election cases 2.docx

8/18/2019 election cases 2.docx

1/80

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 198742 August 10, 2012

TEODORA SOBEJANA-CONDON, Petitioner,

vs.

COMMSSON ON E!ECTONS, !US M. BAUTSTA, ROBE!TO ". PCAR #$% &!MA P.

PAGADUAN,Respondents.

SERENO,*

PERLAS-ERNAE, !! *

D E C S O N

RE'ES, J.:

"ailure to renounce forei#n citi$enship in accordance %ith the e&act tenor of Section '() of

Republic Act (R.A. No. +))' renders a dual citi$en ineli#ible to run for and thus hold an

elective public office.

T() C#s)

At bar is a special civil action for certiorar i under Rule / of the Rules of 0ourt see1in# to nullif

Resolution)dated Septe2ber , )3 of the 0o22ission on Elections (0OMELE0 en banc in

EA0 (AE No. A-//-)33. 4he assailed resolution (a reversed the Order 5 dated Nove2ber 53,

)33 of 0OMELE0 Second 6ivision dis2issin# petitioner7s appeal8 and (b affir2ed the

consolidated 6ecision/ dated October )), )33 of the Re#ional 4rial 0ourt (R40, auan#, !#

U$*o$, B+#$( , %)#+*$g /)t*t*o$)+ T)o%o+# So)#$#-Co$%o$ /)t*t*o$)+3 %*su#*5*)%

#$% *$)*g*) to ()+ /os*t*o$ #s "*)-M#6o+ o5 C##, !# U$*o$.

T() U$%*s/ut)% #ts

4he petitioner is a natural-born "ilipino citi$en havin# been born of "ilipino parents on Au#ust 9,+//. On 6ece2ber 5, +9/, she beca2e a naturali$ed Australian citi$en o%in# to her

2arria#e to a certain :evin 4ho2as 0ondon.

On 6ece2ber ), )33', she filed an application to re-ac;uire Philippine citi$enship before the

Philippine E2bass in 0anberra, Australia pursuant to Section 5 of R.A. No. +))' other%ise

1no%n as the


2/80

approved and the petitioner too1 her oath of alle#iance to the Republic of the Philippines on

6ece2ber ', )33'.

On Septe2ber 9, )33, the petitioner filed an uns%orn 6eclaration of Renunciation of

Australian 0iti$enship before the 6epart2ent of =22i#ration and =ndi#enous Affairs, 0anberra,

Australia, %hich in turn issued the Order dated Septe2ber )>, )33 certifin# that she hasceased to be an Australian citi$en.

4he petitioner ran for Maor in her ho2eto%n of 0aba, La ?nion in the )33> elections. She lost

in her bid. She a#ain sou#ht elective office durin# the Ma 3, )33 elections this ti2e for the

position of @ice-Maor. She obtained the hi#hest nu2bers of votes and %as proclai2ed as the

%innin# candidate. She too1 her oath of office on Ma 5, )33.

Soon thereafter, private respondents Robelito @. Picar, il2a P. Pa#aduan> and Luis M.

autista,9 (private respondents all re#istered voters of 0aba, La ?nion, filed separate petitions

for ;uo %arranto ;uestionin# the petitioner7s eli#ibilit before the R40. 4he petitions si2ilarl

sou#ht the petitioner7s dis;ualification fro2 holdin# her elective post on the #round that she is a

dual citi$en and that she failed to e&ecute a , )33, she

ceased to be an Australian citi$en. She clai2ed that the 6eclaration of Renunciation of

Australian 0iti$enship she e&ecuted in Australia sufficientl co2plied %ith Section '(), R.A. No.

+))' and that her act of runnin# for public office is a clear abandon2ent of her Australian

citi$enship.

Ru*$g o5 t() RTC

=n its consolidated 6ecision dated October )), )33, the trial court held that the petitioner7s

5#*u+) to o/6 *t( S)t*o$ :23 o5 R.A. No. 922: +)$%)+)% ()+ *$)*g*) to +u$ #$%

(o% /u* o55*). As #%*tt)% 6 t() /)t*t*o$)+ ()+s)5 %u+*$g t+*#, t() /)+so$#

%)#+#t*o$ o5 +)$u$*#t*o$ s() 5*)% *$ Aust+#*# #s $ot u$%)+ o#t( . 4he la% clearl

2andates that the docu2ent containin# the renunciation of forei#n citi$enship 2ust be s%orn

before an public officer authori$ed to ad2inister oath. 0onse;uentl, the R407s decision

disposed as follo%sB

CERE"ORE, pre2ises considered, the 0ourt renders Dud#2ent in "A@OR of privaterespondentsF and AGA=NS4 (petitionerB

6E0LAR=NG petitionerF 4EO6ORA SOE!ANA-0ON6ON, dis;ualified and ineli#ible to hold

the office of @ice-Maor of 0aba, La ?nion8

) N?LL="H=NG her procla2ation as the %innin# candidate for @ice-Maor of said 2unicipalit8

and

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt8


3/80

5 6E0LAR=NG the position of @ice-Maor in said 2unicipalit vacant.

SO OR6ERE6.+

Ru*$g o5 t() COME!EC

4he petitioner appealed to the 0OMELE0 but the appeal %as dis2issed b the Second 6ivision

in its Order 3dated Nove2ber 53, )33 for failure to pa the doc1et fees %ithin the prescribed

period. On 2otion for reconsideration, the appeal %as reinstated b the 0OMELE0 en banc in

its Resolution dated Septe2ber , )3. =n the sa2e issuance, the substantive 2erits of the

appeal %ere #iven due course. T() COME!EC )$ #$ o$u++)% *t( t() 5*$%*$gs #$%

o$us*o$s o5 t() RTC; *t #so g+#$t)% t() Mot*o$ 5o+ EEREORE, pre2ises considered the 0o22ission RESO!"ED as it hereb RESO!"ES asfollo%sB

. 4o DSMSS the instant appeal for lac1 of 2erit8

). 4o ARM the DECSON dated )) October )33 of the court a ;uo8 and

5. 4o GRANT the Motion for E&ecution filed on Nove2ber ), )33.

SO OR6ERE6.) (E2phasis supplied

Cence, the present petition ascribin# #rave abuse of discretion to the 0OMELE0 en banc.

T() P)t*t*o$)+?s A+gu)$ts

4he petitioner contends that since she ceased to be an Australian citi$en on Septe2ber )>,

)33, she no lon#er held dual citi$enship and %as onl a "ilipino citi$en %hen she filed her

certificate of candidac as earl as the )33> elections. Cence, the


4/80

Lastl, she disputes the po%er of the 0OMELE0 en banc toB (a ta1e co#ni$ance of the

substantive 2erits of her appeal instead of re2andin# the sa2e to the 0OMELE0 Second

6ivision for the continuation of the appeal proceedin#s8 and (b allo% the e&ecution pendin#

appeal of the R407s Dud#2ent.

T() ssu)s

Posed for resolution are the follo%in# issuesB = hether the 0OMELE0 en banc 2a resolve

the 2erits of an appeal after rulin# on its reinstate2ent8 == hether the 0OMELE0 en banc

2a order the e&ecution of a Dud#2ent rendered b a trial court in an election case8 === hether

the private respondents are barred fro2 ;uestionin# the ;ualifications of the petitioner8 and "3

o+ /u+/os)s o5 %)t)+*$*$g t() /)t*t*o$)+?s )*g***t6 to +u$ 5o+ /u* o55*), ()t()+

t() @so+$ +)$u$*#t*o$ o5 5o+)*g$ *t*)$s(*/@ *$ S)t*o$ :23 o5 R.A. No. 922: *s # )+)

/+o-5o+# +)u*+))$t.

T() Cou+t?s Ru*$g

. A$ #//)# #6 ) s*ut#$)ous6

+)*$st#t)% #$% %)5*$*t*=)6 +)so=)%

6 t() COME!EC )$ #$ *$ #

+)sout*o$ %*s/os*$g o5 # ot*o$ 5o+

+)o$s*%)+#t*o$.

4he po%er to decide 2otions for reconsideration in election cases is arro#ated unto the

0OMELE0 en banc b Section 5, Article =I-0 of the 0onstitution, vi$B

Sec. 5. 4he 0o22ission on Elections 2a sit en banc or in t%o divisions, and shall pro2ul#ateits rules of procedure in order to e&pedite disposition of election cases, includin# pre-

procla2ation controversies. All such election cases shall be heard and decided in division,

provided that 2otions for reconsideration of decisions shall be decided b the 0o22ission en

banc.

A co2ple2entar provision is present in Section '(c, Rule 5 of the 0OMELE0 Rules of

Procedure, to %itB

An 2otion to reconsider a decision, resolution, order or rulin# of a 6ivision shall be resolved b

the 0o22ission en banc e&cept 2otions on interlocutor orders of the division %hich shall be

resolved b the division %hich issued the order.

0onsiderin# that the above cited provisos do not set an li2its to the 0OMELE0 en banc7s

prero#ative in resolvin# a 2otion for reconsideration, there is nothin# to prevent the bod fro2

directl adDudicatin# the substantive 2erits of an appeal after rulin# for its reinstate2ent instead

of re2andin# the sa2e to the division that initiall dis2issed it.


5/80

e thus see no i2propriet 2uch 2ore #rave abuse of discretion on the part of the 0OMELE0

en banc %hen it proceeded to decide the substantive 2erits of the petitioner7s appeal after rulin#

for its reinstate2ent.

"urther, records sho% that, in her 2otion for reconsideration before the 0OMELE0 en banc, the

petitioner not onl proffered ar#u2ents on the issue on doc1et fees but also on the issue of hereli#ibilit. She even filed a supple2ental 2otion for reconsideration attachin# there%ith

supportin# docu2ents5 to her contention that she is no lon#er an Australian citi$en. 4he

petitioner, after obtainin# an unfavorable decision, cannot be per2itted to disavo% the en banc7s

e&ercise of discretion on the substantial 2erits of her appeal %hen she herself invo1ed the

sa2e in the first place.

4he fact that the 0OMELE0 en banc had re2anded si2ilar appeals to the 6ivision that initiall

dis2issed the2 cannot serve as a precedent to the disposition of the petitioner7s appeal. A

decision or resolution of an adDudicatin# bod can be disposed in several %as. 4o sustain

petitioner7s ar#u2ent %ould be virtuall puttin# a strai#htDac1et on the 0OMELE0 en banc7s

adDudicator po%ers.

More si#nificantl, the re2and of the appeal to the 0OMELE0 Second 6ivision %ould be

unnecessaril circuitous and repu#nant to the rule on preferential disposition of ;uo %arranto

cases espoused in Rule 5, Section ' of the 0OMELE0 Rules of Procedure. /

. T() COME!EC )$ #$ (#s t()

/o)+ to o+%)+ %*s+)t*o$#+6

)


6/80

4he fact that the petitioner7s ;ualifications %ere not ;uestioned %hen she filed certificates of

candidac for )33> and )33 elections cannot operate as an estoppel to the petition for ;uo

%arranto before the R40.

?nder the atas Pa2bansa ilan# 99 (O2nibus Election 0ode, there are t%o instances

%here a petition ;uestionin# the ;ualifications of a re#istered candidate to run for the office for%hich his certificate of candidac %as filed can be raised, to %itB

( Before election, pursuant to Section >9 thereof %hich provides thatB

Sec. >9. Petition to den due course or to cancel a certificate of candidac. K A verified petition

see1in# to den due course or to cancel a certificate of candidac 2a be filed b an person

e&clusivel on the #round that an 2aterial representation contained therein as re;uired under

Section >/ hereof is false. 4he petition 2a be filed at an ti2e not later than t%ent-five das

fro2 the ti2e of the filin# of the certificate of candidac and shall be decided, after due notice

and hearin#, not later than fifteen das before the election8 and

() After election, pursuant to Section )'5 thereof, vi$B

Sec. )'5. Petition for ;uo %arranto. K An voter contestin# the election of an Me2ber of the

atasan# Pa2bansa, re#ional, provincial, or cit officer on the #round of ineli#ibilit or of

disloalt to the Republic of the Philippines shall file a s%orn petition for ;uo %arranto %ith the

0o22ission %ithin ten das after the procla2ation of the results of the election. (E2phasis

ours

Cence, if a person ;ualified to file a petition to dis;ualif a certain candidate fails to file the

petition %ithin the t%ent-five ()'-da period prescribed b Section >9 of the O2nibus Election0ode for %hatever reasons, the elections la%s do not leave hi2 co2pletel helpless as he has

another chance to raise the dis;ualification of the candidate b filin# a petition for ;uo %arranto

%ithin ten (3 das fro2 the procla2ation of the results of the election, as provided under

Section )'5 of the O2nibus Election 0ode.>

4he above re2edies %ere both available to the private respondents and their failure to utili$e

Section >9 of the O2nibus Election 0ode cannot serve to bar the2 should the opt to file, as

the did so file, a ;uo %arranto petition under Section )'5.

". P)t*t*o$)+ *s %*su#*5*)% 5+o

+u$$*$g 5o+ ))t*=) o55*) 5o+ 5#*u+) to +)$ou$) ()+ Aust+#*#$

*t*)$s(*/ *$ #o+%#$) *t(

S)t*o$ :23 o5 R.A. No. 922:.

R.A. No. +))' allo%s the retention and re-ac;uisition of "ilipino citi$enship for natural-born

citi$ens %ho have lost their Philippine citi$enship9 b ta1in# an oath of alle#iance to the

Republic, thusB

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt18


7/80

Section 5. Retention of Philippine 0iti$enship. K An provision of la% to the contrar

not%ithstandin#, natural-born citi$ens of the Philippines %ho have lost their Philippine

citi$enship b reason of their naturali$ation as citi$ens of a forei#n countr are hereb dee2ed

to have re-ac;uired Philippine citi$enship upon ta1in# the follo%in# oath of alle#iance to the

RepublicB


8/80

(a are candidates for or are occupin# an public office in the countr of %hich the are

naturali$ed citi$ens8 andor

(b are in active service as co22issioned or non-co22issioned officers in the ar2ed forces of

the countr %hich the are naturali$ed citi$ens. (E2phasis ours

U$%)+ t() /+o=*s*o$s o5 t() #5o+))$t*o$)% #, t() /)t*t*o$)+ (#s =#*%6 +)-#u*+)% ()+

**/*$o *t*)$s(*/ ()$ s() too #$ O#t( o5 A)g*#$) to t() R)/u* o5 t()

P(**//*$)s o$ D)))+ :, 200:. At t(#t /o*$t, s() ()% %u# *t*)$s(*/, *.)., Aust+#*#$

#$% P(**//*$).

O$ S)/t))+ 18, 200, o+ # 6)#+ )5o+) s() *$*t*#6 soug(t ))t*=) /u* o55*), s()

5*)% # +)$u$*#t*o$ o5 Aust+#*#$ *t*)$s(*/ *$ C#$)++#, Aust+#*#. A%*tt)%6, (o)=)+,

t() s#) #s $ot u$%)+ o#t( o$t+#+6 to t() )


9/80

T() # #t)go+*#6 +)u*+)s /)+so$s s))*$g ))t*=) /u* o55*), (o )*t()+ +)t#*$)%

t()*+ P(**//*$) *t*)$s(*/ o+ t(os) (o +)#u*+)% *t, to #) # /)+so$# #$% so+$

+)$u$*#t*o$ o5 #$6 #$% # 5o+)*g$ *t*)$s(*/ )5o+) # /u* o55*)+ #ut(o+*)% to

#%*$*st)+ #$ o#t( s*ut#$)ous *t( o+ )5o+) t() 5**$g o5 t() )+t*5*#t) o5 #$%*%#6.

Cence, Section '() of Republic Act No. +))' co2pels natural-born "ilipinos, %ho have beennaturali$ed as citi$ens of a forei#n countr, but %ho reac;uired or retained their Philippine

citi$enship ( to ta1e the oath of alle#iance under Section 5 of Republic Act No. +))', and ()

for those see1in# elective public offices in the Philippines, to additionall e&ecute a personal and

s%orn renunciation of an and all forei#n citi$enship before an authori$ed public officer prior or

si2ultaneous to the filin# of their certificates of candidac, to ;ualif as candidates in Philippine

elections.

0learl Section '() of Republic Act No. +))' (on the 2a1in# of a personal and s%orn

renunciation of an and all forei#n citi$enship re;uires of the "ilipinos availin# the2selves of

the benefits under the said Act to acco2plish an underta1in# other than that %hich the have

presu2abl co2plied %ith under Section 5 thereof (oath of alle#iance to the Republic of the

Philippines. 4his is 2ade clear in the discussion of the ica2eral 0onference 0o22ittee on

6isa#reein# Provisions of Couse ill No. />)3 and Senate ill No. )53 held on 9 Au#ust

)335 (precursors of Republic Act No. +))', %here the Con. 0hair2an "ran1lin 6rilon and Con.

Representative Arthur 6efensor e&plained to Con. Representative E&e;uiel !avier that the oath

of alle#iance is different fro2 the renunciation of forei#n citi$enship8

& & & &

The intent of the legislators was not only for Filipinos reacquiring or retaining their Philippine

citienship under Republic Act !o. "##$ to ta%e their oath of allegiance to the Republic of thePhilippines& but also to e'plicitly renounce their foreign citienship if they wish to run for elective

posts in the Philippines. 4o ;ualif as a candidate in Philippine elections, "ilipinos 2ust onl

have one citi$enship, na2el, Philippine citi$enship.)5 (0itation o2itted and italics and

underlinin# ours

Cence, in 6e Gu$2an v. 0OMELE0,)/ %e declared petitioner therein to be dis;ualified fro2

runnin# for the position of vice-2aor for his failure to 2a1e a personal and s%orn renunciation

of his A2erican citi$enship.

e find no reason to depart fro2 the 2andator nature infused b the above rulin#s to the

phrase


10/80

=N4ERPELLA4=ON O" REP. !A@=ER

Rep. !avier initiall in;uired %hether under the ill, dual citi$enship is onl li2ited to natural-

born "ilipinos and not to naturali$ed "ilipinos.

Rep. Libanan replied in the affir2ative.

Rep. !avier subse;uentl adverted to Section ' of the ill %hich provides that natural-born

"ilipinos %ho have dual citi$enship shall continue to enDo full civil and political ri#hts. 4his bein#

the case, he sou#ht clarification as to %hether the can indeed run for public office provided that

the renounce their forei#n citi$enship.

Rep. Libanan replied in the affir2ative, citin# that these citi$ens %ill onl have to 2a1e a

personal and s%orn renunciation of forei#n citi$enship before an authori$ed public officer.

Rep. !avier sou#ht further clarification on this 2atter, citin# that %hile the ill provides the2 %ith

full civil and political ri#hts as "ilipino citi$ens, the 2easure also discri2inates a#ainst the2since the are re;uired to 2a1e a s%orn renunciation of their other forei#n citi$enship if and

%hen the run for public office. Ce thereafter proposed to delete this particular provision.

=n his reDoinder, R)/. !*#$#$ ))

sus)u)$t6 *t)% t() #s) o5 A5+o6* =s. Rus, ()+)*$ t() U$*t)% St#t)s o$s*%)+)% #

$#tu+#*)% A)+*#$ st* #s #$ A)+*#$ *t*)$ )=)$ ()$ () #st (*s =ot) *$ s+#)

%u+*$g o$) o5 *ts ))t*o$s.

Rep. !avier ho%ever pointed out that the 2atter of votin# is different because in votin#, one is

not re;uired to renounce his forei#n citi$enship. Ce pointed out that under the ill, "ilipinos %ho

run for public office 2ust renounce their forei#n citi$enship. Ce pointed out further that this is a

contradiction in the ill.

4hereafter, Rep. !avier in;uired %hether "ilipino citi$ens %ho had ac;uired forei#n citi$enship

and are no% entitled to reac;uire their "ilipino citi$enship %ill be considered as natural-born

citi$ens. As such, he li1e%ise in;uired %hether the %ill also be considered ;ualified to run for

the hi#hest elective positions in the countr.

Rep. Libanan replied in the affir2ative, citin# that the onl re;uire2ent is that the 2a1e a

s%orn renunciation of their forei#n citi$enship and that the co2pl %ith the residenc andre#istration re;uire2ents as provided for in the 0onstitution.

hereupon, Rep. !avier noted that under the 0onstitution, natural-born citi$ens are those %ho

are citi$ens at the ti2e of birth %ithout havin# to perfor2 an act to co2plete or perfect hisher

citi$enship.


11/80

Rep. Libanan a#reed there%ith, citin# that this is the reason %h the ill see1s the repeal of 0A

No. 5. 4he repeal, he said, %ould help "ilipino citi$ens %ho ac;uired forei#n citi$enship to

retain their citi$enship. ith re#ard then to Section ' of the ill, he e&plained that the 0o22ittee

had decided to include this provision because Section 9, Article I= of the 0onstitution provides

for the accountabilit of public officers.

$ (*s +)o*$%)+, R)/. J#=*)+ #*$t#*$)% t(#t *$ t(*s #s), t() so+$ +)$u$*#t*o$ o5 #

5o+)*g$ *t*)$s(*/ * o$6 )o) # /+o 5o+# +)u*+))$t.

(n further queries of Rep. )avier& Rep. Libanan affir*ed that natural+born Filipino citiens who

beca*e foreign citiens and who have reacquired their Filipino citienship under the Bill will be

considered as natural+born citiens& and therefore qualified to run for the presidency& the vice+

presidency or for a seat in Congress. Ce also a#reed %ith the observation of Rep. !avier that a

natural-born citi$en is one %ho is a citi$en of the countr at the ti2e of birth. Ce also e&plained

that the ill %ill, in effect, return to a "ilipino citi$en %ho has ac;uired forei#n citi$enship, the

status of bein# a natural-born citi$en effective at the ti2e he lost his "ilipino citi$enship.

As a reDoinder, Rep. !avier opined that doin# so %ould be discri2inatin# a#ainst naturali$ed

"ilipino citi$ens and "ilipino citi$ens b election %ho are all dis;ualified to run for certain public

offices. Ce then su##ested that the ill be a2ended b not considerin# as natural-born citi$ens

those "ilipinos %ho had renounced their "ilipino citi$enship and ac;uired forei#n citi$enship. >)

s#*% t(#t t()6 s(ou% ) o$s*%)+)% #s +)/#t+*#t)% *t*)$s.

=n repl, Rep. Libanan assured Rep. !avier that the 0o22ittee %ill ta1e note of the latter7s

co22ents on the 2atter. Ce ho%ever stressed that after a len#th deliberation on the subDect,

the 0o22ittees on !ustice, and "orei#n Affairs had decided to revert bac1 to the status of bein#

natural-born citi$ens those natural-born "ilipino citi$ens %ho had ac;uired forei#n citi$enshipbut no% %ished to reac;uire their "ilipino citi$enship.

R)/. J#=*)+ t()$ )) +)*t)+#t)% t(#t $#tu+#-o+$

**/*$o *t*)$s (o (#% +)$ou$)% t()*+ *t*)$s(*/ 6 /)%g*$g #)g*#$) to #$ot()+

so=)+)*g$t6 s(ou% $ot ) #o)% to +)=)+t # to t()*+ st#tus o5 )*$g $#tu+#-o+$

*t*)$s o$) t()6 %)*%) to +)g#*$ t()*+ **/*$o *t*)$s(*/. >) u$%)+so+)% t(#t t(*s **$ # #6 #o su( **/*$os to )$o6 %u# *t*)$s(*/.

On %hether the Sponsors %ill a#ree to an a2end2ent incorporatin# the position of Rep. !avier,

Rep. Libanan stated that this %ill defeat the purpose of the ill.


12/80

Rep. !avier disa#reed there%ith, addin# that natural-born "ilipino citi$ens %ho ac;uired forei#n

citi$enships and later decided to re#ain their "ilipino citi$enship, %ill be considered as

repatriated citi$ens.

Rep. Libanan cited the case of en#$on vs. CRE4 %herein the Supre2e 0ourt had ruled that

onl naturali$ed "ilipino citi$ens are not considered as natural-born citi$ens.

=n reaction, Rep. !avier clarified that onl citi$ens b election or those %hose 2others are

"ilipino citi$ens under the +5' 0onstitution and %ho elected "ilipino citi$enship upon reachin#

the a#e of 2aturit, are not dee2ed as natural-born citi$ens.

=n response, Rep. Libanan 2aintained that in the en#$on case, repatriation results in the

recover of one7s ori#inal nationalit and onl naturali$ed citi$ens are not considered as natural-

born citi$ens.

On %hether the Sponsors %ould a#ree to not #ivin# bac1 the status of bein# natural-born

citi$ens to natural-born "ilipino citi$ens %ho ac;uired forei#n citi$enship, Rep. Libanan

re2ar1ed that the od in plenar session %ill decide on the 2atter .)>

4he petitioner obviousl espouses an isolated readin# of Representative !avier7s state2ent8 she

convenientl disre#ards the precedin# and succeedin# discussions in the records.

4he above-;uoted e&cerpts of the le#islative record sho% that Representative !avier7s

state2ent ou#ht to be understood %ithin the conte&t of the issue then bein# discussed, that is K

%hether for2er natural-born citi$ens %ho re-ac;uire their "ilipino citi$enship under the proposed

la% %ill revert to their ori#inal status as natural-born citi$ens and thus be ;ualified to run for

#overn2ent positions reserved onl to natural-born "ilipinos, i.e. President, @ice-President andMe2bers of the 0on#ress.

=t %as Representative !avier7s position that the should be considered as repatriated "ilipinos

and not as natural-born citi$ens since the %ill have to e&ecute a personal and s%orn

renunciation of forei#n citi$enship. !atural+born citiens are those who need not perfor* an act

to perfect their citienship. Representative Libanan, ho%ever, 2aintained that the %ill revert to

their ori#inal status as natural-born citi$ens. 4o reconcile the renunciation i2posed b Section

'() %ith the principle that natural-born citi$ens are those %ho need not perfor2 an act to

perfect their citi$enship, R)/+)s)$t#t*=) J#=*)+ sugg)st)% t(#t t() so+$ +)$u$*#t*o$ o5

5o+)*g$ *t*)$s(*/ ) o$s*%)+)% #s # )+) /+o 5o+# +)u*+))$t.

Petitioner7s ar#u2ent, therefore, loses its point. 4he


13/80

=t is also palpable in the above records that Section ' %as intended to co2ple2ent Section 9,

Article I= of the 0onstitution on public officers7 pri2ar accountabilit of alle#iance and loalt,

%hich providesB

Sec. 9. K Public officers and e2ploees o%e the State and this 0onstitution alle#iance at all

ti2es and an public officer or e2ploee %ho see1s to chan#e his citi$enship or ac;uire thestatus of an i22i#rant of another countr durin# his tenure shall be dealt %ith b la%.

An oath is a sole2n declaration, acco2panied b a s%earin# to God or a revered person or

thin#, that one7s state2ent is true or that one %ill be bound to a pro2ise. 4he person 2a1in# the

oath i2plicitl invites punish2ent if the state2ent is untrue or the pro2ise is bro1en. The legal

effect of an oath is to sub,ect the person to penalties for per,ury if the testi*ony is false.)9

=ndeed, the sole2n pro2ise, and the ris1 of punish2ent attached to an oath ensures

truthfulness to the prospective public officer7s abandon2ent of his adopted state and pro2ise of

absolute alle#iance and loalt to the Republic of the Philippines.

4o hold the oath to be a 2ere pro for2a re;uire2ent is to sa that it is onl for cere2onial

purposes8 it %ould also acco22odate a 2ere ;ualified or te2porar alle#iance fro2

#overn2ent officers %hen the 0onstitution and the le#islature clearl de2and other%ise.

Petitioner contends that the Australian 0iti$enship Act of +/9, under %hich she is alread

dee2ed to have lost her citi$enship, is entitled to Dudicial notice. e disa#ree.

o+)*g$ #s #+) $ot # #tt)+ o5 u%**# $ot*). !*) #$6 ot()+ 5#t, t()6 ust ) #)g)%

#$% /+o=)$.29 To /+o=) # 5o+)*g$ #, t() /#+t6 *$=o*$g *t ust /+)s)$t # o/6 t()+)o5

#$% o/6 *t( S)t*o$s 24 #$% 2: o5 Ru) 12 o5 t() R)=*s)% Ru)s o5 Cou+t (*(+)#%s

Sec. )/. Proof of official record. K 4he record of public docu2ents referred to in para#raph (a of

Section +, %hen ad2issible for an purpose, 2a be evidenced b an official publication

thereof or b a cop attested b the officer havin# the le#al custod of the record, or b his

deput, and acco2panied, if the record is not 1ept in the Philippines, %ith a certificate that such

officer has the custod. =f the office in %hich the record is 1ept is in a forei#n countr, the

certificate 2a be 2ade b a secretar of the e2bass or le#ation, consul #eneral, consul, vice-

consul, or consular a#ent or b an officer in the forei#n service of the Philippines stationed in

the forei#n countr in %hich the record is 1ept, and authenticated b the seal of his office.

(E2phasis ours

Sec. )'. -hat attestation of copy *ust state. K henever a cop of a docu2ent or record is

attested for the purpose of the evidence, the attestation 2ust state, in substance, that the cop

is a correct cop of the ori#inal, or a specific part thereof, as the case 2a be. 4he attestation

2ust be under the official seal of the attestin# officer, if there be an, or if he be the cler1 of a

court havin# a seal, under the seal of such court.

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt29http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_198742_2012.html#fnt29


14/80

4he 0ourt has ad2itted certain e&ceptions to the above rules and held that the e&istence of a

forei#n la% 2a also be established throu#hB ( a testi2on under oath of an e&pert %itness

such as an attorne-at-la% in the countr %here the forei#n la% operates %herein he ;uotes

verbati2 a section of the la% and states that the sa2e %as in force at the ti2e 2aterial to the

facts at hand8 and () li1e%ise, in several naturali$ation cases, it %as held b the 0ourt that

evidence of the la% of a forei#n countr on reciprocit re#ardin# the ac;uisition of citi$enship,althou#h not 2eetin# the prescribed rule of practice, 2a be allo%ed and used as basis for

favorable action, if, in the li#ht of all the circu2stances, the 0ourt is


15/80

=n 5*$), R.A. No. 922: #t)go+*#6 %)#$%s $#tu+#-o+$ **/*$os (o +)-#u*+) t()*+

*t*)$s(*/ #$% s)) ))t*=) o55*), to )


16/80

JOCELYN SY LIMKAICHONG,

Petitioner ,

- versus -

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS,

NAPOLEON N. CAMERO

andRENALD . !ILLANDO,

Respondents.

" -------------------------------------------- "

LO#IS C. BIRAOGO,

Petitioner ,

- versus -

HON. PROSPERO NOGRALES,

S$ea%er &' ()e H&use &'

Re$resen(a(*ves &' ()e C&n+ress &'

()e P)**$$*nes, and JOCELYN SY

LIMKAICHONG,

Respondents.

"---------------------------------------------"

OLI!IA P. PARAS,Petitioner ,

- versus -

HON. PROSPERO NOGRALES, *n

)*s a$a*( as S$ea%er &' ()e H&use

&' Re$resen(a(*ves/ HON. ROBERTO

NA0ARENO, *n )*s a$a*( as

Sere(ar Genera &' ()e H&use &' Re$resen(a(*ves/ HON. RHODORA

SE!ILLA, *n )er a$a*( as De$u(

Sere(ar Genera '&r *nane &' ()e

H&use &' Re$resen(a(*ves/ THE

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

and JOCELYN SY

G.R. N&s. 123341-45

G.R. N&. 126157

G.R. N&s. 126145-44


17/80

LIMKAICHONG,

Respondents.

" ------------------------------------------- "

RENALD . !ILLANDO,Petitioner ,

- versus -

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

and JOCELYN SY

LIMKAICHONG,

Respondents.

G.R. N&s. 126587-81

Present:

PUNO, C.J.,

QUISUMBING,

N!R"S#S!N$I!GO,

C!RPIO,

!US$RI!#M!R$IN"%,

CORON!,

C!RPIO MOR!&"S,$ING!,

C'ICO#N!%!RIO,

("&!SCO, )R*,

N!C'UR!,

&"ON!R+O#+" C!S$RO,

BRION, and

P"R!&$!, JJ.

Pr&9u+a(edA$r* 1, 5776


18/80

" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "

D E C I S I O N

PERALTA, J.:

Once a ;*nn*n+ and*da(e has been $r&a*9ed, (a%en )*s &a(), and assu9ed

&''*e as a Member of the 'ouse of Representati-es,

the


19/80

o-er election contests relatin. to his election, returns, and /ualifications, and 9ere

ae+a(*&n as (& ()e *nva*d*( &' )er $r&a9a(*&n d&es n&( d*ves( ()e Ee(&ra

Tr*=una &' *(s


20/80

In her separate !ns9ers264 to the petitions, &im:aichon. claimed that she is

a na(ura-=&rn **$*n& since she 9as born to a na(ura*ed **$*n& 'a()er and

a na(ura-=&rn **$*n& 9&()er, 9ho had reac/uired her status as such due to her

husband;s naturali=,

nineteen 03=1 da5s had alread5 passed after her father too: his Oath of !lle.iance

on October 73, 3=>= and after he 9as issued a Certificate of Naturali


21/80

In a )oint Resolution2774 dated Ma 12, 5772, the COM"&"C Second +i-ision

.ranted the petitions in the dis/ualification cases, d*s>ua*'*ed L*9%a*)&n+ as a

and*da(e '&r Re$resen(a(*ve &' ()e *rs( D*s(r*( &' Ne+r&s Or*en(a , d*re(ed

()e Pr&v*n*a Su$erv*s&r &' ()e COMELEC (& s(r*%e &u( )er na9e 'r&9 ()e

*s( &' e*+*=e and*da(es, and '&r ()e Pr&v*n*a B&ard &' Canvassers ?PBOC@

(& sus$end )er $r&a9a(*&n. In disposin. the cases, the COM"&"C Second

+i-ision made the follo9in. ratiocinationOn ()e su=s(an(*a *ssue &' ;)e()er res$&nden( J&en S-L*9%a*)&n+ *s

d*s>ua*'*ed (& run '&r ()e &n+ress*&na sea( &' ()e *rs( D*s(r*( &' Ne+r&s

Or*en(a &n ()e +r&und ()a( s)e *s n&( a na(ura-=&rn **$*n&, ;e )&d ()a(

she s s! "s#$a%&e".

Petitioners ha-e successfull5 dischar.ed their burden of proof and has

con-incin.l5 sho9n 9ith pieces of documentar5 e-idence that Ju*& On+ S,

'a()er &' )ere*n res$&nden( J&en S-L*9%a*)&n+, 'a*ed (& a>u*re**$*n& *(*ens)*$ *n ()e na(ura*a(*&n $r&eed*n+s 9hich he under9ent for the said purpose*

!n eamination of the records of Special Case No* 38@ 9ould re-eal thatthe O''*e &' ()e S&**(&r Genera ;as de$r*ved &' *(s $ar(**$a(*&n *n a ()e

s(a+es &' ()e $r&eed*n+s ()ere*n, as re/uired under Common9ealth !ct No*

@6 or the Re-ised Naturali8, !n !ct Ma:in.!dditional Pro-isions for Naturali= Order declarin. )ulio On. S5 as a Dilipino citi1, 9herein the Supreme Court declared

!nd as thou.h that 9as not enou.h, the hearin. prior to theoathta:in. of respondent $an 9as conducted 9ithout the re/uired

notice to the Solicitor General* It is true, as it appeared later, that

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn22


22/80

Discal (elu


23/80

$he respondent insists that naturali


24/80

Res$&nden( J&en S-L*9%a*)&n+ =e*n+ ()e dau+)(er &' Ju*& On+

S, and )av*n+ =een =&rn &n N&ve9=er 6, 166 , under ()e 164 P)**$$*ne

C&ns(*(u(*&n, *s a C)*nese na(*&na , and *s d*s>ua*'*ed (& run as *rs( D*s(r*(

Re$resen(a(*ve &' Ne+r&s Or*en(a.

HEREORE, the Petitions are GR!N$"+ and )ocel5n +* S5#&im:aichon. is declared as +ISQU!&IDI"+ from her candidac5 for

Representati-e of the Dirst +istrict of Ne.ros Oriental*

$he Pro-incial Super-isor of the Commission on "lections of Ne.ros

Oriental is hereb5 directed to stri:e out the name )OC"&N S#

&IME!IC'ONG from the list of eli.ible candidates for the said position, and theconcerned Board of Can-assers is hereb5 directed to hold andFor suspend the

proclamation of )OC"&N S#&IME!IC'ONG as 9innin. candidate, if an5,

until this decision has become final*

SO OR+"R"+*274

T)e PBOC ree*ved ()e J&*n( Res&u(*&n &' ()e COMELEC Se&nd D*v*s*&n

&n ()e even*n+ &' Ma 12, 5772, and a&rd*n+ sus$ended ()e $r&a9a(*&n

&' L*9%a*)&n+.58

$he follo9in. da5, or on Ma5 3?, 7886, the COM"&"C En

Banc issued Res&u(*&n N&. 37527>4 adoptin. the polic5#.uidelines of n&(

sus$end*n+ ()e $r&a9a(*&n &' ;*nn*n+ and*da(es ;*() $end*n+d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ases 9hich shall be 9ithout preudice to the continuation of the

hearin. and resolution of the in-ol-ed cases*

On Ma5 78, 7886, &im:aichon. filed 9ith the COM"&"C a M&(*&n '&r

Re&ns*dera(*&n &' ()e J&*n( Res&u(*&n &' Ma 12, 5772 and #r+en( M&(*&n (&

L*'( ()e Order Sus$end*n+ Pr&a9a(*&n*27A4

On Ma5 77, 7886, &im:aichon. filed another motion for the liftin. of the

directi-e suspendin. her proclamation, insistin. that she should be proclaimed asthe 9inner in the con.ressional race pursuant to COM"&"C Resolution No* ?8A7*2764 On same date, (illando, one of the petitioners in the dis/ualification cases, filed

an #r+en( Man*'es(a(*&n Car*'*n+ COMELEC Res&u(*&n N&. 375 ;*()

M&(*&n,27?4 pra5in. that the COM"&"C should not lift the suspension of

&im:aichon.s proclamation*

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn28


25/80

On Ma 5, 5772, the PBOC, in compliance 9ith COM"&"C Resolution

No* ?8A7, recon-ened and proclaimed &im:aichon. as the dul5 elected Member of

the 'ouse of Representati-es for the Dirst +istrict of Ne.ros Oriental*27=4

$hereafter, or on Ma5 8, 7886, Paras filed 9ith the COM"&"C a Pe(*(*&n

(& Nu*' and&r Annu ()e Pr&a9a(*&n &' J&en S-L*9%a*)&n+ as *rs(

D*s(r*( Re$resen(a(*ve &' Ne+r&s Or*en(a *n rea(*&n (& ()e Ma 12, 5772

J&*n( Res&u(*&n &' ()e COMELEC Se&nd D*v*s*&n,284 statin., amon. others,

that &im:aichon.;s proclamation -iolated the earlier order of the COM"&"C

Second +i-ision suspendin. her proclamation* $he petition, doc:eted as SPC No*

86#733, ;as d*s9*ssed = ()e COMELEC *rs( D*v*s*&n,234 ra(*&*na(*n+ ()a(

()e d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ases ;ere n&( e( '*na ;)en L*9%a*)&n+ ;as

$r&a*9ed. !ccordin.l5, her proclamation 9hich 9as -alid or le.al, effecti-el5

di-ested the COM"&"C of its urisdiction o-er the cases* $he COM"&"C Dirst

+i-ision eplained its rulin. in this 9ise

$he Commission has made its *n(en(*&n *n *ssu*n+ Res&u(*&n N&.

375 -er5 clear in that there shall be n& sus$ens*&n &' $r&a9a(*&n &' ;*nn*n+and*da(es ;*() $end*n+ d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ases *nv&v*n+, a9&n+ &()ers,

*ssues &' *(*ens)*$* !s the dis/ualification cases in-ol-in. &im:aichon. 9ere

still pendin. reconsideration b5 the en banc, the underl5in. polic5 9hich .a-erise to the issuance of the Resolution (& res$e( ()e ;* &' ()e **$*n&

ee(&ra(e, a$$*es (& ()e sus$ens*&n &' $r&a9a(*&n &' ()e ;*nn*n+

&n+ress*&na and*da(e '&r ()e *rs( D*s(r*( &' Ne+r&s Or*en(a.

HEREORE, the instant petition is dismissed*

SO ORDERED* 0"mphasis ours1

+issatisfied, Paras mo-ed for the reconsideration of the abo-e Resolution*274

Mean9hile, in a Resolution24 dated )une 7=, 7886, the COM"&"C En

Banc, in an e/uall5 di-ided -ote of , denied &im:aichon.s motion for reconsideration of the )oint Resolution of the COM"&"C Second +i-ision in the

dis/ualification cases* $he pertinent portions of the Resolution den5in. her motion

reads

Anen( ()e *ssue &'


26/80

n&(;*()s(and*n+ )er $r&a9a(*&n as *( *s &n ()*s C&99*ss*&n, and n&( ()e

H&use &' Re$resen(a(*ves Ee(&ra Tr*=una ?HRET@, 9hich has urisdiction to

re-ie9 resolutions or decisions of the COM"&"C, 9hether issued b5 a di-isionor en banc* !s stated b5 the Supreme Court in the leadin. case of Codilla v. De

Venecia, G*R* No* 3>8A8>, +ecember 38, 7887, respondent herself seasonabl5

challen.ed the -alidit5 of the resolution of the Second +i-ision in her motion for reconsideration* 'ence, ()e *ssue &' res$&nden(s d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ;as s(*

;*()*n ()e e"us*ve


27/80

It 9ould be etremel5 repu.nant to the basic concept of

the constitutionall5 .uaranteed ri.ht to suffra.e if a

candidate 9ho has not ac/uired the maorit5 or pluralit5of -otes is proclaimed 9inner and imposed as

representati-e of a constituenc5, the maorit5 of 9hich

ha-e positi-el5 declared throu.h their ballots that the5do not choose him* $o simplisticall5 assume that the

second placer 9ould ha-e recei-ed that 0 sic1 other -otes

9ould be to substitute our ud.ment for the mind of the-oters* 'e could not be considered the first amon. the

/ualified candidates because in a field 9hich ecludes

the /ualified candidate, the conditions 9ould ha-e

substantiall5 chan.ed*

$he effect of a decision declarin. a person ineli.ible tohold an office is onl5 that the election fails entirel5, that

the 9reath of -ictor5 cannot be transferred from thedis/ualified 9inner to the repudiated loser because the

la9 then as no9 onl5 authori


28/80

On )ul5 , 7886, &im:aichon. filed in the dis/ualification cases a.ainst her

a Man*'es(a(*&n and M&(*&n '&r Car*'*a(*&n and&r T& Deare ()e Pe(*(*&ns

as D*s9*ssed *n A&rdane ;*() Se(*&n , Rue 13 &' ()e COMELEC Rues

&' Pr&edure*2>4 She contended that, 9ith her proclamation, her ha-in. ta:en her

oath of office and her assumption of the position, the COM"&"C 9as di-ested of

urisdiction to hear the dis/ualification cases* She further contended that, follo9in.

Section A,2A4 Rule 3? of the COM"&"C Rules of Procedure, the dis/ualification

cases 9ould ha-e to be reheard, and if on rehearin., no decision 9ould be reached,

the action or proceedin.s should be dismissed, because the COM"&"C En

Banc 9as e/uall5 di-ided in opinion 9hen it resol-ed her motion for

reconsideration*

On an e-en date, Paras 9rote the 'ouse of Representati-es informin. it of

the COM"&"C En Banc Resolution dated )une 7=, 7886 upholdin. the )oint

Resolution of the COM"&"C Second +i-ision dated Ma5 36, 7886, 9hich

dis/ualified &im:aichon. as a con.ressional candidate*264

In the interim, then Spea:er of the 'ouse of Representati-es )ose de (enecia, )r*

0+e (enecia1 allo9ed &im:aichon. to officiall5 assume the office as a Member of

the 'ouse of Representati-es on )ul5 7, 7886, as sho9n in the )ournal of the

'ouse of Representati-es*2?4

+espite &im:aichon.s repeated pleas for the resolution of her manifestation

and motion for clarification,2=4 the COM"&"C did not resol-e the same* 'ence, on

!u.ust 3, 7886, she filed 9ith this Court a Pe(*(*&n '&r Ce')!'a' 2@84 under Rule

A>, in relation to Rule A@ of the 3==6 Rules of Ci-il Procedure doc:eted as G.R.

N&s. 123341-45 $ra*n+ '&r ()e annu9en( &' ()e Ma 12, 5772 J&*n(

Res&u(*&n &' ()e COMELEC Se&nd D*v*s*&n and ()e June 56, 5772

Res&u(*&n &' ()e COMELEC En Banc in the dis/ualification cases for ha-in. been issued 9ith .ra-e abuse of discretion amountin. to lac: of urisdiction* S)e

averred ()a( s*ne s)e ;as aread $r&a*9ed &n Ma 5, 5772 as

Re$resen(a(*ve &' ()e *rs( D*s(r*( &' Ne+r&s Or*en(a, )ad assu9ed &''*e &n

June 47, 5772, and )ad s(ar(ed (& $er'&r9 )er du(*es and 'un(*&ns as su),

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn36http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn37http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn38http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn39http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn40http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn40http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn36http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn37http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn38http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn39http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn40


29/80

()e COMELEC )ad &s( *(s ua*'*a(*&ns &' L*9%a*)&n+ s)&ud n&; =e de(er9*ned =

()e H&use &' Re$resen(a(*ves Ee(&ra Tr*=una in accordance 9ith the abo-e#

/uoted pro-ision of the Constitution*

HEREORE, premises considered, this Commission resol-ed, as it hereb5

resol-es, that all pendin. incidents relatin. to the /ualifications of )ocel5n S*&im:aichon. as Member of the 'ouse of Representati-es should no9 be

determined b5 the 'ouse of Representati-es "lectoral $ribunal*

SO ORDERED* 0"mphasis ours1

On !u.ust 7@, 7886, &ouis Birao.o 0Birao.o1, as a citi


30/80

&im:aichon., 9hich denial 9as affirmed b5 the COM"&"C En Banc in a

Resolution2@64 dated Debruar5 3, 788?*

On September >, 788?, (illando also filed 9ith this Court a Pe(*(*&n

'&r Ce')!'a' and In


31/80

A* Hhether the Spea:er of the 'ouse of Representati-es ma5 be compelled to

prohibit &im:aichon. from assumin. her duties as a Member of the 'ouse of

Representati-es*

On same da5, the Court re/uired the parties to simultaneousl5 file 9ithin

t9ent5 0781 da5s their respecti-e memoranda, after 9hich the petitions shall be

deemed submitted for resolution, 9ith or 9ithout the memoranda*

Se(*&n , Ar(*e !I of the 1632 P)**$$*ne C&ns(*(u(*&n pro-ides for the

/ualification of a Member of the 'ouse of Representati-es, thus

Se(*&n . No person shall be a Member of the 'ouse of Representati-es

unless he is a na(ura-=&rn *(*en &' ()e P)**$$*nes and, on the da5 of theelection, is at least t9ent5#fi-e 5ears of a.e, able to read and 9rite, and, ecept

the part5#list representati-es, a re.istered -oter in the district in 9hich he shall beelected, and a resident thereof for a period of not less than one 5ear immediatel5

precedin. the da5 of the election*

)en L*9%a*)&n+ '*ed )er COC, s)e s(a(ed ()ere*n ()a( s)e *s a na(ura-

=&rn **$*n& *(*en. I( ;as n&( (rue, a&rd*n+ (& ()e $e(*(*&ners *n ()e

d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ases, =eause )er 'a()er re9a*ned a C)*nese *(*en a( ()e

(*9e &' )er =*r(). The COM"&"C Second +i-ision has sided 9ith Camero and

(illando, and dis/ualified &im:aichon. to run as a con.ressional candidate in the

Dirst +istrict of Ne.ros Oriental for ha-in. failed to compl5 9ith the citi


32/80

$he proclamation of &im:aichon. 9as -alid* $he COM"&"C Second +i-ision

rendered its )oint Resolution dated Ma5 36, 7886* On Ma5 78, 7886, &im:aichon.

timel5 filed 9ith the COM"&"C En Banc her motion for reconsideration as 9ell as

for the liftin. of the incorporated directi-e suspendin. her proclamation* T)e '**n+

&' ()e 9&(*&n '&r re&ns*dera(*&n e''e(*ve sus$ended ()e e"eu(*&n &' ()e

Ma 12, 5772 J&*n( Res&u(*&n*2>84 Since the eecution of the Ma5 36, 7886 )oint

Resolution 9as suspended, there 9as no impediment to the -alid proclamation of

&im:aichon. as the 9inner* Section 7, Rule 3= of the COM"&"C Rules of

Procedure pro-ides

Sec* 7* $eriod %or &ilin' !otions %or Reconsideration. ! motion to reconsider a

decision, resolution, order or rulin. of a +i-ision shall be filed 9ithin fi-e 0>1da5s from the promul.ation thereof* Su) 9&(*&n, *' n&( *'! &!'/a, sus$ends

()e e"eu(*&n '&r *9$e9en(a(*&n &' ()e de*s*&n, res&u(*&n, &rder and

ru*n+*

In G.R. N&s. 126145-44, Paras, ho9e-er, maintained that &im:aichon. 9as

a Chinese citi, 7886, and that it too: place in a

restaurant and not at the pro-incial capitol* Dinall5, she ar.ued that &im:aichon.s

proclamation 9as -oid in accordance 9ith the Court;s pronouncement in the case

of Codilla v. De Venecia.2>34

$he Office of the Solicitor General 0OSG1 filed its Comment on the petition of

Paras, epressin. its support for the position ta:en b5 the latter*

! perusal of the ar.uments ad-anced b5 Paras and the OSG does not s9a5

the Court to rule a.ainst the -alidit5 of &im:aichon.s proclamation* No less than

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn50http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn51http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn50http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn51


33/80

the COM"&"C Dirst +i-ision has sustained the -alidit5 of her proclamation 9hen

it dismissed, b5 9a5 of a Resolution dated )une 7=, 7886, the petition filed b5

Paras to nullif5 the proclamation* Not onl5 that* $he COM"&"C Dirst +i-ision has

also adopted &im:aichon.s ar.ument that follo9in. her -alid proclamation, the

COM"&"Cs urisdiction o-er the dis/ualification cases has ceased and that the

same should be threshed out in the proper proceedin.s filed before the

'R"$* Notabl5, the dismissal of Paras petition 9as affirmed b5 the COM"&"C in

its Omnibus Order dated )anuar5 7?, 788?*

In add*(*&n, ()e va*d*( &' L*9%a*)&n+Fs $r&a9a(*&n *s *n a&rdane ;*()

COMELEC En Banc Res&u(*&n N&. 375. T)e d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ases '*ed

a+a*ns( )er re9a*ned $end*n+ as a resu( &' )er (*9e 9&(*&n '&r

re&ns*dera(*&n* (illando 0in G.R. N&s. 126587-81@, ho9e-er, maintained that

Resolution No* ?8A7 is in-alid hence, it could not be used as basis to -alidate

L*9%a*)&n+Fs $r&a9a(*&n. He ar+ued ()a( *( 9us( =e $u=*s)ed s*ne *( *s a

$&*-+u*de*ne *n ()e e"er*se &' ()e COMELECs rue-9a%*n+ $&;er. !s

such, it cannot supersede the )oint Resolution of the Second +i-ision 9hich 9as

rendered pursuant to the COM"&"Cs /uasi#udicial po9er*

'is ar.ument is specious* Resolution No* ?8A7 is not onl5 a polic5# .uideline* It is

also an administrati-e interpretation of the t9o 071 pro-isions of the 3=?6

Constitution, namel5 0i1 Section 36,2>74 !rticle (I 0ii1 Section 7071,2>4 !rticle IJ#

C Section A2>@4 of R*!* AA@A and Sections 7@32>>4 and 7@,2>A4 !rticle JJ of the

O"C. !s such, it does not ha-e to compl5 9ith the due process re/uirement* T)e

(er9 ad9*n*s(ra(*ve &nn&(es &r $er(a*ns (& ad9*n*s(ra(*&n, es$e*a

9ana+e9en(, as = 9ana+*n+ &r &ndu(*n+, d*re(*n+ &r su$er*n(end*n+, ()e

e"eu(*&n, a$$*a(*&n, &r &ndu( &' $ers&ns &r ()*n+s. I( d&es n&( en(a* an

&$$&r(un*( (& =e )eard, ()e $r&du(*&n and ;e*+)*n+ &' ev*dene, and a

de*s*&n &r res&u(*&n ()ere&n.2 T)*s *s (& =e d*s(*n+u*s)ed 'r&9 >uas*-

u*red (&

*nves(*+a(e 'a(s, &r aser(a*n ()e e"*s(ene &' 'a(s, )&d )ear*n+s, and dra;

&nus*&ns 'r&9 ()e9, as a =as*s '&r ()e*r &''**a a(*&n and (& e"er*se

d*sre(*&n &' a


34/80

Res&u(*&n N&. 375 *s a va*d e"er*se &' ()e COMELECs

&ns(*(u(*&na 9anda(ed $&;er (& $r&9u+a(e *(s &;n rues &' $r&edure

rea(*ve (& ()e &ndu( &' ()e ee(*&ns. 6 In adoptin. such polic5#.uidelines for

the Ma5 3@, 7886 National and &ocal "lections, the COM"&"C had in mind the

obecti-e of upholdin. the so-erei.n 9ill of the people and in ()e *n(eres( &'


35/80

II

2he)he'3 $*!n L/0ach!n,4s *'!c%a/a)!n3 )he HRET3 ns)ea" !& )he

COMELEC3 sh!$%" ass$/e 5$'s"c)!n !(e' )he "s#$a%&ca)!n cases.

In her petition 0G.R. N&s. 123341-45@, &im:aichon. ar.ued that her

proclamation on Ma5 7>, 7886 b5 the PBOC di-ested the COM"&"C of its

urisdiction o-er all issues relatin. to her /ualifications, and that urisdiction no9

lies 9ith the 'R"$*

B*ra&+&, &n ()e &()er )and, =e*eved &()er;*se. He ar+ued ?*n G.R. N&.

126157@ ()a( ()e *ssue &nern*n+ L*9%a*)&n+s d*s>ua*'*a(*&n *s s(* ;*()*n

()e e"us*ve


36/80

ee(*&n, re(urns, and >ua*'*a(*&ns &' ()e*r res$e(*ve Me9=ers* "ach

"lectoral $ribunal shall be composed of nine Members, three of 9hom shall be

)ustices of the Supreme Court to be desi.nated b5 the Chief )ustice, and theremainin. si shall be Members of the Senate or the 'ouse of Representati-es, as

the case ma5 be, 9ho shall be chosen on the basis of proportional representation

from the political parties and the parties or or.aniua*'*a(*&ns &' L*9%a*)&n+ s)&ud n&; =e de(er9*ned =

()e H&use &' Re$resen(a(*ves Ee(&ra Tr*=una in accordance 9ith the abo-e#

/uoted pro-ision of the Constitution*

HEREORE, premises considered, this Commission resol-ed, as it hereb5

resol-es, that all pendin. incidents relatin. to the /ualifications of )ocel5n S*&im:aichon. as Member of the 'ouse of Representati-es should no9 be

determined b5 the 'ouse of Representati-es "lectoral $ribunal*

SO ORDERED* 0"mphasis supplied1

Horth citin. also is the ratiocination of the COM"&"C Dirst +i-ision 9hen it

dismissed the petition of Paras see:in. the nullit5 of &im:aichon.;s proclamation,thus

$he present situation is similar not to the factual circumstances of Codilla, 9hichParas in-o:es, but rather to that in $lanas 9hich adheres to the .eneral rule

.i-in. urisdiction to the 'ouse of Representati-es "lectoral $ribunal* !s at the


37/80

time of &im:aichon.;s proclamation, her dis/ualification 9as not 5et final, her

proclamation 9as -alid or le.al* $his Commission no lon.er has urisdiction o-er

the case* $his, not9ithstandin. the Second +i-ision;s directi-e suspendin.&im:aichon.;s proclamation*

T)e C&99*ss*&n )as 9ade *(s *n(en(*&n *n *ssu*n+ Res&u(*&n N&. 375 ver

ear *n ()a( ()ere s)a =e n& sus$ens*&n &' $r&a9a(*&n &' ;*nn*n+

and*da(es ;*() $end*n+ d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ases, *nv&v*n+, a9&n+ &()ers,

*ssues &' *(*ens)*$. As ()e d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ases *nv&v*n+ L*9%a*)&n+

;ere s(* $end*n+ re&ns*dera(*&n = ()e En Banc, ()e under*n+ $&*

;)*) +ave r*se (& ()e *ssuane &' ()e res&u(*&n: (& res$e( ()e ;* &' ()e

**$*n& ee(&ra(e, a$$*es (& ()e sus$ens*&n &' $r&a9a(*&n &' ()e ;*nn*n+

C&n+ress*&na and*da(e '&r ()e *rs( D*s(r*( &' Ne+r&s Or*en(a.

HEREORE, the instant petition is +ISMISS"+*

SO ORDERED*

Petitioners 0in G*R* Nos* 36=378, 36=37#, and 36=7@8#@31 steadfastl5

maintained that &im:aichon.s proclamation 9as tainted 9ith irre.ularit5, 9hich

9ill effecti-el5 pre-ent the 'R"$ from ac/uirin. urisdiction*

$he fact that the proclamation of the 9innin. candidate, as in this case, 9as

alle.ed to ha-e been tainted 9ith irre.ularit5 does not di-est the 'R"$ of its

urisdiction*2A@4 $he Court has shed li.ht on this in the case of Vin#ons)C*ato,2A>4 to

the effect that

In the present case, it is not disputed that respondent Unico has alread5 been proclaimed and ta:en his oath of office as a Member of the 'ouse of

Representati-es 0$hirteenth Con.ress1 hence, the COM"&"C correctl5 ruled that

it had alread5 lost urisdiction o-er petitioner Chato;s petition* $he issues raised b5 petitioner Chato essentiall5 relate to the can-assin. of returns and alle.ed

in-alidit5 of respondent Unico;s proclamation* $hese are matters that are best

addressed to the sound ud.ment and discretion of the 'R"$* Si.nificantl5, thealle.ation that respondent Unico;s proclamation is null and -oid does not di-est

the 'R"$ of its urisdiction

2I4n an electoral contest 9here the -alidit5 of the proclamation of a 9innin. candidate 9ho has ta:en his oath of

office and assumed his post as con.ressman is raised, that issue is

best addressed to the 'R"$* $he reason for this rulin. is self#



38/80

e-ident, for it a-oids duplicit5 of proceedin.s and a clash of

urisdiction bet9een constitutional bodies, 9ith due re.ard to the

people;s mandate*

Durther, for the Court to ta:e co.ni


39/80

pro-ided b5 the 'R"$ Rules* In $an'ilinan v. Commission on Elections,2AA4 9e

ruled that 9here the candidate has alread5 been proclaimed 9inner in the

con.ressional elections, the remed5 of petitioner is to file an electoral protest 9ith

the "lectoral $ribunal of the 'ouse of Representati-es*

$he PBOC proclaimed &im:aichon. as the 9inner on Ma5 7>, 7886* $hus,

petitioners 0in G*R* Nos* 36=378, 36=37#, and 36=7@8#@31 should ha-e filed

either an election protest or petition for +uo arranto 9ithin ten da5s from Ma5

7>, 7886* But the5 did not* In fact, to date, no petition of protest or petition for +uo

arranto has been filed 9ith the 'R"$* (eril5, the ten#da5 prescripti-e period for

initiatin. a contest a.ainst &im:aichon. has lon. epired*

'o9e-er, the said ten#da5 prescripti-e period under the 3==? 'R"$Rules d&es n&( a$$ (& d*s>ua*'*a(*&n ases =ased &n *(*ens)*$ * Under the

3=?6 Constitution, Members of the 'ouse of Representati-es must be na(ura-

=&rn *(*ens n&( &n a( ()e (*9e &' ()e*r ee(*&n =u( dur*n+ ()e*r en(*re

(enure* Bein. a continuin. re/uirement, one 9ho assails a member;s citi


40/80

e"$ressed ()r&u+) ()e =a&( ann&( ure ()e v*e &' *ne*+*=**(, es$e*a *'

()e 9*s(a%en =e*eved, as *n ()*s ase, ()a( ()e and*da(e ;as

>ua*'*ed. O=v*&us, ()*s rue re>u*res s(r*( a$$*a(*&n ;)en ()e de'**en

*s a% &' *(*ens)*$. If a person see:s to ser-e in the Republic of thePhilippines,

he must o9e his total lo5alt5 to this countr5 alone, aburin. and renouncin. all

fealt5 to an5 other state*

'o9e-er, in assailin. the citi


41/80

!s earl5 as the case of -ueto v. Catolico,2A?4 9here the Court of Dirst Instance

ud.e motu proprio and not in the proper denaturali


42/80

be properl5 in-o:ed in accordance 9ith the procedure laid do9n b5 la9* Such

procedure is the cancellation of the naturali1,

Common9ealth !ct No* A4, in the manner fied in Section 3? of Common9ealth!ct No* @6, hereinbefore /uoted, namel5, upon motion made in the proper

proceedin.s b5 the Solicitor General or his representati-es, or b5 the proper

pro-incial fiscal* In &()er ;&rds, ()e *n*(*a(*ve 9us( &9e 'r&9 ()ese &''*ers,$resu9a= a'(er $rev*&us *nves(*+a(*&n *n ea) $ar(*uar ase. 0"mphasis

supplied1

Clearl5, under la9 and urisprudence, it is the State, throu.h its representati-es

desi.nated b5 statute, that ma5 /uestion the ille.all5 or in-alidl5 procured

certificate of naturali


43/80

na(ura*a(*&n $r&eed*n+s, *( '&&;s ()a( L*9%a*)&n+ re9a*ns a C)*nese

na(*&na and *s d*s>ua*'*ed (& run as and*da(e and =e ee(ed as a Me9=er &'

()e H&use &' Re$resen(a(*ves.

e ann&( res&ve ()e 9a((er &' L*9%a*)&n+s *(*ens)*$ as ()e sa9e s)&ud

)ave =een )aen+ed *n a$$r&$r*a(e $r&eed*n+s as ear*er s(a(ed.

I!

2he)he' )he COMELEC4s "s#$a%&ca)!n !& L/0ach!n,

s &na% an" e7ec$)!'.

In resol-in. this issue, pertinent is the pro-ision of Section 30b1, Rule 3? of the3== COM"&"C Rules of Procedure

Sec* 3* &inalit0 o% Decisions or Resolutions. 0b1 In Special !ctions and Special Cases, a decision or resolution of the

Commission en banc shall become final and eecutor5 after fi-e 0>1 da5s from its

promul.ation unless restrained b5 the Supreme Court*

In his Memorandum dated )une 76, 788?, Birao.o stated that the Resolution of theCOM"&"C En Banc in the dis/ualification cases became final and eecutor5 after

fi-e 0>1 da5s from its promul.ation and that the same 9as not restrained b5 this

Court pursuant to Section 30b1, Rule 3? of the 3== COM"&"C Rules

of Procedure* 'e a-erred that since &im:aichon. recei-ed a cop5 of the

COM"&"C En Banc Resolution dated )une 7=, 7886 on )ul5 , 7886, she had

until )ul5 ?, 7886 9ithin 9hich to obtain a restrainin. order from the Court to

pre-ent the same from becomin. final and eecutor5* 'o9e-er, she did not do

an5thin. to that effect* Birao.o also a-erred that &im:aichon. is .uilt5 of forumshoppin. hence, her petition must be dismissed b5 the Court*

Instead of as:in. the Court for 9hat Birao.o opined as a restrainin. order,

&im:aichon. filed 9ith this Court, on !u.ust 3, 7886, her petition

for certiorari assailin. the said COM"&"C En Banc Resolution pursuant to


44/80

Section 7,2634 Rule A@, in relation to Rule A>, 3==6 Rules of Ci-il Procedure,

postulatin. that she had thirt5 081 da5s from )ul5 @, 7886 9ithin 9hich to file the

petition, or until !u.ust , 7886* She cited Section 6, !rticle IJ of the 3=?6

Constitution, 9hich prescribes the po9er of this Court to re-ie9 decisions of

the COM"&"C,2674 thus

SEC. 2. "ach Commission shall decide b5 a maorit5 -ote of all its Members an5

case or matter brou.ht before it 9ithin sit5 da5s from the date of its submission

for decision or resolution* ! case or matter is deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filin. of the last pleadin., brief, or memorandum re/uired b5

the rules of the Commission or b5 the Commission itself* Unless other9ise

pro-ided b5 this Constitution or b5 la9, an5 decision, order, or rulin. of eachCommission ma5 be brou.ht to the Supreme Court on certiorari b5 the a..rie-ed

part5 9ithin thirt5 da5s from receipt of a cop5 thereof*

In his Comment on the petition, (illando pra5ed for the outri.ht dismissal

of &im:aichon.s petition as 0a1 it 9as filed be5ond the re.lementar5 period 0b1

&im:aichon. en.a.ed in prohibited forum shoppin. and 0c1 &im:aichon.

admitted that the issues raised ha-e become moot and academic* 'e also sou.ht to

declare &im:aichon. in contempt of court for forum shoppin.*

$he COM"&"C, throu.h the OSG, also filed its Comment, pra5in. for the denialof &im:aichon.;s petition and its dismissal for bein. moot, contendin. that 0a1 the

COM"&"C En Banc Resolution dated !u.ust 3A, 7886 has rendered the instant

petition moot and academic and 0b1 &im:aichon. :no9in.l5 and intentionall5

en.a.ed in forum shoppin.*$he OSG ar.ued that, 9ithout 9aitin. for the

resolution of her Motion for Clarification and t9o 071 successi-e motions to

resol-e said motions 9hich are pendin. before the COM"&"C En Banc,

&im:aichon. filed the present petition to /uestion the )oint Resolution dated Ma5

36, 7886 of the COM"&"C Second +i-ision, 9hich issues 9ere pendin. before

the COM"&"C En Banc. 'er act of see:in. relief from this Court 9hile there 9ere

se-eral other incidents pendin. before the COM"&"C, the final resolution in either

one of 9hich 9ill amount to res judicata in the other, clearl5 sho9ed forum

shoppin. on her part*



45/80

In her Repl5 to the abo-e Comments, &im:aichon. countered that she did not

en.a.e in forum shoppin., for had she 9aited for the COM"&"C to rule on her

manifestation and other motions, it 9ould ha-e resulted in the epiration of

the re.lementar5 period for filin. a petition for certiorari before the Court*

$he Ma5 36, 7886 )oint Resolution of the COM"&"C Second +i-ision

dis/ualif5in. &im:aichon. and suspendin. her proclamation cannot 5et be

implemented considerin. that she timel5 filed a motion for reconsideration* $hus,

pursuant to Section 30c1, Rule 3? and Section 7 Rule 3= of the COM"&"C Rules

of Procedure, the )oint Resolution has not 5et attained finalit5 for it to be

implemented*

Notabl5, the seemin. impropriet5 of the Resolution of the COM"&"C En

Banc dated )une 7=, 7886 has since been remedied b5 the promul.ation of its

Resolution dated !u.ust 3A, 7886, reco.niua*'*ed = v*r(ue &' a '*na and e"eu(&r


46/80

said Resolution dated )une 7=, 7886 is alread5 final and eecutor5 hence, it should

be respected pursuant to the principle of res judicata*

+e (enecia, on the other hand, ar.ued that he should not be faulted for honorin.

the proclamation of &im:aichon., because it had the hallmar:s of re.ularit5, and

he had no po9er to eclude an5 Member of the 'ouse of Representati-es motu

proprio* In their Comment on the petition, respondents +e (enecia, et al *,

contended that the enrollment of a Member in the Roll of Members of the 'ouse of

Representati-es and hisFher reco.nition as such becomes the 9*n*s(er*a du( of

the Secretar5 General and the 'ouse of Representati-es u$&n $resen(a(*&n =

su) Me9=er &' a va*d Cer(*'*a(e &' Pr&a9a(*&n and Oa() &' O''*e*

Res$&nden( N&+raes, as De !ene*aFs, su=s(*(u(e, '*ed a Me9&randu9 da(ed

Ju 1, 5773 s(a(*n+ ()a( under ()e *ru9s(anes, ()e H&use &'

Re$resen(a(*ves, and *(s &''**as, are ;*()&u( re&urse e"e$( (&

)&n&r ()e va*d*( &' ()e $r&a9a(*&n &' L*9%a*)&n+ un(* ()e sa9e *s

aneed, rev&%ed &r nu*'*ed, and (& &n(*nue (& re&+n*e )er as ()e du

ee(ed Re$resen(a(*ve &' ()e *rs( D*s(r*( &' Ne+r&s Or*en(a un(* *( *s

&rdered = ()*s C&ur(, as *( ;as *n C!"%%a3 (& re&+n*e s&9e=&d ese* He

;en( &n (& s(a(e ()a( a'(er assu9$(*&n = ()e Me9=er-ee(, &r )av*n+

a>u*red a $resu9$(*ve va*d (*(e (& ()e &''*e, ()e H&use &' Re$resen(a(*vesann&(, /!)$ *'!*'!, ane, rev&%e, ;*()dra; an re&+n*(*&n +*ven (& a

s*((*n+ Me9=er &r (& re9&ve )*s na9e 'r&9 *(s r&, as su) ;&ud a9&un( (& a

re9&va &' su) Me9=er 'r&9 )*s &''*e ;*()&u( due $r&ess &' a; . (eril5, it is

onl5 after a determination b5 the appropriate tribunal 0as in this case, the 'R"$1,

pursuant to a final and eecutor5 order, that the Member does not ha-e a ri.ht to

the office 0i.e., not bein. a dul5 elected Member1, that the 'ouse of

Representati-es is directed to eclude the said Member*

$heir contentions are meritorious* $he unseatin. of a Member of the 'ouse of

Representati-es should be eercised 9ith .reat caution and after the proper

proceedin.s for the ouster has been -alidl5 completed* Dor to arbitraril5 unseat

someone, 9ho obtained the hi.hest number of -otes in the elections, and durin. the


47/80

pendenc5 of the proceedin.s determinin. ones /ualification or dis/ualification,

9ould amount to disenfranchisin. the electorate in 9hom so-erei.nt5 resides*26@4

HEREORE, premises considered, the petition in G.R. N&s. 123341-

45 is GRANTED and the )oint Resolution of the COM"&"C Second +i-ision

dated Ma5 36, 7886 in SP! Nos* 86#7@6 and 86#7@? is RE!ERSED and SET

ASIDE* !ll the other petitions 0G.R. N&s. 126157, 126145-44, 126587-811 are

hereb5 DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED*

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 202202 Mach !"# 20!$

S%&'ER%O R. TAGO&%NO# Petitione#

(s.

)OUSE O* REPRESENTAT%'ES E&ECTORA& TR%BUNA& AN+ &UC, MAR%E TORRES-

GOME# Respon/ents.

+ E C % S % O N

PER&AS-BERNABE# .1

Assaile/ in this Petition fo Cetioai an/ Pohibition un/e Rule 3 of the Rules of

Cout is the Mach 22# 20!2 +ecision! of the )ouse of Repesentati(es Electoal

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn74http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/178831-32.htm#_ftn74


48/80

Tibunal 4)RET5 in )RET Case No. !0-0$! 4675 8hich /eclae/ the (ali/it9 of pi(ate

espon/ent &uc9 Maie Toes-Go:e;le/ a 'ei>e/ Petition#$ alle=in= that Richa/# 8ho

8as actuall9 a esi/ent of Colle=e Steet# East Geenhills# San uan Cit9# Meto

Manila# :isepesente/ in his CoC that he esi/e/ in "!0 Calota )ills# Can-a/ien=#O:oc Cit9. %n this e=a/# untilla assete/ that Richa/ faile/ to :eet the one 4!5

9ea esi/enc9 euie:ent un/e Section # Aticle '% of the !"D Philippine

Constitution 4Constitution5 an/ thus shoul/ be /eclae/ /isuali>e/ineli=ible to un

fo the sai/ o@ce. %n a//ition# untilla pa9e/ that Richa/cation

>le/ b9 BUENA'ENTURA O. UNT%&&A a=ainst R%C)AR+ %. GOME. Acco/in=l9#

R%C)AR+ %. GOME is +%S6UA&%*%E+ as a can/i/ate fo the O@ce of Con=ess:an#

*outh +istict of &e9te# fo lac? of esi/enc9 euie:ent.

SO OR+ERE+.

A==ie(e/# Richa/ :o(e/ fo econsi/eation but the sa:e 8as /enie/ b9 the

COME&EC En Banc thou=h a Resolution /ate/ Ma9 # 20!0.D Theeafte# in a

Manifestation of e(en /ate# Richa/ accepte/ the sai/ esolution 8ith >nalit9 Fin

o/e to enable his substitute to facilitate the >lin= of the necessa9 /ocu:ents fo

substitution.F


49/80

On Ma9 3# 20!0# &uc9 Maie Toes-Go:e; 4pi(ate espon/ent5 >le/ he CoC"

to=ethe 8ith a Ceti>cate of No:ination an/ Acceptance!0 fo: the &ibeal Pat9

en/osin= he as the pat9


50/80

/isuali>e/. Afte all# the i=ht to substitute is a pi(ile=e =i(en to a political pat9 to

eecise an/ not /epen/ent totall9 to a can/i/ate.

Nonetheless# in case of /oubt# the sa:e :ust al8a9s be esol(e/ to the

uali>cation of a can/i/ate to un in the public o@ce.

The substitution co:plie/ 8ith the euie:ents po(i/e/ un/e Section !2 in

elation to Section !$ of Co:elec Resolution No. D /ate/ Octobe # 200".

%n (ie8 of the foe=oin=# the &a8 +epat:ent RECOMMEN+S the follo8in=1

2. TO A&&O7 CAN+%+ATE &UC, MAR%E TORRES GOME AS A SUBST%TUTE

CAN+%+ATE *OR R%C)AR+ GOME1 4E:phasis an/ un/escoin= supplie/5

The follo8in= /a9# o on Ma9 "# 20!0# untilla >le/ an Ete:el9 U=ent Motion fo

Reconsi/eation!2 4Ma9 "# 20!0 Motion5 of the abo(e-:entione/ COME&EC En Banc

esolution

Pen/in= esolution of untilla


51/80

On Ma9 !!# 20!0# untilla >le/ an Ete:el9 U=ent Motion to esol(e the pen/in=

Ma9 "# 20!0 Motion elati(e to Resolution No. "0.! The sai/ :otion# ho8e(e#

e:aine/ unacte/.

On Ma9 2# 20!0# petitione >le/ a Petition!3 fo uo 8aanto befoe the )RET in

o/e to oust pi(ate espon/ent fo: he con=essional seat# clai:in= that1 4!5 she

faile/ to co:pl9 8ith the one 4!5 9ea esi/enc9 euie:ent un/e Section #

Aticle '% of the Constitution consi/ein= that the tansfe of he (ote e=istation

fo: San Rafael Bulacan! to the *outh +istict of &e9te 8as onl9 applie/ fo on

ul9 2$# 200"J 425 she /i/ not (ali/l9 substitute Richa/ as his CoC 8as (oi/ ab initioJ

an/ 4$5 pi(ate espon/ent


52/80

Rulin= of the )RET

Afte /ue pocee/in=s# the )RET issue/ the assaile/ Mach 22# 20!2 +ecision20

8hich /is:isse/ the uo 8aanto petition an/ /eclae/ that pi(ate espon/ent

8as a uali>e/ can/i/ate fo the position of &e9te Repesentati(e 4*outh

&e=islati(e +istict5. %t obse(e/ that the esolution /en9in= Richa/


53/80

2he petition is #eritorious$

A. +istinction bet8een a petition fo /isuali>cation an/ a petition to /en9 /uecouse tocancel a ceti>cate of can/i/ac9

2he O#nibus (lection Code+5 6O(C7 provides for certain re#edies to assail

a candidate’s bid for public o8ce$ .#ong these which obtain particular

signi-cance to this case are: 6%7 a petition for dis"uali-cation under

9ection ; and 6+7 a petition to deny due course to and4or cancel a

certi-cate of candidacy under 9ection )$ 2he distinctions between the

two are wellcation case un/e Section of the OEC is hin=e/ on eithe1 4a5

a can/i/atecation. Anent the latte# the

pohibite/ acts un/e Section efe to election oIenses un/e the OEC# an/ not

to (iolations of othe penal la8s.23 %n paticula# these ae1 4!5 =i(in= :one9 o

othe :ateial consi/eation to inKuence# in/uce o coupt the (otes o public

o@cials pefo:in= electoal functionsJ 425 co::ittin= acts of teois: to enhance

one


54/80

to /iscontinue such can/i/ac9 as a fo: of penal sanction bou=ht b9 the

co::ission of the abo(e-:entione/ election oIenses.

On the othe han/# a /enial of /ue couse to an/o cancellation of a CoC

pocee/in= un/e Section D of the OEC$ is pe:ise/ on a pesoncationJ he or she #ust have also #ade a false representation of the

sa#e in the CoC$$D The natue of a Section D petition 8as /iscusse/ in the case

of *e:in (. COME&EC#$ 8hee the Cout illu:ine/1

&et it be :isun/estoo/# the /enial of /ue couse to o the cancellation of the CoC is

not base/ on the lac! of "uali-cations but on a -nding that the candidate

#ade a #aterial representation that is false* 8hich :a9 elate to theuali>cations euie/ of the public o@ce heshe is unnin= fo. %t is note/ that the

candidates states in his4her CoC that he4she is eligible for the o8ce he4she

see!s$ 9ection ) of the OEC# theefoe# is to be ea/ in elation to the

constitutional an/ statuto9 po(isions on uali>cations o eligibility for public

o8ce$ 0f the candidate subse"uently states a #aterial representation in

the CoC that is false* the CO'((C* following the law* is e#powered to

deny due course to or cancel such certi-cate$ 0n/ee/# the Cout has alea/9

li?ene/ a pocee/in= un/e Section D to a uo 8aanto pocee/in= un/e Section

23$ of the OEC since the9 both /eal 8ith the eli=ibilit9 o uali>cation of a

can/i/ate# with the distinction #ainly in the fact that a >9ection )>petition is -led before procla#ation* while a petition for "uo warranto is

-led after procla#ation of the winning candidate$ 6(#phasis supplied7

Coolla9 theeto# it :ust be note/ that the /elibeateness of the :isepesentation#

:uch less onecance in a Section D petition as

it is enou=h that the pesoncation in the CoC be

false. %n this elation# Luispu/ence hol/s that an epess >n/in= that the peson

co::itte/ an9 /elibeate :isepesentation is of little conseuence in the

/ete:ination of 8hethe one


55/80

Petinentl9# 8hile a /isuali>e/ can/i/ate un/e Section is still consi/ee/ to

ha(e been a can/i/ate fo all intents an/ puposes# on the othe han/# a peson

8hose CoC ha/ been /enie/ /ue couse to an/o cancelle/ un/e Section D is

/ee:e/ to ha(e not been a can/i/ate at all. The eason bein= is that a cancelle/

CoC is consi/ee/ (oi/ ab initio an/ thus# cannot =i(e ise to a (ali/ can/i/ac9 an/

necessail9# to (ali/ (otes.! %n Tala=a (. COME&EC2 4Tala=a5# the Cout ule/ that1

7hile a peson 8ho is /isuali>e/ un/e Section is :eel9 pohibite/ to

continue as a can/i/ate# a peson 8ho ceti>cate is cancelle/ o /enie/ /ue couse

un/e Section D is not teate/ as a can/i/ate at all# as if heshe ne(e >le/ a CoC.

The foe=oin= (aiance =ains ut:ost i:potance to the pesent case consi/ein= its

i:plications on can/i/ate substitution.

B. 'ali/ CoC as a con/ition sine ua non fo can/i/ate substitution

Section DD of the OEC po(i/es that if an o@cial can/i/ate of a e=istee/ o

acce/ite/ political pat9 /ies# 8ith/a8s o is /isuali>e/ fo an9 cause# a peson

belon=in= to an/ ceti>e/ b9 the sa:e political pat9 :a9 >le a CoC to eplace the

can/i/ate 8ho /ie/# 8ith/e8 o 8as /isuali>e/. %t states that1

Sec. DD. Can/i/ates in case of /eath# /isuali>cation o 8ith/a8al of anothe. - %f

afte the last /a9 fo the >lin= of ceti>cates of can/i/ac9# an o@cial can/i/ate of a

e=istee/ o acce/ite/ political pat9 /ies# 8ith/a8s o is /isuali>e/ fo an9

cause# onl9 a peson belon=in= to# an/ ceti>e/ b9# the sa:e political pat9 :a9 >le

a ceti>cate of can/i/ac9 to eplace the can/i/ate 8ho /ie/# 8ith/e8 o 8as

/isuali>e/. 4E:phasis supplie/5

E(i/entl9# Section DD euies that thee be an Fo@cial can/i/ateF befoe can/i/atesubstitution pocee/s. Thus# 8hethe the =oun/ fo substitution is /eath#

8ith/a8al o /isuali>cation of a can/i/ate# the sai/ section uneui(ocall9 states

that onl9 an o@cial can/i/ate of a e=istee/ o acce/ite/ pat9 :a9 be

substitute/.$


56/80

As /e>ne/ un/e Section D"4a5 of the OEC# the te: Fcan/i/ateF efes to an9

peson aspiin= fo o see?in= an electi(e public o@ce 8ho has >le/ a ceti>cate of

can/i/ac9 b9 hi:self o thou=h an acce/ite/ political pat9# a==oup:ent# o

coalition of paties. Cleal9# the la8 euies that one :ust ha(e (ali/l9 >le/ a CoC

in o/e to be consi/ee/ a can/i/ate. The euie:ent of ha(in= a CoC obtains

e(en =eate i:potance if one consi/es its natue. %n paticula# a CoC fo:ali;esnot onl9 a pesoncate of can/i/ac9 is in the natue of a fo:al :anifestation to the 8hole

8ol/ of the can/i/atecation an/ /enial of /ue couse to an/o

cancellation of CoC cases (is--(is can/i/ate substitution


57/80

Pocee/in=# fo: the foe=oin= /iscouse# it is e(i/ent that thee lies a clea-cut

/istinction bet8een a /isuali>cation case un/e Section an/ /enial of /ue

couse to an/o cancellation of COC case un/e Section D (is--(is thei especti(e

eIects on can/i/ate substitution un/e Section DD.!8phi!

As eplaine/ in the case of Mian/a (. Aba9aD 4Mian/a5# a can/i/ate 8ho is

/isuali>e/ un/e Section can be (ali/l9 substitute/ pusuant to Section DD

because he e:ains a can/i/ate until /isuali>e/J but a peson 8hose CoC has

been /enie/ /ue couse to an/o cancelle/ un/e Section D cannot be substitute/

because he is not consi/ee/ a can/i/ate. State/ /iIeentl9# since thee 8oul/ be

no can/i/ate to spea? of un/e a /enial of /ue couse to an/o cancellation of a

CoC case# then thee 8oul/ be no can/i/ate to be substitute/J the sa:e /oes not

obtain# ho8e(e# in a /isuali>cation case since thee e:ains to be a can/i/ate to

be substitute/# althou=h his o he can/i/ac9 is /iscontinue/.

On this note# it is euall9 e(elato9 that Section DD epessl9 enu:eates the

instances 8hee substitution is pe:issible# that is 8hen an o@cial can/i/ate of a

e=istee/ o acce/ite/ political pat9 F/ies# 8ith/a8s o is /isuali>e/ fo an9

cause.F Noticeabl9# :ateial :isepesentation cases ae not inclu/e/ in the sai/

section an/ theefoe# cannot be a (ali/ basis to pocee/ 8ith can/i/ate

substitution.

+. Application to the case at ba

0n this case* it is undisputed that Richard was dis"uali-ed to run in the

'ay %,* +,%, elections due to his failure to co#ply with the one year

residency re"uire#ent$?& 2he confusion* however* ste##ed fro# the use

of the word >dis"uali-ed> in the February %)* +,%, Resolution of the

CO'((C First Division* which was adopted by the CO'((C (n @anc in

granting the substitution of private respondent* and even furtherperpetuated by the 1R(2 in denying the "uo warranto petition$ 0n short* a

-nding that Richard was #erely dis"uali-ed A and not that his CoC was

denied due course to and4or cancelled A would #ean that he could have

been validly substitute by private respondent* thereby legiti#i/ing her

candidacy$


58/80

,et the fact that the COME&EC *ist +i(isione/ Petition to +isualif9 Can/i/ate fo &ac? of

6uali>cationF32 8hich pa9e/ that the COME&EC /eclae Richa/ F+%S6UA&%*%E+

an/ %NE&%G%B&E fo: see?in= the o@ce of Me:be of the )ouse of Repesentati(esF

an/ F that his Ceti>cate of Can/i/ac9 be +EN%E+ +UE COURSE an/o

CANCE&&E+F3$ caie/ 8ith it the /enial of /ue couse to an/o cancellation of

Richa/cation# the cancellation of the can/i/atecate of

can/i/ac9 ha/ li?e8ise been /enie/ /ue couse an/ cancelle/.

The Cout ules that it 8as.

Pi(ate espon/entcall9 pa9e/ fo the follo8in=1


59/80

7)ERE*ORE# it is espectfull9 pa9e/ that the Ceti>cate of Can/i/ac9 >le/ b9

espon/ent fo the position of Ma9o fo the Cit9 of Snatia=o be not =i(en /ue

couse an/o cancelle/.

Othe eliefs Lust an/ euitable in the pe:ises ae li?e8ise pa9e/ fo.

%n esol(in= the petition >le/ b9 pi(ate espon/ent specif9in= a (e9 paticula

elief# the COME&EC ule/ fa(oabl9 in the follo8in= :anne1

7)ERE*ORE# in (ie8 of the foe=oin=# the Co::ission 4*%RST +%'%S%ON5 GRANTS

the Petition. Respon/ent OSE FPe:peF M%RAN+A is heeb9 +%S6UA&%*%E+ fo:

unnin= fo the position of :a9o of Santia=o Cit9# %sabela# in the Ma9 !!# !""national an/ local elections.

SO OR+ERE+.

*o: a plain ea/in= of the /ispositi(e potion of the COME&EC esolution of Ma9 3#

!"" in SPA No. "-0!"# it is su@cientl9 clea that the pa9e speci>call9 an/

paticulal9 sou=ht in the petition 8as GRANTE+# thee bein= no uali>cation on the

:atte 8hatsoe(e. The /isuali>cation 8as si:pl9 ule/ o(e an/ abo(e the=antin= of the speci>c pa9e fo /enial of /ue couse an/ cancellation of the

ceti>cate of can/i/ac9.

Thee is no /ispute that the co:plaint o petition >le/ b9 pi(ate espon/ent in SPA

No. "-0!" is one to /en9 /ue couse an/ to cancel the ceti>cate of can/i/ac9 of

ose FPe:peF Mian/a. Thee is li?e8ise no uestion that the sai/ petition 8asGRANTE+ 8ithout an9 uali>cation 8hatsoe(e. %t is athe clea# theefoe# that

8hethe o not the COME&EC =ante/ an9 futhe elief in SPA No. "-0!" b9

/isualif9in= the can/i/ate# the fact e:ains that the sai/ petition 8as =ante/ an/

that the ceti>cate of can/i/ac9 of ose FPe:peF Mian/a 8as /enie/ /ue couse

an/ cancelle/. 4E:phasis an/ un/escoin= supplie/5


60/80

The sa:e ule 8as late /iscusse/ in the case of Tala=a# (i;1

$. Gantin= 8ithout an9 uali>cation o petition in SPA No. 0"-02"4+C5 :anifeste/

COME&ECe/ an/ to cancel his CoC

%n Mian/a (. Aba9a# the speci>c elief that the petition pa9e/ fo 8as that the CoC

Fbe not =i(en /ue couse an/o cancelle/F. The COME&EC cate=oicall9 =ante/

Fthe p

Date post:	07-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	alice-marie-alburo
View:	222 times
Download:	0 times

election cases 2.docx

Documents