Kasilag v.

Rodriguez, 69 PHIL 217

FACTS: Kasilag and Emiliana Ambrosio entered a contract of mortgage of improveme
nts of land acquired as homestead to secure the payment of the indebtedness og P
1,000 plus interest. The parties stipulated that Ambrosio was to pay the debt wi
th interest within 4 years., and in such case, mortgage would not have any effec
t. They agreed that Ambrosio would execute a deed of sale if it would not be pai
d within 4 years and that she would pay the tax on the land. After a year, it tu
rned out that she wasnt able to pay the tax. Hence, they entered a verbal agreeme
nt whereby she conveyed to the latter the possession of the land on the conditio
n that they would not collect the interest of the loan, would attend to the paym
ent of the land tax, would benefit by the fruits of the land, & would introduce
improvement thereof.
ISSUE: W/N the petitioner should be deemed the possessor of the land in good fai
th because he was unaware of any flaw in his title or in the manner of its acqui
sition by which it is invalidated
HELD: The possession of the land is illegal and void because such contract is ex
pressly prohibited by Sec 116 of Act No 1874 as amended. Petitioner acted in bad
faith in taking possession of the land because he knew that the contract he mad
e with Ambrosio was an absolute sale and that the latter could not sell the land
because it is prohibited by Sec 116 of Act 2874. Gross and inexcusable ignoranc
e of the law may not be the basis of good faith.
Frivaldo vs. Comelec
G.R. No. 120295 (June 28, 1996)
Facts:
Juan G. Frivaldo was proclaimed governor-elect of the province of Sorsogon on 22
January 1988, and assumed office in due time. On 27 October 1988, the league of
Municipalities, Sorsogon Chapter represented by its President, Salvador Estuye,
who was also suing in his personal capacity, filed with the Comelec a petition
for the annulment of Frivaldos election and proclamation on the ground that he wa
s not a Filipino citizen, having been naturalized in the United States on 20 Jan
uary 1983. Frivaldo admitted that he was naturalized in the United States as all
eged but pleaded the special and affirmative defenses that he had sought America
n citizenship only to protect himself against President Marcos. His naturalizati
on, he said, was ?merely forced upon himself as a means of survival against the
unrelenting persecution by the Martial Law Dictators agents abroad.? He also argu
ed that the challenge to his title should be dismissed, being in reality a quo w
arranto petition that should have been filed within 10 days from his proclamatio
n, in accordance with Section 253 of the Omhibus Election Code.
Issue:
Whether Juan G. Frivaldo was a citizen of the Philippines at the time of his el
ection on 18 January 1988, as provincial governor of Sorsogon.
Held:
The Commission on Elections has the primary jurisdiction over the question as th
e sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns and qualification
s of the members of the Congress and elective provincial and city officials. How
ever, the decision on Frivaldos citizenship has already been made by the COMELEC
through its counsel, the Solicitor General, who categorically claims that Frival
do is a foreigner. The Solicitors stance is assumed to have bben taken by him aft
er consultation with COMELEC and with its approval. It therefore represents the
decision of the COMELEC itself that the Supreme Court may review. In the certifi
cate of candidacy filed on 19 November 1987, Frivaldo described himself as a ?na
tural-born? citizen of the Philippines, omitting mention of any subsequent loss
of such status. The evidence shows, however, that he was naturalized as a citize
n of the United States in 1983 per the certification from the United States Dist
rict Court, Northern District of California, as duly authenticated by Vice Consu
l Amado P. Cortez of the Philippine Consulate General in San Francisco, Californ
ia, U.S.A. There were many other Filipinos in the United States similarly situat
ed as Frivaldo, and some of them subject to greater risk than he, who did not fi
nd it necessary nor do they claim to have been coerced to abandon their cherishe
d status as Filipinos. Still, if he really wanted to disavow his American citize
nship and reacquire Philippine citizenship, Frivaldo should have done so in acco
rdance with the laws of our country. Under CA No. 63 as amended by CA No. 473 an
d PD No. 725, Philippine citizenship may be reacquired by direct act of Congress
, by naturalization, or by repatriation. He failed to take such categorical acts
. Rhe anomaly of a person sitting as provincial governor in this country while o
wing exclusive allegiance to another country cannot be permitted. The fact that
he was elected by the people of Sorsogon does not excuse this patent violation o
f the salutary rule limiting public office and employment only to the citizens o
f this country. The will of the people as expressed through the ballot cannot cu
re the vice of ineligibilityQualifications for public office are continuing requ
irements and must be possessed not only at the time of appointment or election o
r assumption of office but during the officers entire tenure. Once any of the req
uired qualifications is lost, his title may be seasonably challenged. Frivaldo i
s disqualified from serving as governor of Sorsogon.