Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No.

123456 AUGUST 8, 2016

FERDINAND R. MARCOS, JR. Petitioner,

-versus-

BENIGNO SIMEON C. AQUINO III And THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent,

x----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

HERNANDEZ C.:

The Constitution is the paramount law of the land and adherence to it is absolute, what the Constitution says stays and ought to be strictly obeyed.

Statement of the Case

This is a Petition for Certiorari, under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court; on the Order Dated 30 January 2016 issued by the Commission on Election in COMELEC SPA No. 16-026 entitled FERDINAND bong bong MARCOS vs. Benigno Simeon C. AQUINO III denying petitioners Motion to disqualify the respondent from running as Senator for the Republic of the Philippines.

The Facts

The factual antecedents of the case as summarized are as follows:

On December 31, 2015 Private respondent, the incumbent president of the Republic of Philippines who term of office ends at noon of June 30, 2016 filed before the Commission on Election his Certificate of Candidacy for Senator of the Republic of the Philippines. On January 10, 2016 Petitioner filed a Petition for Disqualification of Senatorial Candidate Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III which was docketed as COMELEC SPA. No. 16-004.

On January 30, 2016, the Commission on Election rendered the assailed resolution herein which denied the petition of Ferdinand bong bong Marcos and allowed Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III to run as President of the Republic.

Contention of Parties

Petitioner mainly anchored his arguments on Section 4, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution which states:

Section 4. The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people for a term of six years which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date, six years thereafter. The President shall not be eligible for any reelection. No person who

has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time.

While the Respondents mainly anchored their arguments using principles of Statutory Construction.

This Courts Ruling

We find the present petition unmeritorious.

Oddly the very same provision in which the Petitioner relied their argument contain the words which proves to be fatal to their cause. By closely analyzing the said provision it can be gleaned that the last sentence states No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time. It is very clear from the import of said provision that the only thing that it prohibits is reelection to the same office at any time which impliedly states that election of a sitting President is not prohibited by the Fundamental Law if he seeks to be elected to a different public office.

AbsolutiaSentencia Ex Positore Non Indiget, plain words require no explanation. The provision as plainly stated there in should not be subject to any construction.

WHEREFORE, the Petition is hereby DENIED, the assailed Decision of the Commission on Election is AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED.

Nuyda. concur