Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
For the second time around, believing that he is 1992, petitioner Labo filed the instant petition for
a Filipino ctizen, Ramon Labo, Jr filed his COC review with prayer, among others, for the
for mayor of Baguio City on March 23, 1992 for issuance of a temporary restraining order to set
the May 11, 1992 elections. Petitioner Roberto aside the May 9, 1992 resolution of respondent
Ortega on other hand, also filed his COC for the Comelec; to render judgment declaring him as a
same office on March 25, 1992. Filipino citizen; and to direct respondent Comelec
On March 26, 1992, petitioner Ortega filed a to proceed with his proclamation in the event he
the COMELEC on the ground that Labo is not a Petitioner Ortega argues that respondent
outcome of this case in the event the issue is Commission shall, after five (5) days from
elevated to the Supreme Court either on appeal receipt of a copy thereof by the parties, be final
certificate of candidacy had already become final repudiated by the electorate. He was obviously
and executory a day earlier, or on May 14, 1992, not the choice of the people of Baguio City.
An individual does not lose her domicile even if Petitioner filed another CoC amending the
she has lived and maintained residences in certificate. Petitioner stated in Item 8 of his
different places. In the case at bench, the certificate that he had resided in the constituency
evidence adduced by Motejo lacks the degree of for l year and 13 days.
persuasiveness as required to convince the court
that an abandonment of domicile of origin in favor Petitioner filed his Answer praying for the
of a domicile of choice indeed incurred. It cannot dismissal of the disqualification case. On the
be correctly argued that Marcos lost her domicile same day, a hearing was conducted by the
of origin by operation of law as a result of her COMELEC wherein petitioner presented in
marriage to the late President Ferdinand E. evidence, his Affidavit, lease contract between
Marcos. petitioner and Leonor Feliciano.
Petitioner Rommel Jalosjos was born in Quezon The question of residence is a question of
City. He migrated to Australia when he was eight intention. To determine compliance with the
years old and acquired Australian citizenship. In residency/domicile requirement, jurisprudence
2008, he returned to the Philippines and lived in has laid down the following guidelines:
Zamboanga, he took an oath of allegiance to the
Philippines and was issued a certificate of
reacquisition of citizenship by the Bureau of (a) every person has a domicile or
Immigration and he renounced his Australian residence somewhere;
citizenship.
Jalosjos then filed a certificate of candidacy The facts show that Jalosjos' domicile of origin
(COC) for Governor of Zamboanga Sibugay for was Quezon city. When he acquired Australian
the 2010 elections. Erasmo filed a petition to citizenship, Australia became his domicile by
cancel the COC on the ground of failure to comply operation of law and by choice. On the other
with the one year residency requirement of the hand, when he came to the Philippines in
Local Government Code (LGC). November 2008 to live with his brother in
Zamboanga Sibugay, it is evident that Jalosjos
COMELEC held that Jalosjos failed to present did so with intent to change his domicile for good.
ample proof of a bona fide intention to establish a He left Australia, gave up his Australian
domicile in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. It held that citizenship, and renounced his allegiance to that
country and reacquired his old citizenship by very beginning, and was merely a de facto
taking an oath of allegiance to the Philippines. By officer. The eligible candidate who garnered the
his acts, Jalosjos forfeited his legal right to live in highest number of votes must assume the
Australia, clearly proving that he gave up his office. The rule on succession in the Local
domicile there. And he has since lived nowhere Government Code does not apply (Svetlana
else except in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. Jalosjos v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 193314, 25
June 2013
To hold that Jalosjos has not established a new
domicile in Zamboanga Sibugay despite the loss DELA TORRE V. COMELEC (G.R. No. 121592;
of his domicile of origin (Quezon City) and his July 5, 1996)
domicile of choice and by operation of law
(Australia) would violate the settled maxim that a FACTS:
man must have a domicile or residence Petitioner Rolando dela Torre was disqualified
somewhere. from running as mayor of Cavinti Laguna on the
ground that he was convicted of violation the Anti-
Neither can COMELEC conclude that Jalosjos Fencing Law.
did not come to settle his domicile in Ipil since he
has merely been staying at his brother's house. He argues that he should not be disqualified
A candidate is not required to have a house in because he is serving probation of his sentence
order to establish his residence or domicile in that and hence, the execution of his judgment was
place. It is enough that he should live there even suspended together with all its legal
if it be in a rented house or in the house of a friend consequences.
or relative. To insist that the candidate own the
ISSUE:
house where he lives would make property a WON Dela Torre is disqualified to run for public
qualification for public office. What matters is that office.
Jalosjos has proved two things: actual physical
presence in Ipil and an intention of making it his HELD:
domicile. Sec.40 of LGC provides:
Disqualifications.
As evidence, Jalosjos presented his next-door The following persons are disqualified from
neighbors who testified that he was physically running for any elective local position:
present in Ipil, he presented correspondence with (a) Those sentenced by final judgment for an
political leaders and local and national party offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense
mates, furthermore, he is a registered voter by punishable by one (1) year or more of
final judgement of the RTC. The court also noted imprisonment within two (2) years after serving
that Jalosjos has since acquired a lot in Ipil and a sentence;
fish pond in San Isidro, Naga, Zamboanga
Sibugay. This, without a doubt is sufficient to Moral turopitude is considered as an act of
establish his intent to set his domicile in Ipil, baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private
duties which a man owes his fellow men, or to
Zamboanga Sibugay.
society in general, contrary to the accepted and
DISPOSITIVE customary rule of right and duty between man
and woman or conduct contrary to justice,
WHEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the petition honesty, modesty, or good morals.
and SETS ASIDE the Resolution of the
COMELEC Second Division dated February 11, In this case of fencing, actual knowledge by the
2010 and the Resolution of the COMELEC En "fence" of the fact that property received is stolen
Banc dated May 4, 2010 that disqualified displays the same degree of malicious
petitioner Rommel Jalosjos from seeking election deprivation of one's rightful property as that which
animated the robbery or theft which, by their very
as Governor of Zamboanga Sibugay.
nature, are crimes of moral turpitude. Hence Dela
A candidate who was elected but was later Torre is disqualified from seeking public office.
disqualified for failing to meet the residency
requirement was never a valid candidate from the
With regard to his argument that he is under
The presence of the 2nd element represents
probation, the court ruled that the legal effect of
probation is only to suspend the execution of the moral turpitude as stated in the ruling of People v
sentence. Atty. Fe Tuanda where conviction for violation of
Dela Torre's conviction subsists and remains BP 22 involves deceit and affects the good moral
totally unaffected notwithstanding the grant of character of a person.
probation. In fact, a judgment of conviction in a
criminal case ipso facto attains finality when the
accused applies for probation, although it is not URBANO M. MORENO vs. COMELEC, ET AL.
executory pending resolution of the application G.R. No. 168550. August 10, 2006
for probation.
FACTS: Norma L. Mejes (Mejes) filed a petition
to disqualify Moreno from running for Punong
Villaber v COMELEC GR No. 148326 11.15.01 Barangay on the ground that the latter was
convicted by final judgment of the crime of
Arbitrary Detention. The Comelec en banc
F: Petitioner seeks to annul Comelec resolution granted her petition and disqualified Moreno.
Moreno filed an answer averring that the petition
disqualifying him as congressional candidate of
states no cause of action because he was already
Davao Del Sur and for the cancellation of his granted probation. Allegedly, following the case
certificate of candidacy and denial of motion for of Baclayon v. Mutia, the imposition of the
sentence of imprisonment, as well as the
reconsideration. Petitioner was disqualified upon accessory penalties, was thereby suspended.
the petition of his rival candidate for Moreno also argued that under Sec. 16 of the
Probation Law of 1976 (Probation Law), the final
disqualification on grounds of his previous discharge of the probation shall operate to restore
conviction in violation of BP 22 (bouncing check to him all civil rights lost or suspended as a result
of his conviction and to fully discharge his liability
law) which constitutes moral turpitude, a ground for any fine imposed.
for disqualification for electoral candidacy under
However, the Comelec en banc assails Sec.
the Omnibus Election Code.
40(a) of the Local Government Code which
provides that those sentenced by final judgment
I: WON a violation of BP 22 constitutes a for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an
offense punishable by one (1) year or more of
disqualification for electoral candidacy. imprisonment, within two (2) years after serving
sentence, are disqualified from running for any
elective local position. Since Moreno was
R: A violation of BP 22 involves the following released from probation on December 20, 2000,
elements: disqualification shall commence on this date and
end two (2) years thence. The grant of probation
to Moreno merely suspended the execution of his
1. Accused makes, draws, issues any sentence but did not affect his disqualification
check to apply to account or for value; from running for an elective local office.
2. Accused knows at the time of the On his petition, Moreno argues that the
issuance that there is no sufficient fund disqualification under the Local Government
Code applies only to those who have served their
on the drawee bank for the payment of sentence and not to probationers because the
the check in full upon its presentment. latter do not serve the adjudged sentence. The
Probation Law should allegedly be read as an
3. The check is subsequently dishonored by
exception to the Local Government Code
the drawee bank. because it is a special law which applies only to
probationers. Further, even assuming that he is
disqualified, his subsequent election as Punong
Barangay allegedly constitutes an implied pardon Citizenship by the Bureau of Immigration. On
of his previous misconduct. September 1, 2009 he renounced his Australian
citizenship, executing a sworn renunciation of the
ISSUE: Does Moreno’s probation grant him the same in compliance with Republic Act (R.A.)
right to run in public office? 9225. From the time of his return, Jalosjos
acquired a residential property in the same village
HELD: Yes. Sec. 16 of the Probation Law
where he lived. He applied for registration as a
provides that "[t]he final discharge of the
voter in the Municipality of Ipil but respondent
probationer shall operate to restore to him all civil
rights lost or suspended as a result of his Erasmo, the Barangay Captain, opposed the said
conviction and to fully discharge his liability for act. Election Registration Board approved it and
any fine imposed as to the offense for which included Jalosjos’ name in the COMELEC voters
probation was granted." Thus, when Moreno was list. Erasmo filed before the MTC a petition for the
finally discharged upon the court's finding that he exclusion of Jalosjos’ name from the official
has fulfilled the terms and conditions of his voters list. MTC denied Erasmo’s petition. He
probation, his case was deemed terminated and appealed to RTC but RTC ruled same as MTC’s.
all civil rights lost or suspended as a result of his On November 28, 2009 Jalosjos filed his
conviction were restored to him, including the Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for Governor of
right to run for public office. Zamboanga Sibugay Province for the May 10,
2010 elections. Erasmo filed a petition to deny
It is important to note that the disqualification
due course or to cancel Jalosjos’ COC on the
under Sec. 40(a) of the Local Government Code
covers offenses punishable by one (1) year or ground that Jalosjos made material
more of imprisonment, a penalty which also misrepresentation in the same since he failed to
covers probationable offenses. In spite of this, the comply with (1) the requirements of R.A. 9225
provision does not specifically disqualify and (2) the one-year residency requirement of the
probationers from running for a local elective Local Government Code. COMELEC ruled
office. against Jalosjos, because it failed to comply with
the 1-year residency ruequirement. Jalosjos won
Probation Law should be construed as an the elections
exception to the Local Government Code. While
the Local Government Code is a later law which ISSUE: w/n Jalosjos failed to comply with the 1-
sets forth the qualifications and disqualifications year residency requirement
of local elective officials, the Probation Law is a
special legislation which applies only to HELD: Yes. It is clear from the facts that Quezon
probationers. It is a canon of statutory City was Jalosjos’ domicile of origin, the place of
construction that a later statute, general in its his birth. His domicile was changed from Quezon
terms and not expressly repealing a prior special City to Australia when he migrated there at the
statute, will ordinarily not affect the special age of eight, acquired Australian citizenship, and
provisions of such earlier statute. lived in that country for 26 years. Australia
became his domicile by operation of law and by
choice. But, when he came to the Philippines in
Jalosjos v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 193237,
November 2008 to live with his brother in
October 9, 2012
Zamboanga Sibugay, it is evident that Jalosjos
FACTS: Rommel Jalosjos was born in Quezon did so with intent to change his domicile for good.
City on October 26, 1973. He migrated to He left Australia, gave up his Australian
Australia in 1981 when he was eight years old citizenship, and renounced his allegiance to that
and there acquired Australian citizenship. On country. In addition, he reacquired his old
November 22, 2008, at age 35, he decided to citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance to the
return to the Philippines and lived with his brother Republic of the Philippines, resulting in his being
in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. Four days upon his issued a Certificate of Reacquisition of Philippine
return, he took an oath of allegiance to the Citizenship by the Bureau of Immigration. By his
Republic of the Philippines, hence, he was issued acts, Jalosjos forfeited his legal right to live in
a Certificate of Reacquisition of Philippine Australia, clearly proving that he gave up his
domicile there. And he has since lived nowhere for a local elective post, that of the Mayor of the
else except in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. City of Manila.
ATTY. ALICIA RISOS-VIDAL, ALFREDO S. LIM Petitioner Risos-Vidal filed a Petition for
PETITIONER-INTERVENOR, Disqualification against former President Estrada
before the COMELEC because of Estrada’s
VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND
Conviction for Plunder by the Sandiganbayan
JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA
Sentencing Him to Suffer the Penalty of
Reclusion Perpetua with Perpetual Absolute
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.:
Disqualification. Petitioner relied on Section 40 of
NATURE: the Local Government Code (LGC), in relation to
These are petitions including: Section 12 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC)
1) a Petition for Certiorari filed by Atty. Alicia
Risos-Vidal, which essentially prays for the In a Resolution dated April 1, 2013, the
issuance of the writ of certiorari annulling and COMELEC, Second Division, dismissed the
setting aside the April 1, 2013 and April 23, petition for disqualification holding that President
2013 Resolutions of the Commission on Estrada’s right to seek public office has been
Elections (COMELEC), Second Division and En effectively restored by the pardon vested upon
banc, respectively. him by former President Gloria M. Arroyo.
(2) a Petition-in-Intervention[ filed by Alfredo S. Estrada won the mayoralty race in May 13, 2013
Lim praying to be declared the 2013 winning elections. Petitioner-intervenor Alfredo Lim
candidate for Mayor of the City of Manila in view garnered the second highest votes intervene and
of private respondent former President Joseph seek to disqualify Estrada for the same ground as
Ejercito Estrada’s) disqualification to run for and the contention of Risos-Vidal and praying that he
hold public office be proclaimed as Mayor of Manila.
ISSUE:
FACTS: Whether or not the COMELEC committed grave
On September 12, 2007, the Sandiganbayan abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
convicted former President Estrada, a former of jurisdiction in ruling that former President
President of the Republic of the Philippines, for Estrada is qualified to vote and be voted for in
the crime of plunder and was sentenced to suffer public office as a result of the pardon granted to
the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua and the him by former President Arroyo.
accessory penalties of civil interdiction during the
period of sentence and perpetual absolute HELD:
disqualification. No. The COMELEC did not commit grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
On October 25, 2007, however, former President excess of jurisdiction in issuing the assailed
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo extended executive Resolutions. The arguments forwarded by
clemency, by way of pardon, to former President Risos-Vidal fail to adequately demonstrate any
Estrada explicitly states that He is hereby factual or legal bases to prove that the assailed
restored to his civil and political rights. COMELEC Resolutions were issued in a
“whimsical, arbitrary or capricious exercise of
On November 30, 2009, former President power that amounts to an evasion or refusal to
Estrada filed a Certificate of Candidacy[7] for the perform a positive duty enjoined by law” or were
position of President but was opposed by three so “patent and gross” as to constitute grave
petitions seeking for his disqualification. None of abuse of discretion.
the cases prospered and MRs were denied by
Comelec En Banc. Estrada only managed to
garner the second highest number of votes on the Former President Estrada was granted
May 10, 2010 synchronized elections. an absolute pardon that fully restored all his civil
and political rights, which naturally includes the
On October 2, 2012, former President Estrada right to seek public elective office, the focal point
once more ventured into the political arena, and of this controversy. The wording of the pardon
filed a Certificate of Candidacy,[10] this time vying extended to former President Estrada is
complete, unambiguous, and unqualified. It is FACTS:
likewise unfettered by Articles 36 and 41 of the
Revised Penal Code. The only reasonable,
objective, and constitutional interpretation of the In 1981, Basco was removed from his position as
language of the pardon is that the same in fact Deputy Sheriff for serious misconduct.
conforms to Articles 36 and 41 of the Revised Subsequently, he ran as a candidate for councilor
Penal Code. in the Second District of the City of Manila during
the 1988, local elections. He won and assumed
office. After his term, Basco sought re-election.
The proper interpretation of Articles 36 and 41 Again, he won. However, he found himself facing
of the Revised Penal Code. lawsuits filed by his opponents who wanted to
A close scrutiny of the text of the pardon dislodge him from his position.
extended to former President Estrada shows that
both the principal penalty of reclusion Petitioner argues that Basco should be
perpetua and its accessory penalties are disqualified from running for any elective position
included in the pardon. The sentence which since he had been “removed from office as a
states that “(h)e is hereby restored to his civil and result of an administrative case” pursuant to
political rights,” expressly remitted the accessory Section 40 (b) of Republic Act No. 7160.
penalties that attached to the principal penalty
of reclusion perpetua. Hence, even if we apply
Articles 36 and 41 of the Revised Penal Code, it For a third time, Basco was elected councilor in
is indubitable from the text of the pardon that the 1995. Expectedly, his right to office was again
accessory penalties of civil interdiction and contested. In 1995, petitioner Grego filed with the
perpetual absolute disqualification were COMELEC a petition for disqualification. The
expressly remitted together with the principal COMELEC conducted a hearing and ordered the
penalty of reclusion perpetua. parties to submit their respective memoranda.
FALLO:
RULING: No. The Supreme Court found no grave
Petition is dismissed abuse of discretion on the part of COMELEC in
dismissing the petition for disqualification,
however, the Court noted that they do not agree
WILMER GREGO, petitioner, VS.
with its conclusions and reasons in the assailed
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND
resolution.
HUMBERTO BASCO, respondents (DIGEST)
TEODORA SOBEJANA-CONDON v.
RULING: COMELEC, GR No. 198742, 2012-08-10
Facts:
No. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition.
The COMELEC committed no grave abuse of petitioner is a natural-born Filipino citizen... she
discretion in disqualifying petitioner as candidate became a naturalized Australian citizen owing to
for Chairman in the Barangay elections of 2007. her marriage to a certain Kevin Thomas Condon.
she filed an application to re-acquire Philippine
Lopez was born a Filipino but he deliberately citizenship... pursuant to
sought American citizenship and renounced his
Filipino citizenship. He later on became a dual The application was approved and the petitioner
citizen by re-acquiring Filipino citizenship. took her oath of allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines... the petitioner filed an unsworn
Declaration of Renunciation of Australian
R.A. No. 9225 expressly provides for the Citizenship before the Department of Immigration
conditions before those who re-acquired Filipino and Indigenous Affairs, Canberra, Australia,
citizenship may run for a public office in the which in turn issued the Order dated September
Philippines. 27, 2006 certifying that she has... ceased to be
an Australian citizen.
Section 5 of the said law states: petitioner ran for Mayor in
Caba, La Union... in the 2007 elections. She lost
Section 5. Civil and Political Rights and Liabilities.
– Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine She again sought elective office during the May
citizenship under this Act shall enjoy full civil and 10, 2010 elections this time for the position of
political rights and be subject to all attendant Vice-Mayor.
liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws
and was proclaimed as... the winning candidate.
of the Philippines and the following conditions:
private respondents... filed separate petitions for
quo warranto questioning the... petitioner's
(2) Those seeking elective public office in the
eligibility
Philippines shall meet the qualification for holding
such public office as required by the Constitution The petitions similarly sought the petitioner's
and existing laws and, at the time of the filing of disqualification from holding her elective post on
the certificate of candidacy, make a personal and the ground that she is a dual citizen and that she
sworn renunciation of any and all foreign failed to execute a "personal and sworn
renunciation of any and all foreign... citizenship
before any public officer authorized to administer sworn renunciation of... any and all foreign
an oath" as imposed by citizenship before any public officer authorized to
administer an oath... she filed a renunciation of
R.A. No. 9225. Australian citizenship in Canberra, Australia.
trial court held that the petitioner's failure to Admittedly, however, the same was not under
comply with oath contrary to the exact mandate of Section
5(2) that the renunciation of... foreign citizenship
R.A. No. 9225 rendered her ineligible to run and must be sworn before an officer authorized to
hold public office. administer oath.
the personal... declaration of renunciation she Hence, Section 5(2) of Republic Act No. 9225
filed in Australia was not under oath. compels natural- born Filipinos, who have been
naturalized as citizens of a foreign country, but
The petitioner appealed to the COMELEC but the who reacquired or retained their Philippine
appeal was dismissed citizenship (1) to take the oath of allegiance under
Section 3 of Republic Act No. 9225,... and (2) for
Hence, the present petition ascribing grave abuse
those seeking elective public offices in the
of discretion to the COMELEC en banc.
Philippines, to additionally execute a personal
Issues: and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign
citizenship before an authorized public officer
For purposes of determining the petitioner's prior or simultaneous to the filing of their
eligibility to run for public office, whether the certificates of... candidacy, to qualify as
"sworn renunciation of foreign citizenship"... in candidates in Philippine elections.
Section 5(2) of R.A. No. 9225 is a mere pro-forma
requirement. [T]he intent of the legislators was not only for
Filipinos reacquiring or retaining their Philippine
Ruling: citizenship under Republic Act No. 9225 to take
their oath of allegiance to the Republic of the
Petitioner is disqualified from running for elective
Philippines, but also to explicitly renounce their
office for failure to renounce her Australian
foreign... citizenship if they wish to run for elective
citizenship in accordance with Section 5(2) of
posts in the Philippines. To qualify as a candidate
R.A. No. 9225.
in Philippine elections, Filipinos must only have
R.A. No. 9225 allows the retention and re- one citizenship, namely, Philippine citizenship.
acquisition of Filipino citizenship for natural-born
it is an additional qualification for elective office
citizens who have lost their Philippine
specific only to Filipino citizens who re-acquire
citizenship... by taking an oath of allegiance to the
their citizenship under Section 3 of R.A. No. 9225.
Republic
It is the operative act that restores their right to
The oath is an abbreviated repatriation process run for public office. The petitioner's failure to...
that restores one's Filipino citizenship and all civil comply therewith in accordance with the exact
and political rights and obligations concomitant tenor of the law, rendered ineffectual the
therewith, subject to certain conditions imposed Declaration of Renunciation of Australian
in Section 5, viz: Citizenship she executed
Sec. 5. Civil and Political Rights and Liabilities. As such, she is yet to regain her political right to
Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine seek elective office. Unless she... executes a
citizenship under this Act shall enjoy full civil and sworn renunciation of her Australian citizenship,
political rights and be subject to all attendant she is ineligible to run for and hold any elective
liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws office in the Philippines.
of the
Philippines and the following conditions:
(2) Those seeking elective public office in the The petitioner's continued exercise of his
Philippines shall meet the qualification for holding rights as a citizen of the USA through using
such public office as required by the Constitution his USA passport after the renunciation of his
and existing laws and, at the time of the filing of USA citizenship reverted him to his earlier status
the certificate of candidacy, make a personal and
as a dual citizen. Such reversion disqualified him candidate in the May 8, 1995 election for the
from being elected to public office. (Agustin v. position of governor.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 207105, November 10,
2015) Marquez filed urgent motions to suspend
Rodriguez’ proclamation which the COMELEC
EDUARDO T. RODRIGUEZ granted.