Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No. 180088 January 19, 2009 MANUEL B.

JAPZON, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS an JAIME S. T!, Respondents. DECISI N C"ICO#NAZARIO, J.: !his is a Petition for Revie" on Certiorari under Rules #$ % and #&' of the Revised Rules of Court see(in) to annul and set aside the Resolution * dated *% +ul, '--. of the /irst Division of public respondent Co00ission on Elections 1C ME2EC3 and the Resolution $ dated '4 Septe0ber '--. of C ME2EC en banc, in SPA No. -.5&#4, for havin) been rendered "ith )rave abuse of discretion, a0ountin) to lac( or e6cess of 7urisdiction. Both petitioner Manuel B. +ap8on 1+ap8on3 and private respondent +ai0e S. !, 1!,3 "ere candidates for the ffice of Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, in the local elections held on %$ Ma, '--.. n %& +une '--., +ap8on instituted SPA No. -.5&#4 b, filin) before the C ME2EC a Petition & to dis:ualif, and;or cancel !,<s Certificate of Candidac, on the )round of 0aterial 0isrepresentation. +ap8on averred in his Petition that !, "as a for0er natural5born /ilipino, havin) been born on = ctober %=$* in "hat "as then Pa0bu7an Sur, >ernani Eastern Sa0ar 1no" the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Easter Sa0ar3 to spouses An) Chi0 !, 1a Chinese3 and Crisanta Aranas Su0i)uin 1a /ilipino3. !, eventuall, 0i)rated to the ?nited States of A0erica 1?SA3 and beca0e a citi8en thereof. !, had been residin) in the ?SA for the last '& ,ears. @hen !, filed his Certificate of Candidac, on '4 March '--., he falsel, represented therein that he "as a resident of Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, for one ,ear before %$ Ma, '--., and "as not a per0anent resident or i00i)rant of an, forei)n countr,. @hile !, 0a, have applied for the reac:uisition of his Philippine citi8enship, he never actuall, resided in Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, for a period of one ,ear i00ediatel, precedin) the date of election as re:uired under Section *= of Republic Act No. .%#-, other"ise (no"n as the 2ocal 9overn0ent Code of %==%. In fact, even after filin) his application for reac:uisition of his Philippine citi8enship, !, continued to 0a(e trips to the ?SA, the 0ost recent of "hich "as on *% ctober '--# lastin) until '- +anuar, '--.. Moreover, althou)h !, alread, too( his ath of Alle)iance to the Republic of the Philippines, he continued to co0port hi0self as an A0erican citi8en as proven b, his travel records. >e had also failed to renounce his forei)n citi8enship as re:uired b, Republic Act No. =''&, other"ise (no"n as the Citi8enship Retention and Reac:uisition Act of '--*, or related la"s. >ence, +ap8on pra,ed for in his Petition that the C ME2EC order the dis:ualification of !, fro0 runnin) for public office and the cancellation of the latter<s Certificate of Candidac,. In his Ans"er# to +ap8on<s Petition in SPA No. -.5&#4, !, ad0itted that he "as a natural5born /ilipino "ho "ent to the ?SA to "or( and subse:uentl, beca0e a naturali8ed A0erican citi8en. !, clai0ed, ho"ever, that prior to filin) his Certificate of Candidac, for the ffice of Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, on '4 March '--., he alread, perfor0ed the follo"in) actsA 1%3 "ith the enact0ent of Republic Act No. =''&, )rantin) dual citi8enship to

natural5born /ilipinos, !, filed "ith the Philippine Consulate 9eneral in 2os An)eles, California, ?SA, an application for the reac:uisition of his Philippine citi8enshipB 1'3 on ' ctober '--&, !, e6ecuted an ath of Alle)iance to the Republic of the Philippines before Noe0i !. Dia8, Cice Consul of the Philippine Consulate 9eneral in 2os An)eles, California, ?SAB 1*3 !, applied for a Philippine passport indicatin) in his application that his residence in the Philippines "as at A. Mabini St., Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar. !,<s application "as approved and he "as issued on '# ctober '--& a Philippine passportB 1$3 on 4 March '--#, !, personall, secured and si)ned his Co00unit, !a6 Certificate 1C!C3 fro0 the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, in "hich he stated that his address "as at Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0arB 1&3 thereafter, on %. +ul, '--#, !, "as re)istered as a voter in Precinct --%*A, Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0arB 1#3 !, secured another C!C dated $ +anuar, '--. a)ain statin) therein his address as Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0arB and 1.3 finall,, !, e6ecuted on %= March '--. a dul, notari8ed Renunciation of /orei)n Citi8enship. 9iven the afore0entioned facts, !, ar)ued that he had reac:uired his Philippine citi8enship and renounced his A0erican citi8enship, and he had been a resident of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, for 0ore than one ,ear prior to the %$ Ma, '--. elections. !herefore, !, sou)ht the dis0issal of +ap8on<s Petition in SPA No. -.5&#4. Pendin) the sub0ission b, the parties of their respective Position Papers in SPA No. -.5&#4, the %$ Ma, '--. elections "ere alread, held. !, ac:uired the hi)hest nu0ber of votes and "as declared Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, b, the Municipal Board of Canvassers on %& Ma, '--... /ollo"in) the sub0ission of the Position Papers of both parties, the C ME2EC /irst Division rendered its Resolution4 dated *% +ul, '--. in favor of !,. !he C ME2EC /irst Division found that !, co0plied "ith the re:uire0ents of Sections * and & of Republic Act No. =''& and reac:uired his Philippine citi8enship, to "itA Philippine citi8enship is an indispensable re:uire0ent for holdin) an elective public office, and the purpose of the citi8enship :ualification is none other than to ensure that no alien, i.e., no person o"in) alle)iance to another nation, shall )overn our people and our countr, or a unit of territor, thereof. Evidences revealed that D!,E e6ecuted an ath of Alle)iance before Noe0i !. Dia8, Cice Consul of the Philippine Consulate 9eneral, 2os An)eles, California, ?.S.A. on ctober ', '--& and e6ecuted a Renunciation of /orei)n Citi8enship on March %=, '--. in co0pliance "ith R.A. DNo.E =''&. Moreover, neither is D!,E a candidate for or occup,in) public office nor is in active service as co00issioned or non5co00issioned officer in the ar0ed forces in the countr, of "hich he "as naturali8ed citi8en.= !he C ME2EC /irst Division also held that !, did not co00it 0aterial 0isrepresentation in statin) in his Certificate of Candidac, that he "as a resident of Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, for at least one ,ear before the elections on %$ Ma, '--.. It reasoned thatA Althou)h D!,E has lost his do0icile in DtheE Philippines "hen he "as naturali8ed as ?.S. citi8en in %=#=, the reac:uisition of his Philippine citi8enship and subse:uent acts thereof proved that he has been a resident of Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar for at least

one 1%3 ,ear before the elections held on %$ Ma, '--. as he represented in his certificate of candidac,D.E As held in Co:uilla vs. Co0elecA F!he ter0 Gresidence< is to be understood not in its co00on acceptation as referrin) to Gd"ellin)< or Ghabitation,< but rather to Gdo0icile< or le)al residence, that is, Gthe place "here a part, actuall, or constructivel, has his per0anent ho0e, "here he, no 0atter "here he 0a, be found at an, )iven ti0e, eventuall, intends to return and re0ain 1ani0us 0anendi3.< A do0icile of ori)in is ac:uired b, ever, person at birth. It is usuall, the place "here the child<s parents reside and continues until the sa0e is abandoned b, ac:uisition of ne" do0icile 1do0icile of choice3. In the case at bar, petitioner lost his do0icile of ori)in in ras b, beco0in) a ?.S. citi8en after enlistin) in the ?.S. Nav, in %=#&. /ro0 then on and until Nove0ber %-, '---, "hen he reac:uired Philippine citi8enship, petitioner "as an alien "ithout an, ri)ht to reside in the Philippines save as our i00i)ration la"s 0a, have allo"ed hi0 to sta, as a visitor or as a resident alien. Indeed, residence in the ?nited States is a re:uire0ent for naturali8ation as a ?.S. citi8en. !itle 4, H%$'.1a3 of the ?nited States Code providesA Re:uire0ents of naturali8ationA Residence 1a3 No person, e6cept as other"ise provided in this subchapter, shall be naturali8ed unless such applicant, 1%3 ,ear i00ediatel, precedin) the date of filin) his application for naturali8ation has resided continuousl,, after bein) la"full, ad0itted for per0anent residence, "ithin the ?nited States for at least five ,ears and durin) the five ,ears i00ediatel, precedin) the date of filin) his petition has been ph,sicall, present therein for periods totalin) at least half of that ti0e, and "ho has resided "ithin the State or "ithin the district of the Service in the ?nited States in "hich the applicant filed the application for at least three 0onths, 1'3 has resided continuousl, "ithin the ?nited States fro0 the date of the application up to the ti0e of ad0ission to citi8enship, and 1*3 durin) all period referred to in this subsection has been and still is a person of )ood 0oral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the ?nited States, and "ell disposed to the )ood order and happiness of the ?nited States. 1E0phasis added3 In Caasi v. Court of Appeals, this Court ruled that i00i)ration to the ?nited States b, virtue of a G)reencard,< "hich entitles one to reside per0anentl, in that countr,, constitutes abandon0ent of do0icile in the Philippines. @ith 0ore reason then does naturali8ation in a forei)n countr, result in an abandon0ent of do0icile in the Philippines. Records sho"ed that after ta(in) an ath of Alle)iance before the Cice Consul of the Philippine Consulate 9eneral on ctober ', '--&, D!,E applied and "as issued a Philippine passport on ctober '#, '--&B and secured a co00unit, ta6 certificate fro0 the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur on March 4, '--#. Evidentl,, D!,E "as alread, a resident of Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar for 0ore than one 1%3 ,ear before the elections on Ma, %$, '--..%- 1E0phasis ours.3

!he dispositive portion of the *% +ul, '--. Resolution of the C ME2EC /irst Division, thus, readsA @>ERE/ RE, pre0ises considered, the petition is DENIED for lac( of 0erit. %% +ap8on filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the fore)oin) Resolution of the C ME2EC /irst Division. n '4 Septe0ber '--., the C ME2EC en banc issued its Resolution %' den,in) +ap8on<s Motion for Reconsideration and affir0in) the assailed Resolution of the C ME2EC /irst Division, on the basis of the follo"in) ratiocinationA @e have held that a Natural born /ilipino "ho obtains forei)n citi8enship, and subse:uentl, spurns the sa0e, is b, clear acts of repatriation a /ilipino Citi8en and hence :ualified to run as a candidate for an, local post. 6666 It 0ust be noted that absent an, sho"in) of irre)ularit, that overturns the prevailin) status of a citi8en, the presu0ption of re)ularit, re0ains. Citi8enship is an i0portant aspect of ever, individual<s constitutionall, )ranted ri)hts and privile)es. !his is essential in deter0inin) "hether one has the ri)ht to e6ercise pre5deter0ined political ri)hts such as the ri)ht to vote or the ri)ht to be elected to office and as such ri)hts sprin) fro0 citi8enship. "in) to its pri0ordial i0portance, it is thus presu0ed that ever, person is a citi8en of the countr, in "hich he residesB that citi8enship once )ranted is presu0abl, retained unless voluntaril, relin:uishedB and that the burden rests upon "ho alle)es a chan)e in citi8enship and alle)iance to establish the fact. ur revie" of the Motion for Reconsideration sho"s that it does not raise an, ne" or novel issues. !he ar)u0ents 0ade therein have alread, been dissected and e6pounded upon e6tensivel, b, the first Division of the Co00ission, and there appears to be no reason to depart fro0 the "isdo0 of the earlier resolution. @e thus affir0 that D!,E did not co00it an, 0aterial 0isrepresentation "hen he acco0plished his Certificate of Candidac,. !he onl, )round for denial of a Certificate of Candidac, "ould be "hen there "as 0aterial 0isrepresentation 0eant to 0islead the electorate as to the :ualifications of the candidate. !here "as none in this case, thus there is not enou)h reason to den, due course to the Certificate of Candidac, of Respondent +a0es S. !,.%* /ailin) to obtain a favorable resolution fro0 the C ME2EC, +ap8on proceeded to file the instant Petition for Certiorari, rel,in) on the follo"in) )roundsA A. !>E C MMISSI N N E2EC!I NS C MMI!!ED 9RACE AB?SE / DISCRE!I N AM ?N!IN9 ! 2ACI R EJCESS / +?RISDIC!I N @>EN I! CAPRICI ?S2K, @>IMSICA22K AND @AN! N2K DISRE9ARDED !>E PARAME!ERS SE! BK 2A@ AND +?RISPR?DENCE / R !>E ACL?ISI!I N / A NE@ D MICI2E / C> ICE AND RESIDENCE.%$

B. !>E C MMISSI N N E2EC!I NS C MMI!!ED 9RACE AB?SE / DISCRE!I N AM ?N!IN9 ! 2ACI R EJCESS / +?RISDIC!I N @>EN I! CAPRICI ?S2K, @>IMSICA22K AND @AN! N2K RE/?SED ! CANCE2 D!K<SE CER!I/ICA!E / CANDIDACK, AND C NSEL?EN!2K DEC2ARE D+APM NE AS !>E D?2K E2EC!ED MAK R / 9EN. MACAR!>?R, EAS!ERN SAMAR. %& +ap8on ar)ues that "hen !, beca0e a naturali8ed A0erican citi8en, he lost his do0icile of ori)in. !, did not establish his residence in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines, 7ust because he reac:uired his Philippine citi8enship. !he burden falls upon !, to prove that he established a ne" do0icile of choice in 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, a burden "hich he failed to dischar)e. !, did not beco0e a resident of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, b, 0erel, e6ecutin) the ath of Alle)iance under Republic Act No. =''&. !herefore, +ap8on asserts that !, did not 0eet the one5,ear residenc, re:uire0ent for runnin) as a 0a,oralt, candidate in the %$ Ma, '--. local elections. !he one5,ear residenc, re:uire0ent for those runnin) for public office cannot be "aived or liberall, applied in favor of dual citi8ens. Conse:uentl,, +ap8on believes he "as the onl, re0ainin) candidate for the ffice of Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, and is the onl, placer in the %$ Ma, '--. local elections. +ap8on pra,s for the Court to annul and set aside the Resolutions dated *% +ul, '--. and '4 Septe0ber '--. of the C ME2EC /irst Division and en banc, respectivel,B to issue a ne" resolution den,in) due course to or cancelin) !,<s Certificate of Candidac,B and to declare +ap8on as the dul, elected Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar. As e6pected, !, sou)ht the dis0issal of the present Petition. Accordin) to !,, the C ME2EC alread, found sufficient evidence to prove that !, "as a resident of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, one ,ear prior to the %$ Ma, '--. local elections. !he Court cannot evaluate a)ain the ver, sa0e pieces of evidence "ithout violatin) the "ell5entrenched rule that findin)s of fact of the C ME2EC are bindin) on the Court. !, disputes +ap8on<s assertion that the C ME2EC co00itted )rave abuse of discretion in renderin) the assailed Resolutions, and avers that the said Resolutions "ere based on the evidence presented b, the parties and consistent "ith prevailin) 7urisprudence on the 0atter. Even assu0in) that !,, the "innin) candidate for the ffice of Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, is indeed dis:ualified fro0 runnin) in the local elections, +ap8on as the second placer in the sa0e elections cannot ta(e his place. !he ffice of the Solicitor 9eneral 1 S93, 0ean"hile, is of the position that !, failed to 0eet the one5,ear residenc, re:uire0ent set b, la" to :ualif, hi0 to run as a 0a,oralt, candidate in the %$ Ma, '--. local elections. !he S9 opines that !, "as unable to prove that he intended to re0ain in the Philippines for )ood and ulti0atel, 0a(e it his ne" do0icile. Nonetheless, the S9 still pra,s for the dis0issal of the instant Petition considerin) that +ap8on, )atherin) onl, the second hi)hest nu0ber of votes in the local elections, cannot be declared the dul, elected Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, even if !, is found to be dis:ualified fro0 runnin) for the said position. And since it too( a position adverse to that of the C ME2EC, the S9 pra,s fro0 this Court to allo" the C ME2EC to file its o"n Co00ent on +ap8on<s Petition. !he Court, ho"ever, no lon)er acted on this particular pra,er of the C ME2EC, and "ith the sub0ission of the Me0oranda b, +ap8on, !,, and the S9, it alread, sub0itted the case for decision.

!he Court finds no 0erit in the Petition at bar. !here is no dispute that !, "as a natural5born /ilipino. >e "as born and raised in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines. >o"ever, he left to "or( in the ?SA and eventuall, beca0e an A0erican citi8en. n ' ctober '--&, !, reac:uired his Philippine citi8enship b, ta(in) his ath of Alle)iance to the Republic of the Philippines before Noe0i !. Dia8, Cice Consul of the Philippine Consulate 9eneral in 2os An)eles, California, ?SA, in accordance "ith the provisions of Republic Act No. =''&. %# At this point, !, still held dual citi8enship, i.e., A0erican and Philippine. It "as onl, on %= March '--. that !, renounced his A0erican citi8enship before a notar, public and, resultantl,, beca0e a pure Philippine citi8en a)ain. It bears to point out that Republic Act No. =''& )overns the 0anner in "hich a natural5born /ilipino 0a, reac:uire or retain %. his Philippine citi8enship despite ac:uirin) a forei)n citi8enship, and provides for his ri)hts and liabilities under such circu0stances. A close scrutin, of said statute "ould reveal that it does not at all touch on the 0atter of residence of the natural5born /ilipino ta(in) advanta)e of its provisions. Republic Act No. =''& i0poses no residenc, re:uire0ent for the reac:uisition or retention of Philippine citi8enshipB nor does it 0ention an, effect of such reac:uisition or retention of Philippine citi8enship on the current residence of the concerned natural5born /ilipino. Clearl,, Republic Act No. =''& treats citi8enship independentl, of residence. !his is onl, lo)ical and consistent "ith the )eneral intent of the la" to allo" for dual citi8enship. Since a natural5born /ilipino 0a, hold, at the sa0e ti0e, both Philippine and forei)n citi8enships, he 0a, establish residence either in the Philippines or in the forei)n countr, of "hich he is also a citi8en. Residenc, in the Philippines onl, beco0es relevant "hen the natural5born /ilipino "ith dual citi8enship decides to run for public office. Section &1'3 of Republic Act No. =''& readsA SEC. &. Civil and Political Ri)hts and 2iabilities. N !hose "ho retain or reac:uire Philippine citi8enship under this Act shall en7o, full civil and political ri)hts and be sub7ect to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities under e6istin) la"s of the Philippines and the follo"in) conditionsA 6666 1'3 !hose see(in) elective public office in the Philippines shall 0eet the :ualifications for holdin) such public office as re:uired b, the Constitution and e6istin) la"s and, at the ti0e of the filin) of the certificate of candidac,, 0a(e a personal and s"orn renunciation of an, and all forei)n citi8enship before an, public officer authori8ed to ad0inister an oath. Brea(in) do"n the afore5:uoted provision, for a natural born /ilipino, "ho reac:uired or retained his Philippine citi8enship under Republic Act No. =''&, to run for public office, he 0ustA 1%3 0eet the :ualifications for holdin) such public office as re:uired b, the Constitution and e6istin) la"sB and 1'3 0a(e a personal and s"orn renunciation of an, and all forei)n citi8enships before an, public officer authori8ed to ad0inister an oath.

!hat !, co0plied "ith the second re:uire0ent is be,ond :uestion. n %= March '--., he personall, e6ecuted a Renunciation of /orei)n Citi8enship before a notar, public. B, the ti0e he filed his Certificate of Candidac, for the ffice of Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, on '4 March '--., he had alread, effectivel, renounced his A0erican citi8enship, (eepin) solel, his Philippine citi8enship. !he other re:uire0ent of Section &1'3 of Republic Act No. =''& pertains to the :ualifications re:uired b, the Constitution and e6istin) la"s. Article J, Section * of the Constitution left it to Con)ress to enact a local )overn0ent code "hich shall provide, a0on) other thin)s, for the :ualifications, election, appoint0ent and re0oval, ter0, salaries, po"ers and functions and duties of local officials, and all other 0atters relatin) to the or)ani8ation and operation of the local units. Pursuant to the fore)oin) 0andate, Con)ress enacted Republic Act No. .%#-, the 2ocal 9overn0ent Code of %==%, Section *= of "hich la,s do"n the follo"in) :ualifications for local elective officialsA SEC. *=. Lualifications. N 1a3 An elective local official 0ust be a citi8en of the PhilippinesB a re)istered voter in the baran)a,, 0unicipalit,, cit, or province or, in the case of a 0e0ber of the san))unian) panlala"i)an, san))unian) panlun)sod, or san))unian ba,an, the district "here he intends to be electedB a resident therein for at least one 1%3 ,ear i00ediatel, precedin) the da, of the electionB and able to read and "rite /ilipino or an, other local lan)ua)e or dialect. 6666 1c3 Candidates for the position of 0a,or or vice 0a,or of independent co0ponent cities, co0ponent cities, or 0unicipalities 0ust be at least t"ent,5one 1'%3 ,ears of a)e on election da,. !he challen)e a)ainst !,<s :ualification to run as a candidate for the ffice of Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, centers on his purported failure to 0eet the one5,ear residenc, re:uire0ent in the said 0unicipalit,. !he ter0 FresidenceF is to be understood not in its co00on acceptation as referrin) to Fd"ellin)F or Fhabitation,F but rather to Fdo0icileF or le)al residence, that is, Fthe place "here a part, actuall, or constructivel, has his per0anent ho0e, "here he, no 0atter "here he 0a, be found at an, )iven ti0e, eventuall, intends to return and re0ain 1ani0us 0anendi3.F %4 A do0icile of ori)in is ac:uired b, ever, person at birth. It is usuall, the place "here the child<s parents reside and continues until the sa0e is abandoned b, ac:uisition of ne" do0icile 1do0icile of choice3. In Co:uilla,%= the Court alread, ac(no"led)ed that for an individual to ac:uire A0erican citi8enship, he 0ust establish residence in the ?SA. Since !, hi0self ad0itted that he beca0e a naturali8ed A0erican citi8en, then he 0ust have necessaril, abandoned the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines, as his do0icile of ori)inB and transferred to the ?SA, as his do0icile of choice.

As has alread, been previousl, discussed b, this Court herein, !,<s reac:uisition of his Philippine citi8enship under Republic Act No. =''& had no auto0atic i0pact or effect on his residence;do0icile. >e could still retain his do0icile in the ?SA, and he did not necessaril, re)ain his do0icile in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines. !, 0erel, had the option to a)ain establish his do0icile in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines, said place beco0in) his ne" do0icile of choice. !he len)th of his residence therein shall be deter0ined fro0 the ti0e he 0ade it his do0icile of choice, and it shall not retroact to the ti0e of his birth. >o" then could it be established that !, indeed established a ne" do0icile in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, PhilippinesO In Papanda,an, +r. v. Co00ission on Elections, '- the Court provided a su00ation of the different principles and concepts in 7urisprudence relatin) to the residenc, :ualification for elective local officials. Pertinent portions of the ratio in Papanda,an are reproduced belo"A ur decisions have applied certain tests and concepts in resolvin) the issue of "hether or not a candidate has co0plied "ith the residenc, re:uire0ent for elective positions. !he principle of ani0us revertendi has been used to deter0ine "hether a candidate has an Fintention to returnF to the place "here he see(s to be elected. Corollar, to this is a deter0ination "hether there has been an Fabandon0entF of his for0er residence "hich si)nifies an intention to depart therefro0. In Caasi v. Court of Appeals, this Court set aside the appealed orders of the C ME2EC and the Court of Appeals and annulled the election of the respondent as Municipal Ma,or of Bolinao, Pan)asinan on the )round that respondent<s i00i)ration to the ?nited States in %=4$ constituted an abandon0ent of his do0icile and residence in the Philippines. Bein) a )reen card holder, "hich "as proof that he "as a per0anent resident or i00i)rant of the ?nited States, and in the absence of an, "aiver of his status as such before he ran for election on +anuar, %4, %=44, respondent "as held to be dis:ualified under H#4 of the 0nibus Election Code of the Philippines 1Batas Pa0bansa Bl). 44%3. In Co v. Electoral !ribunal of the >ouse of Representatives, respondent +ose n), +r. "as proclai0ed the dul, elected representative of the 'nd District of Northern Sa0ar. !he >ouse of Representatives Electoral !ribunal 1>RE!3 upheld his election a)ainst clai0s that he "as not a natural born /ilipino citi8en and a resident of 2aoan), Northern Sa0ar. In sustainin) the rulin) of the >RE!, this Court, citin) /a,pon v. Luirino, applied the concept of ani0us revertendi or Fintent to return,F statin) that his absence fro0 his residence in order to pursue studies or practice his profession as a certified public accountant in Manila or his re)istration as a voter other than in the place "here he "as elected did not constitute loss of residence. !he fact that respondent 0ade periodical 7ourne,s to his ho0e province in 2aoa) revealed that he al"a,s had ani0us revertendi. In Abella v. Co00ission on Elections and 2arra8abal v. Co00ission on Elections, it "as e6plained that the deter0ination of a person<s le)al residence or do0icile lar)el, depends upon the intention that 0a, be inferred fro0 his acts, activities, and utterances. In that case, petitioner Adelina 2arra8abal, "ho had obtained the hi)hest nu0ber of votes in the local elections of /ebruar, %, %=44 and "ho had thus been proclai0ed as the dul, elected )overnor, "as dis:ualified b, the C ME2EC for lac( of residence and re)istration :ualifications, not bein) a resident nor a re)istered voter of Ianan)a, 2e,te. !he C ME2EC ruled that the atte0pt of

petitioner 2arra8abal to chan)e her residence one ,ear before the election b, re)isterin) at Ianan)a, 2e,te to :ualif, her to run for the position of )overnor of the province of 2e,te "as proof that she considered herself a resident of r0oc Cit,. !his Court affir0ed the rulin) of the C ME2EC and held that petitioner 2arra8abal had established her residence in r0oc Cit,, not in Ianan)a, 2e,te, fro0 %=.& up to the ti0e that she ran for the position of Provincial 9overnor of 2e,te on /ebruar, %, %=44. !here "as no evidence to sho" that she and her husband 0aintained separate residences, i.e., she at Ianan)a, 2e,te and her husband at r0oc Cit,. !he fact that she occasionall, visited Ianan)a, 2e,te throu)h the ,ears did not si)nif, an intention to continue her residence after leavin) that place. In Ro0ualde8 v. R!C, Br. ., !acloban Cit,, the Court held that Fdo0icileF and FresidenceF are s,non,0ous. !he ter0 Fresidence,F as used in the election la", i0ports not onl, an intention to reside in a fi6ed place but also personal presence in that place, coupled "ith conduct indicative of such intention. FDo0icileF denotes a fi6ed per0anent residence to "hich "hen absent for business or pleasure, or for li(e reasons, one intends to return. In that case, petitioner Philip 9. Ro0ualde8 established his residence durin) the earl, %=4-<s in Baran)a, Malbo), !olosa, 2e,te. It "as held that the sudden departure fro0 the countr, of petitioner, because of the EDSA People<s Po"er Revolution of %=4#, to )o into self5e6ile in the ?nited States until favorable conditions had been established, "as not voluntar, so as to constitute an abandon0ent of residence. !he Court e6plained that in order to ac:uire a ne" do0icile b, choice, there 0ust concur 1%3 residence or bodil, presence in the ne" localit,, 1'3 an intention to re0ain there, and 1*3 an intention to abandon the old do0icile. !here 0ust be ani0us 0anendi coupled "ith ani0us non revertendi. !he purpose to re0ain in or at the do0icile of choice 0ust be for an indefinite period of ti0eB the chan)e of residence 0ust be voluntar,B and the residence at the place chosen for the ne" do0icile 0ust be actual. ?lti0atel,, the Court recapitulates in Papanda,an, +r. that it is the fact of residence that is the decisive factor in deter0inin) "hether or not an individual has satisfied the residenc, :ualification re:uire0ent. As espoused b, !,, the issue of "hether he co0plied "ith the one5,ear residenc, re:uire0ent for runnin) for public office is a :uestion of fact. Its deter0ination re:uires the Court to revie", e6a0ine and evaluate or "ei)h the probative value of the evidence presented b, the parties before the C ME2EC. !he C ME2EC, ta(in) into consideration the ver, sa0e pieces of evidence presentl, before this Court, found that !, "as a resident of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, one ,ear prior to the %$ Ma, '--. local elections. It is a6io0atic that factual findin)s of ad0inistrative a)encies, such as the C ME2EC, "hich have ac:uired e6pertise in their field are bindin) and conclusive on the Court. An application for certiorari a)ainst actions of the C ME2EC is confined to instances of )rave abuse of discretion a0ountin) to patent and substantial denial of due process, considerin) that the C ME2EC is presu0ed to be 0ost co0petent in 0atters fallin) "ithin its do0ain. '% !he Court even "ent further to "ill not be disturbed b, courts substantial evidence in support concerns the C ME2EC, as the sa, that the rule that factual findin)s of ad0inistrative bodies of 7ustice, e6cept "hen there is absolutel, no evidence or no of such findin)s, should be applied "ith )reater force "hen it fra0ers of the Constitution intended to place the C ME2ECP

created and e6plicitl, 0ade independent b, the Constitution itselfPon a level hi)her than statutor, ad0inistrative or)ans. !he factual findin) of the C ME2EC en banc is therefore bindin) on the Court.'' !he findin)s of facts of :uasi57udicial a)encies "hich have ac:uired e6pertise in the specific 0atters entrusted to their 7urisdiction are accorded b, this Court not onl, respect but even finalit, if the, are supported b, substantial evidence. nl, substantial, not preponderance, of evidence is necessar,. Section &, Rule %** of the Rules of Court provides that in cases filed before ad0inistrative or :uasi57udicial bodies, a fact 0a, be dee0ed established if it is supported b, substantial evidence, or that a0ount of relevant evidence "hich a reasonable 0ind 0i)ht accept as ade:uate to 7ustif, a conclusion. '* !he assailed Resolutions dated *% +ul, '--. and '4 Septe0ber '--. of the C ME2EC /irst Division and en banc, respectivel,, "ere both supported b, substantial evidence and are, thus, bindin) and conclusive upon this Court. !,<s intent to establish a ne" do0icile of choice in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines, beca0e apparent "hen, i00ediatel, after reac:uirin) his Philippine citi8enship on ' ctober '--&, he applied for a Philippine passport indicatin) in his application that his residence in the Philippines "as at A. Mabini St., Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar. /or the ,ears '--# and '--., !, voluntaril, sub0itted hi0self to the local ta6 7urisdiction of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, b, pa,in) co00unit, ta6 and securin) C!Cs fro0 the said 0unicipalit, statin) therein his address as A. Mabini St., Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar. !hereafter, !, applied for and "as re)istered as a voter on %. +ul, '--# in Precinct --%*A, Baran)a, #, Poblacion, 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar. In addition, !, has also been bodil, present in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines, since his arrival on $ Ma, '--#, inar)uabl,, 7ust a little over a ,ear prior to the %$ Ma, '--. local elections. +ap8on 0aintains that !,<s trips abroad durin) said period, i.e., to Ban)(o(, !hailand 1fro0 %$ to %4 +ul, '--#3, and to the ?SA 1fro0 *% ctober '--# to %= +anuar, '--.3, indicate that !, had no intention to per0anentl, reside in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines. !he C ME2EC /irst Division and en banc, as "ell as this Court, ho"ever, vie" these trips differentl,. !he fact that !, did co0e bac( to the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines, after said trips, is a further 0anifestation of his ani0us 0anendi and ani0us revertendi. !here is no basis for this Court to re:uire !, to sta, in and never leave at all the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, for the full one5,ear period prior to the %$ Ma, '--. local elections so that he could be considered a resident thereof. !o the contrar,, the Court has previousl, ruled that absence fro0 residence to pursue studies or practice a profession or re)istration as a voter other than in the place "here one is elected, does not constitute loss of residence.'$ !he Court also notes, that even "ith his trips to other countries, !, "as actuall, present in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines, for at least nine of the %' 0onths precedin) the %$ Ma, '--. local elections. Even if len)th of actual sta, in a place is not necessaril, deter0inative of the fact of residence therein, it does stron)l, support and is onl, consistent "ith !,<s avo"ed intent in the instant case to establish residence;do0icile in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar.

+ap8on repeatedl, brin)s to the attention of this Court that !, arrived in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, on $ Ma, '--# onl, to co0pl, "ith the one5,ear residenc, re:uire0ent, so !, could run as a 0a,oralt, candidate in the %$ Ma, '--. elections. In A:uino v. C ME2EC,'& the Court did not find an,thin) "ron) in an individual chan)in) residences so he could run for an elective post, for as lon) as he is able to prove "ith reasonable certaint, that he has effected a chan)e of residence for election la" purposes for the period re:uired b, la". As this Court alread, found in the present case, !, has proven b, substantial evidence that he had established residence;do0icile in the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, b, $ Ma, '--#, a little over a ,ear prior to the %$ Ma, '--. local elections, in "hich he ran as a candidate for the ffice of the Ma,or and in "hich he )arnered the 0ost nu0ber of votes. /inall,, "hen the evidence of the alle)ed lac( of residence :ualification of a candidate for an elective position is "ea( or inconclusive and it clearl, appears that the purpose of the la" "ould not be th"arted b, upholdin) the victor<s ri)ht to the office, the "ill of the electorate should be respected. /or the purpose of election la"s is to )ive effect to, rather than frustrate, the "ill of the voters. '# !o successfull, challen)e !,<s dis:ualification, +ap8on 0ust clearl, de0onstrate that !,<s ineli)ibilit, is so patentl, anta)onistic to constitutional and le)al principles that overridin) such ineli)ibilit, and thereb, )ivin) effect to the apparent "ill of the people "ould ulti0atel, create )reater pre7udice to the ver, de0ocratic institutions and 7uristic traditions that our Constitution and la"s so 8ealousl, protect and pro0ote. In this case, +ap8on failed to substantiate his clai0 that !, is ineli)ible to be Ma,or of the Municipalit, of 9eneral Macarthur, Eastern Sa0ar, Philippines. @>ERE/ RE, pre0ises considered, the instant Petition for Certiorari is DISMISSED. S RDERED. $. C"ICO#NAZARIO

MINITA Associate +ustice