin, relied on Section 2*C-*&-and 2*C-*'-*a-*8- of CO+EEC Resoltion No. 93%% 8'and
filed the petition nder Section >3. In %ermin, we rled thaa CO+EEC rle or resoltion cannot spplant or var!legislative enact)ents that di$tin'&i$# t#e 'ro&nd$ (odi$&a!i(ication (ro t#o$e o( ine!i'ibi!it), and theappropriate proceedings to raise the said gronds.88/petition for dis:alification can onl! $e pre)ised on agrond specified in Section &" or >3 of the O)ni$sElection Code or Section 8% of the ocal =overn)enCode. Ths, a petition :estioning a candidate;spossession of the re:ired one1!ear residenc! re:ire)ent
as distingished fro) per)anent residenc! or i))igranstats in a foreign contr!, shold $e filed nder Section 93and a petition nder Section >3 is the wrong re)ed!.In &under v. #ommission on 'lections,82 petitioner /lfais+nder filed a certificate of candidac! for +a!or of $onganao del Sr on "> Nove)$er "%%0. Respondent /tt!Tago Sarip filed a petition for +nder;s dis:alification on&' /pril "%&%. Sarip clai)ed that +nder )isrepresentedthat he was a registered voter of $ong, anao del Srand that he was eligi$le to register as a voter in "%%' eventhogh he was not !et &3 !ears of age at the ti)e of thevoter;s registration. +oreover, +nder;s certificate ocandidac! was not acco)plished in fll as he failed toindicate his precinct and did not affi4 his th)$1)ark. The
CO+EEC Second Division dis)issed Sarip;s petition anddeclared that his gronds are not gronds fodis:alification nder Section >3 $t for denial ocancellation of +nder;s certificate of candidac! ndeSection 93. Sarip;s petition was filed ot of ti)e as he hadonl! "2 da!s after the filing of +nder;s certificate ocandidac!, or ntil "& Dece)$er "%%0, within which to filehis petition.The CO+EEC En anc, however, dis:alified +nder. Inreversing the CO+EEC Second Division, the CO+EECEn anc did not rle on the propriet! of Sarip;s re)ed! $tfocsed on the :estion of whether +nder was aregistered voter of $ong, anao del Sr. This Correinstated the CO+EEC Second Division;s resoltion. This
Cort rled that the grond raised in the petition, lack oregistration as voter in the localit! where he was rnning asa candidate, is inappropriate for a petition fodis:alification. @e frther declared that with or rling in%ermin, we had alread! re5ected the clai) that lack os$stantive :alifications of a candidate is a grond for apetition for dis:alification nder Section >3. The onl!s$stantive :alification the a$sence of which is a grondfor a petition nder Section >3 is the candidate;s per)anenresidenc! or i))igrant stats in a foreign contr!.The dissenting opinions place the violation of the three1ter)li)it rle as a dis:alification nder Section >3 as theviolation allegedl! is a stats, circ)stance or conditionwhich $ars hi) fro) rnning for p$lic office despite the
possession of all the :alifications nder Section '0 of theFocal =overn)ent CodeG. In so holding the dissentingopinions write in the law what is not fond in the lawSection >3 is e4plicit as to the proper gronds fodis:alification nder said Section. The gronds for filing apetition for dis:alification nder Section >3 are specificall!en)erated in said Section. Bowever, contrar! to thespecific en)eration in Section >3 and contrar! toprevailing 5risprdence, the dissenting opinions add to theen)erated gronds the violation of the three1ter) li)it rleand falsification nder the Revised Penal Code, which areo$viosl! not fond in the en)eration in Section >3.The dissenting opinions e:ate on6anida;s possession o
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt39http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt39http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt39http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt40http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt41http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt41http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt42http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt42http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt43http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt44http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt44http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt45http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt45http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt39http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt40http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt41http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt42http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt43http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt44http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt458/14/2019 Aratea.doc
7/13
a dis:alif!ing condition *violation of the three1ter) li)itrle- with the gronds for dis:alification nder Section >3.Section >3 is e4plicit as to the proper gronds fordis:alification? the co))ission of specific prohi$ited actsnder the O)ni$s Election Code and possession of aper)anent residenc! or i))igrant stats in a foreigncontr!. /n! other false representation regarding a )aterialfact shold $e filed nder Section 93, specificall! nder thecandidate;s certification of his eligi$ilit!. In re5ecting aviolation of the three1ter) li)it as a condition for eligi$ilit!,
the dissenting opinions resort to 5dicial legislation, ignoringthe ver!a legis doctrine and well1esta$lished 5risprdenceon this ver! isse.In a certificate of candidac!, the candidate is asked tocertif! nder oath his eligi$ilit!, and ths :alification, to theoffice he seeks election. Even thogh the certificate ofcandidac! does not specificall! ask the candidate for then)$er of ter)s elected and served in an elective position,sch fact is )aterial in deter)ining a candidate;s eligi$ilit!,and ths :alification for the office. Election to and serviceof the sa)e local elective position for three consectiveter)s renders a candidate ineligi$le fro) rnning for thesa)e position in the scceeding elections. on6anida)isrepresented his eligi$ilit! $ecase he knew fll well that
he had $een elected, and had served, as )a!or of San/ntonio, 7a)$ales for )ore than three consective ter)s!et he still certified that he was eligi$le to rn for )a!or forthe ne4t scceeding ter). Ths, on6anida;s representationthat he was eligi$le for the office that he soght electionconstittes false )aterial representation as to his:alification or eligi$ilit! for the office.Legal Duty of #&'L'#to 'nforce Perpetual Special DisqualificationEven withot a petition nder Section 93 of the O)ni$sElection Code, the CO+EEC is nder a legal dt! tocancel the certificate of candidac! of an!one sffering fro)perpetal special dis:alification to rn for p$lic office $!virte of a final 5dg)ent of conviction. The final 5dg)ent
of conviction is 5dicial notice to the CO+EEC of thedis:alification of the convict fro) rnning for p$lic office.The law itself $ars the convict fro) rnning for p$lic office,and the dis:alification is part of the final 5dg)ent ofconviction. The final 5dg)ent of the cort is addressed notonl! to the E4ective $ranch, $t also to other govern)entagencies tasked to i)ple)ent the final 5dg)ent nder thelaw.@hether or not the CO+EEC is e4pressl! )entioned inthe 5dg)ent to i)ple)ent the dis:alification, it isass)ed that the portion of the final 5dg)ent ondis:alification to rn for elective p$lic office is addressedto the CO+EEC $ecase nder the Constittion theCO+EEC is dt! $ond to en(orce and ad)inister a!!
laws and reglations relative to the condct of anelection.8> The dis:alification of a convict to rn forelective p$lic office nder the Revised Penal Code, asaffir)ed $! final 5dg)ent of a co)petent cort, is part oftheen(orceent and adini$tration of all the lawsrelating to the condct of elections.'ffect of a $oid #ertificate of #andidacy/ cancelled certificate of candidac! void a! initio cannotgive rise to a valid candidac!, and )ch less to validvotes.89 @e :ote fro) the CO+EEC;s " #e$rar! "%&&Resoltion with approval?/s earl! as #e$rar! &3, "%&%, the Co))ission speakingthrogh the Second Division had alread! ordered the
cancellation of on6anida;s certificate of candidac!, andhad stricken off his na)e in the list of official candidates forthe )a!oralt! post of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales. Thereafterthe Co))ission En anc in its resoltion dated /gst &&"%&% nani)osl! affir)ed the resoltion dis:alif!ingon6anida. Or findings were likewise sstained $! theSpre)e Cort no less. The dis:alification of on6anida isnot si)pl! anchored on one grond. On the contrar!, it wase)phasi6ed in or En anc resoltion that on6anida;sdis:alification is two1pronged? first, he violated the
constittional fiat on the three1ter) li)itA and second , asearl! as Dece)$er &, "%%0, he is known to have $eenconvicted $! final 5dg)ent for ten *&%- conts o#alsification nder /rticle &9& of the Revised Penal CodeIn other words, on election da!, respondent on6anida;sdis:alification is notoriosl! known in fact and in law'rgo, since respondent Lonzanida 4as never a candidatefor te position of &ayor 5of6 San +ntonio, 7am!ales, tevotes cast for im sould !e considered stray votesConse:entl!, Intervenor /ntipolo, who re)ains as the sole:alified candidate for the )a!oralt! post and o$tained thehighest n)$er of votes, shold now $e proclai)ed as thedl! elected +a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales. 83*oldfacingand nderscoring in the originalA italici6ation spplied-
on6anidas certificate of candidac! was cancelled $ecasehe was ineligi$le or not :alified to rn fo+a!or.184pi1@hether his certificate of candidac! iscancelled $efore or after the elections is i))ateria$ecase the cancellation on sch grond )eans he wasnever a candidate fro) the ver! $eginning, his certificate ocandidac! $eing void a! initio. There was onl! one :alifiedcandidate for +a!or in the +a! "%& % elections 1 /nti polowho therefore received the highest n)$er of votes.=>EREFORE, the petition is ISMISSE. The Resoltiondated " #e$rar! "%&& and the Order dated &" (anar!"%&& of the CO+EEC En ane in SP/ No. %01&23 *DCare AFFIRME. The CO+EEC En ane isIRECTE toconstitte a Special +nicipal oard of Canvassers to
proclai) Estela D. /ntipolo as the dl! elected +a!or oSan /ntonio, 7a)$ales. Petitioner Efren Racel /ratea isORERE to cease and desist fro) discharging thefnctions of the Office of the +a!or of San /ntonio7a)$ales. SO ORDERED.
ISSENTING O"INION?RION, J.:I dissent fro) the )a5orit!s *i- rling that the violation of thethreeter) li)it rle is a grond for cancellation of acertificate of candidac! *Co C- and *ii- conclsion thaprivate respondent Estela D. /nti polo, the second placerin the "%&% elections for the )a!oralt! post in San /ntonio7a)$ales, shold $e seated as +a!or.
Ro)eo D. on6anida and /ntipolo were a)ong the for * 8candidates for the )a!oralt! position in San /ntonio7a)$ales in the +a! &%, "%&% elections. On Dece)$er 3"%%0, Dr. Sigfrid S. Rodolfo filed a Petition toDisqualify9Deny Due #ourse or to #ancel #o# againson6anida with the Co))ission on Elections:#&'L'#;.The core of the petition against on6anidawas his prported )isrepresentation in his CoC $! statingthat he was eligi$le to rn as )a!or of San /ntonio7a)$ales, when in fact, he had alread! served for threeconsective ter)s. &
On #e$rar! &3, "%&%, the CO+EEC "nd Division isseda Resoltion cance!!in' Lon:anida@$ CoC and $tri8in'
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt46http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt47http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt47http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt47http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt48http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt1bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt46http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt47http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt48http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt1b8/14/2019 Aratea.doc
8/13
o&t #i$ nae (ro t#e o((icia! !i$t o( candidate$ (ora)or on the grond that he had alread! served for threeconsective ter)s. "
on6anida )oved for the reconsideration of the rling,which )otion nder the Rles of the CO+EEC waselevated to the CO+EEC en !anc. The )otion was notresolved $efore elections and on +a! &%, "%&%, on6anidareceived the highest n)$er of votes for the )a!oralt!post, while petitioner Efren Racel /ratea won the vice)a!oralt! positionA the! were dl! proclai)ed winners.'
De to the CO+EEC Resoltion canceling on6anida;sCoC, /ratea wrote to the Depart)ent of the Interior andocal =overn)ent *D*L0- to in:ire whether, $! law, heshold ass)e the position of )a!or, in view of theper)anent vacanc! created $! the CO+EEC "ndDivision;s rling. The DI= favora$l! acted on /ratea;sre:est, and on (l! 2, "%&%, he took his oath of office as)a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales.8
On /gst &&, "%&%, the CO+EEC en !anc affir)edon6anida;s dis:alification to rn for another ter). /partfro) this grond, the CO+EEC en !anc also noted thaton6anida was dis:alified to rn nder Section 8% of theocal =overn)ent Code for having $een convicted $! final5dg)ent for ten conts of falsification.2
On /gst "2, "%&%, /ntipolo filed a )otion for leave tointervene, on the clai) that she had a legal interest in thecase as she was the onl! re)aining :alified candidate forthe position. She arged that she had the right to $eproclai)ed as the )a!or considering that on6anidaceased to $e a candidate when the CO+EEC "nd Divisionordered the cancellation of his CoC and the striking ot ofhis na)e fro) the official list of candidates for the +a! &%,"%&% elections.>
On (anar! &", "%&&, the CO+EEC en !anc issed anOrder granting /ntipolo;s )otion for leave to intervene. Inits #e$rar! ", "%&" Resoltion, the CO+EEC en !ancgranted /ntipolo;s petition in interventionA declared nll andvoid on6anida;s procla)ationA ordered the constittion of a
special +nicipal oard of Canvassers to proclai) /ntipoloas the dl! elected +a!orA and ordered /ratea to cease anddesist fro) discharging the fnctions of +a!or of San/ntonio, 7a)$ales. This gave rise to the present petition.T#e I$$&e$The isses for the Cort;s resoltion are as follows?*&- @hat is the natre of the petition filed $! Dr. Rodolfo$efore the CO+EECA*"- Did the CO+EEC correctl! dispose the case inaccordance with the natre of the petition filedA*'- @ho shold $e proclai)ed as +a!or of San /ntonio,7a)$ales Q the second placer or the dl! elected ice1+a!orI s$)it that the violation of the three1ter) li)it rle cannot
$e a grond for the cancellation of a CoC. It is anappropriate grond for dis:alificationA ths, Dr. Rodolfoshold $e dee)ed to have filed a petition fordis:alification, not a petition for the cancellation ofon6anida;s CoC. The CO+EEC;s cancellation ofon6anida;s CoC was therefore erroneos.I reach this conclsion $! sing an approach that startsfro) a consideration of the natre of the CoC 1 thedoc)ent that creates the stats of a candidate 1 and)oves on to relevant concepts, specificall!, dis:alificationsand its effects, re)edies, effects of sccessfl sits, andlti)atel! the three1ter) li)it rle. I discssed this fll! atlength in the case of alaga v. #&'L'#.9 I here$!
reiterate )! alaga discssions for ease of presentation.he *o* and the +ualifications for its iling./ $asic rle and one that cannot $e repeated often enoghis that the CoC is the doc)ent that creates the stats of acandidate. In Sinaca v. &ula,3 the Cort descri$ed thenatre of a CoC as follows Q/ certificate of candidac! is in the natre of a for)a)anifestation to the whole world of the candidates politicacreed or lack of political creed. It is a state)ent of a personseeking to rn for a p$lic office certif!ing that he
annonces his candidac! for the office )entioned and thahe is eligi$le for the office, the na)e of the political part! towhich he $elongs, if he $elongs to an!, and his post1officeaddress for all election prposes $eing as well stated.oth the &09' and &039 Constittions left to Congress thetask of providing the :alifications of local electiveofficials. Congress ndertook this task $! enacting atasPa)$asa ilang *
8/14/2019 Aratea.doc
9/13
certificate of candidacy. Q / verified petition seeking to den!de corse or to cancel a certificate of candidac! )a! $efiled $! Fan!G person ec!&$i*e!) on the grond that an!ateria! re-re$entation contained t#erein a$ re&ired&nder Section 6 hereof is false. The petition )a! $e filedat an! ti)e not later than twent!1five da!s fro) the ti)e ofthe filing of the certificate of candidac! and shall $edecided, after de notice and hearing, not later than fifteenda!s $efore the election. Fitalics, e)phases andnderscores orsG
/ necessaril! related provision is Section '0 of =C &00&which states?Sec. '0. "ualifications. Q *a- /n elective local official )st$e a citi6en of the PhilippinesA a registered voter inthe!arangay, )nicipalit!, cit!, or province or, in the case ofa )e)$er of the sangguniang panlala4igan,sangguniang
panlungsod, or sanggunian !ayan, the district where heintends to $e electedA a resident therein for at least one *&-!ear i))ediatel! preceding the da! of the electionA anda$le to read and write #ilipino or an! other local langageor dialect.4 4 4 4*c- Candidates for the position of +a!or or vice1)a!or ofindependent co)ponent cities, co)ponent cities, or
)nicipalities )st $e at least twent!1one *"&- !ears of ageon election da!. Fitalics orsGNota$l!, Section 98 of the OEC does not re:ire an!negative :alification e4cept onl! as e4pressl! re:iredtherein. / specific negative re:ire)ent refers to therepresentation that the wold1$e candidate is not aper)anent resident nor an i))igrant in another contr!.This re:ire)ent, however, is in fact si)pl! part of thepositive re:ire)ent of residenc! in the localit! for whichthe CoC is filed and, in this sense, is not strictl! a negativere:ire)ent. Neit#er doe$ Section 6 re&ire an)$tateent t#at t#e o&!dbe candidate doe$ not-o$$e$$ an) 'ro&nd (or di$&a!i(ication $-eci(ica!!)en&erated b) !a, a$ di$&a!i(ication i$ a atter t#at
t#e OEC and LGC 1991 $e-arate!) dea! it#, a$di$c&$$ed be!o. Notab!), Section 6 doe$ not re)uirea o&!dbe candidate to $tate t#at #e #a$ not $er*ed (ort#ree con$ec&ti*e ter$ in t#e $ae e!ecti*e -o$itioniediate!) -rior to t#e -re$ent e!ection$.@ith the acco)plish)ent of the CoC and its filing, a politicalaspirant officiall! ac:ires the stats of a candidate and, atthe ver! least, the prospect of holding p$lic officeA he, too,for)all! opens hi)self p to the co)ple4 politicalenviron)ent and processes. The Cort cannot $e )oree)phatic in holding that t#e i-ortance o( a *a!idcerti(icate o( candidac) re$t$ at t#e *er) core o( t#ee!ectora! -roce$$.&8
Pertinent laws&2 provide the specific periods when a CoC
)a! $e filedA when a petition for its cancellation )a! $e$roghtA and the effect of its filing. These )easres, a)ongothers, are in line with the State polic! or o$5ective ofensring e:al access to opportnities for p$lic service,&>
$earing in )ind that the li)itations on the privilege to seekp$lic office are within the plenar! power of Congress toprovide.&9
he *oncept of 'is)ualification vis--vis/emedy of*ancellation0 and 1ffects of'is)ualification.To dis:alif!, in its si)plest sense, is *&- to deprive aperson of a power, right or privilegeA or *"- to )ake hi) orher ineligi$le for frther co)petition $ecase of violation ofthe rles.&3It is in these senses that the ter) is nderstood
in or election laws.Ths, an!one who )a! :alif! or )a! have :alified ndethe general rles of eligi$ilit! applica$le to all citi6ens*Section 98 of the OEC- )a! $e de-ri*ed o( t#e ri'#t tobe a candidate or a) !o$e t#e ri'#t to be a candidate*if he has filed his CoC- $ecase of a trait or characteristicthat applies to hi) or an act that can $e i)pted to hi) asan individual, separately from the genera)ualifications that must e2ist for a citizen to run for alocal public office. Nota$l!, t#e breac# o( t#e t#reeter
!iit is a trait or condition that can possi$l! appl! only tothose who have previosl! served for three consectiveter)s in the sa)e position soght i))ediatel! prior to thepresent elections.In a dis:alification sitation, the gronds are the individatraits or conditions of, or the individal acts odis:alification co))itted $!, a candidate as providednder Sections >3 and &" of the OEC and Section 8% o=C &00&, and which generall! have nothing to do with theeligi$ilit! re:ire)ents for the filing of a CoC.&0
Sections >3 and &" of the OEC *together with Section 8% o=C &00&, otlined $elow- cover the following as traitscharacteristics or acts of dis:alification? *i- corrptingvoters or election officialsA *ii- co))itting acts of terroris)
to enhance candidac!A *iii- overspendingA *iv- solicitingreceiving or )aking prohi$ited contri$tions *vca)paigning otside the ca)paign periodA *vi- re)ovaldestrction or deface)ent of lawfl election propaganda*vii- co))itting prohi$ited for)s of election propaganda*viii- violating rles and reglations on election propagandathrogh )ass )ediaA *i4- coercion of s$ordinatesA *4threats, inti)idation, terroris), se of fradlent device oother for)s of coercionA *4i- nlawfl electioneeringA *4iirelease, dis$rse)ent or e4penditre of p$lic fndsA *4iiisolicitation of votes or ndertaking an! propaganda on theda! of the electionA *4iv- declaration as an insaneA and *4vco))itting s$version, insrrection, re$ellion or an!offense for which he has $een sentenced to a penalt! o
)ore than eighteen )onths or for a cri)e involving )oratrpitde.Section 8% of =C &00&, on the other hand, essentiall!repeats those alread! in the OEC nder the followingdis:alifications?a. Those sentenced $! final 5dg)ent for an offenseinvolving )oral trpitde or for an offense pnisha$le $!one *&- !ear or )ore of i)prison)ent, within two *"- !earsafter serving sentenceA$. Those re)oved fro) office as a reslt of anad)inistrative caseAc. Those convicted $! final 5dg)ent for violating the oathof allegiance to the Rep$licAd. Those with dal citi6enshipA
e. #gitives fro) 5stice in cri)inal or non1political caseshere or a$roadAf. Per)anent residents in a foreign contr! or those whohave ac:ired the right to reside a$road and contine toavail of the sa)e right after the effectivit! of this CodeA andg. The insane or fee$le1)inded.Together, these provisions e)$od! the dis:alificationsthat, $! statte, can $e i)pted against a candidate or alocal elected official to den! hi) of the chance to rn fooffice or of the chance to serve if he has $een elected./ ni:e featre of dis:alification is that nder Section>3 of the OEC, it re(er$ on!) to a Bcandidate,B not to onewho is not !et a candidate. Ths, the gronds fo
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt14bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt15bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt15bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt16bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt17bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt18bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt18bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt19bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt19bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt14bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt15bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt16bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt17bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt18bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt19b8/14/2019 Aratea.doc
10/13
8/14/2019 Aratea.doc
11/13
)istake. Fe)phases ors, citation o)ittedGThs, in addition to the failre to satisf! or co)pl! with theeligi$ilit! re:ire)ents, a )aterial )isrepresentation )st$e present in a cancellation of CoC sitation. The lawapparentl! does not allow )aterial divergence fro) thelisted re:ire)ents to :alif! for candidac! and enforces itsedict $! re:iring positive representation of co)pliancender oath. Significantl!, where dis:alification is involved,the )ere e4istence of a grond appears sfficient and a)aterial representation ass)es no relevance.
5s to the period for filing:The period to file a petition to den! de corse to or cancela CoC depends on the provision of law invoked. If thepetition is filed nder Section 3 o( t#e OEC, the petition)st $e filed within twent!1five *"2- da!s fro) the filing ofthe CoC.">Bowever, if the petition is $roght nder Section49 of the sa)e law, the petition )st $e filed within five *2-da!s fro) the last da! of filing the CoC."9
On the other hand, the period to file a di$&a!i(icationca$e is at an! ti)e $efore the procla)ation of a winningcandidate, as provided in CO+EEC Resoltion No.3>0>."3T#e t#reeter !iit di$&a!i(ication, beca&$e o(it$ &ni&e c#aracteri$tic$, doe$ not $trict!) (o!!o t#i$tie !iitation and i$ di$c&$$ed at !en't# be!o . /t the
ver! least, it shold follow the te)poral li)itations of a quo4arranto petition which )st $e filed within ten *&%- da!sfro) procla)ation."0 The constittional natre of theviolation, however, arges against the application of thisti)e re:ire)entA the rationale for the rle and the role ofthe Constittion in the contr!;s legal order dictate that apetition shold $e allowed while a consective forth1ter)eris in office.5s to the effects of a successful suit?/ candidate whose CoC was denied d&e co&r$e orcance!!ed is not considered a candidate at all. Note that thelaw fi4es the period within which a CoC )a! $e filed.'%/fterthis period, generall! no other person )a! 5oin the electioncontest. / nota$le e4ception to this general rle is the rle
on s$stittion. The application of the e4ception, however,prespposes a valid CoC. navoida$l!, a candidate#o$e CoC #a$ been cance!!ed or denied d&e co&r$ecannot be $&b$tit&ted (or !ac8 o( a CoC, to all intents andprposes.'&Si)ilarl!, a sccessfl quo 4arranto sit resltsin the oster of an alread! elected official fro) officeAs$stittion, for o$vios reasons, can no longer appl!.On the other hand, a candidate who was $i-!)di$&a!i(ied is )erel! prohi$ited fro) contining as acandidate or fro) ass)ing or contining to ass)e thefnctions of the officeA s$stittion can ths take placender the ter)s of Section 99 of the OEC.'" >oe*er, at#reeter candidate it# a *a!id and $&b$i$tin' CoCcannot be $&b$tit&ted if t#e ba$i$ o( t#e $&b$tit&tion i$
#i$ di$&a!i(ication on acco&nt o( #i$ t#reeter!iitation. i$&a!i(ication t#at i$ ba$ed on a breac# o(t#e t#reeter !iit r&!e cannot be in*o8ed a$ t#i$di$&a!i(ication can on!) ta8e -!ace a(ter e!ection #eret#e t#reeter o((icia! eer'ed a$ inner. /s in a quo4arranto, an! s$stittion is too late at this point.5s to the effects of a successful suit on the right of thesecond placer in the elections:In an! of these three re)edies, the doctrine of re5ection ofthe second placer applies for the si)ple reason that QTo si)plisticall! ass)e that the second placer wold havereceived the other votes wold $e to s$stitte or5dg)ent for the )ind of the voter. The second placer is 5st
that, a second placer. Be lost the elections. Be wasrepdiated $! either a )a5orit! or plralit! of voters. Becold not $e considered the first a)ong :alifiedcandidates $ecase in a field which e4cldes thedis:alified candidate, the conditions wold haves$stantiall! changed. @e are not prepared to e4trapolatethe reslts nder sch circ)stances.''
@ith the dis:alification of the winning candidate and theapplication of the doctrine of re5ection of the second placerthe r&!e$ on $&cce$$ion nder the law accordingl! appl!.
/s an ece-tiona! $it&ation, however, the candidate withthe second highest n)$er of votes *second placer- )a!$e validl! proclai)ed as the winner in the elections sholdthe winning candidate $e di$&a!i(ied $! final 5dg)enbefore t#e e!ection$, as clearl! provided in Section > oR./. No. >>8>.'8 The sa)e effect o$tains when theelectorate is fll! aware, in fact and in law and within thereal) of notoriet!, of the dis:alification, !et the! still votedfor the dis:alified candidate. In this sitation, theelectorate that cast the plralit! of votes in favor of thenotoriosl! dis:alified candidate is si)pl! dee)ed to havewaived their right to vote.'2
In a CoC cance!!ation proceeding, the law is silent on thelegal effect of a 5dg)ent cancelling the CoC and does no
also provide an! te)poral distinction. =iven, however, thefor)al initiator! role a CoC pla!s and the standing it givesto a political aspirant, the cancellation of the CoC $ased ona finding of its invalidit! effectivel! reslts in a vote for anine(istent candidate or for one who is dee)ed not to $e inthe $allot. /lthogh legall! a )isno)er, the second placershold $e proclai)ed the winner as the candidate with thehighest n)$er of votes for the contested position. Thissa)e conse:ence shold reslt if the cancellation case$eco)es final after elections, as the cancellation signifiesnon1candidac! fro) the ver! start, i.e., fro) $efore theelections.6iolation of the three-term limit rulea. T#e T#reeTer Liit R&!e.
The three1ter) li)it rle is a creation of Section 3, /rticle
c. Fi!in' o( "etition and E((ect$./s a dis:alification that can onl! $e triggered after theelections, it is not one that can $e i)ple)ented or giveneffect $efore sch ti)e. The reason is o$viosA $efore tha
ti)e, the gatewa! to the 8th consective ter) has not $eenopened $ecase the for1ter) re1electionist has not wonThis realit! $rings into sharp focs the ti)ing of the filing oa petition for dis:alification for $reach of the three1ter)li)it rle. Shold a petition nder the three1ter) li)it rle $eallowed onl! after the for1ter) official has won on thetheor! that it is at that point that the Constittion de)ands a$arThe ti)ing of the filing of the petition for dis:alification is a)atter of procedre that pri)aril! rests with the CO+EECOf corse, a petition for dis:alification cannot $e filedagainst one who is not !et a candidate as onl! candidates*and winners- can $e dis:alified. Bence, the filing shold$e done after the filing of the CoC. On the )atter of the
ti)e li)itations of its filing, I $elieve that the petition doesnot need to $e ho$$led $! the ter)s of CO+EECResoltion No. 3>0>'9$ecase of the $-ecia! nat&re andc#aracteri$tic$ o( t#e t#reeter !iit r&!e Q i.e., theconstittional $reach involvedA the fact that it can $eeffective onl! after a candidate has won the electionA andthe lack of specific provision of the election laws covering itTo $e sre, a constittional $reach cannot $e allowed tore)ain nattended $ecase of the procedres laid down $!ad)inistrative $odies. @hile Salcedo considers the re)ed!of quo 4arranto as al)ost the sa)e as the re)ed! ocancellation on the :estion of eligi$ilit!, the fact that there)edies can $e availed of onl! at particlar periods of theelection process signifies )ore than the te)pora
distinction.#ro) the point of view of eligi$ilit!, one who )erel! seeksto hold p$lic office throgh a valid candidac! cannot wholl!$e treated in the sa)e )anner as one who has won and isat the point of ass)ing or serving the office to which hewas electedA the re:ire)ents to be e!i'ib!e a$ acandidate are defined $! the election laws and $! the locagovern)ent code, $t $e!ond these are con$tit&tionare$triction$ on e!i'ibi!it) to $er*e. The three1ter) li)irle serves as the $est e4a)ple of this fine distinctionA alocal official who is allowed to $e a candidate nder ostattes $t who is effectivel! in his forth ter) shold $econsidered ineligi!le to serve if the Cort were to give life tothe constittional provision, coched in a strong prohi$itor!
langage, that no sch official shall serve for )ore thanthree consective ter)s./ possi$le legal st)$ling $lock in allowing the filing of thepetition $efore the election is the e4istence of a case oaction or pre)atrit! at that point. If dis:alification istriggered onl! after a three1ter)er has won, then it )a! $earged with so)e strength that a petition, filed against arespondent three1ter) local official $efore he has won aforth ti)e, has not violated an! law and does not give thepetitioner the right to file a petition for lack of case ofaction or pre)atrit!.I take the view, however, that the petition does not need to$e i))ediatel! acted pon and can )erel! $e docketed as
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt36bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt37bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt37bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt36bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt37b8/14/2019 Aratea.doc
13/13
a cationar! petition reserved for ftre action if and whenthe three1ter) local official wins a forth consective ter).If the parties proceed to litigate withot raising thepre)atrit! or lack of case of action as o$5ection, a rlingcan $e deferred ntil after case of action accresA if arling is entered, then an! decreed dis:alification cannot$e given effect and i)ple)ented ntil a violation of thethree1ter) li)it rle occrs.nlike in an ordinar! dis:alification case *where adis:alification $! final 5dg)ent $efore the elections
against the victorios $t dis:alified candidate cancataplt the second placer into office- and in a cancellationcase *where the 5dg)ent, regardless of when it $eca)efinal, against the victorios candidate with an invalid CoCsi)ilarl! gives the second placer a right to ass)e office-,a dis:alification $ased on a violation of the threeter) li)itrle sets p a ver! high $ar against the second placernless he can clearl! and convincingl! show that theelectorate had deli$eratel! and knowingl! )isapplied theirvotes./odolfo7s petition is properly one for dis)ualificationOn the $asis of the a$ove discssions, I vote to grant thepresent petition.Notwithstanding the caption of Dr. Rodolfo;s petition, his
petition is properl! one for dis:alification, since he onl!alleged a violation of the three1ter) li)it rle Q adis:alification, not a cancellation isse. Ths, the natreand conse:ences of a dis:alification petition are what we)st recogni6e and give effect to in this case. Thisconclsion i))ediatel! i)pacts on /ntipolo who, as secondplacer and in the a$sence of an! of the e4ceptions, )st$ow ot of the pictre nder the doctrine of re5ection of thesecond placer.'3
%irst, as discssed a$ove, a reslting dis:alification $asedon a violation of the three1ter) li)it rle cannot $egin tooperate ntil after the elections, where the three1ter)official e)erged as victorios.'0 There is no wa! that/ntipolo, the second placer in the election, cold ass)e
the office of +a!or $ecase no dis:alification took effectbefore the elections against on6anida despite the decisionrendered then. To reiterate, the prohi$ition againston6anida onl! took place after his election for his forthconsective ter). /t that point, the election was over andthe people had chosen. @ith on6anida ineligi$le toass)e office, the ice1+a!or takes over $! sccession.Second, likewise, it has not $een shown that the electoratedeli$eratel! and knowingl! )isapplied their votes in favor ofon6anida, reslting in their disenfranchise)ent. Since adis:alification $ased on a violation of the three1ter) li)itrle does not affect a CoC that is otherwise valid, thenon6anida re)ained a candidate who cold $e validl! votedfor in the elections.8% It was onl! when his dis:alification
was triggered that a per)anent vacanc! occrred in theoffice of the +a!or of San /ntonio, 7a)$ales. nder the=C,8&it is /ratea, the dl! elected ice +a!or, who sholdserve as +a!or in place of the elected $t dis:alifiedon6anida.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt38bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt38bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt39bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt39bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt40bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt40bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt41bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt41bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt38bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt39bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt40bhttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/oct2012/gr_195229_2012.html#fnt41b