RA.

9225- Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003

all Philippine citizens who become citizens of another country shall be

deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of
this Act
Retention of Philippine Citizenship. natural-born Filipino citizens who
lost their Philippine citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of
a foreign country are deemed to have re-acquired Philippine citizenship upon
taking the oath of allegiance to the Republic
Derivative Citizenship. the unmarried child (legitimate, illegitimate or
adopted & below eighteen (18) years of age) of those who re-acquire
Philippine citizenship shall be deemed citizens of the Philippines
Civil and Political Rights and Liabilities of those who retain or re-acquire
their Phil. citizenship subject to the ff. conditions:
(1) Right of suffragea. requirements under Section 1, Article V of the Constitution,
b. Republic Act No. 9189 or "The Overseas Absentee Voting Act
of 2003" and
c. other existing laws;
(2) Election to public officea. Qualifications for holding such public office as required by the
Constitution and existing laws and;
b. make a Personal and Sworn Renunciation of any and all
Foreign Citizenship before any public officer authorized to
administer an oath at the time of the filing of the certificate of
candidacy
(3) Appointment to any public officea. Subscribe and swear to an oath of allegiance to the Republic
of the Philippines and its duly constituted authorities prior to
their assumption of office:
Provided- they renounce their oath of allegiance to the
country where they took that oath;
(4) Practice of profession - apply with the proper authority for a
license or permit to engage in such practice
(5) Those who cannot exercise the right to vote or be elected or
appointed to any public office in the Philippines:
a. candidates for/are occupying any public office in the
country of which they are naturalized citizens
b. in active service as commissioned or non-commissioned
officers in the armed forces of the country which they are
naturalized citizens

B.P. 881- OMNIBUS ELECTION CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Sec. 77. Candidates in case of death, disqualification or withdrawal of

another. If an official candidate of a registered or accredited political party dies,
withdraws or is disqualified for any cause:
1. After the last day for the filing of certificates of candidacy

only a person belonging to, and certified by, the same political party
may file a certificate of candidacy to replace the candidate

substitute candidate may file his certificate of candidacy not later than
mid-day of the day of the election.

2. Between the day before the election and mid-day of election day

certificate may be filed with any board of election inspectors in the

political subdivision where he is a candidate, or

in the case of candidates to be voted for by the entire electorate of the

country, with the Commission.

Sec. 78. Petition to deny due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy.

A verified petition seeking to deny due course or to cancel a certificate of
candidacy

may be filed by the person exclusively on the ground that any material
representation contained therein as required under Section 74 hereof is false

may be filed at any time not later than twenty-five days from the time of the
filing of the certificate of candidacy and shall be decided, after due notice and
hearing, not later than fifteen days before the election

GEN. RULE:
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
SEC. 40. Disqualifications. - The ff. persons are disqualified from running for
any elective local position:
(a) Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude
or for an offense punishable by one (1) year or more of imprisonment, within
two (2) years after serving sentence;
(b) Those removed from office as a result of an administrative case;
(c) Those convicted by final judgment for violating the oath of allegiance to
the Republic;
(d) Those with dual citizenship;
(e) Fugitives from justice in criminal or nonpolitical cases here or abroad;

(f) Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who have acquired the
right to reside abroad and continue to avail of the same right after the
effectivity of this Code; and
(g) The insane or feeble-minded.
R.A.6770 "The Ombudsman Act of 1989"
Sec. 14. No writ of injunction shall be issued by any court to delay an
investigation being conducted by the Ombudsman unless there is a prima
facie evidence that the subject matter of the investigation is outside the
jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman. No court shall hear any appeal or
application for remedy against the decision or findings of the Ombudsman,
except the Supreme Court, on pure question of law.
Sec 21. The Office of the Ombudsman shall have disciplinary authority over
all elective and appointive officials of the Government and its subdivisions,
instrumentalities and agencies, including Members of the Cabinet, local
government, government-owned or controlled corporations and their
subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed only by impeachment
or over Members of Congress, and the Judiciary.
Sec 24. Preventives Suspension. The Ombudsman or his Deputy may
preventively suspend any officer or employee under his authority pending an
investigation, if in his judgment the evidence of guilt is strong, and
(a) the charge against such officer or employee involves dishonesty,
oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty;
(b) the charges would warrant removal from the service; or
(c) the respondent's continued stay in office may prejudice the case
filed against him.
The preventive suspension shall continue until the case is terminated by
the Office of the Ombudsman but not more than six (6) months, without pay
Section 27. Effectivity and Finality of Decisions. (1) All provisionary
orders of the Office of the Ombudsman are immediately effective and
executory In all administrative disciplinary cases, orders, directives, or
decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman may be appealed to the
Supreme Court by filing a petition for certiorari within ten (10) days from
receipt of the written notice of the order, directive or decision or denial of
the motion for reconsideration in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of
Court.
EXCEPTION: Lingating v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 153475, [November 13, 2002]
FACTS

Petitioner Lingating filed a petition for the disqualification of respondent Sulong

as candidate for mayor in the 2001 elections pursuant to Sec. 40 (b) of RA No.
7160 (Local Government Code), which disqualifies from running for any elective local
position "those removed from office as a result of an administrative case." Sulong had
previously won as mayor in 1988, reelected in 1992 and 1995. Allegedly, while in office
in 1991, he was found guilty of various offenses by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan and

was ordered removed from office. Consequently, the vice-mayor took oath as mayor.
Petitioner claimed that this decision had become final and executory while respondent
denied the same averring that after receiving a copy of the decision on February 17,
1992, he filed a motion for reconsideration and/or notice of appeal thereof on February
18, 1992; that on February 27, 1992, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan required Jim
Lingating, the complainant in AC No. 12-91, to comment on respondent Sulong's
motion for reconsideration and/or notice of appeal; that the said complainant had not
yet complied therewith and his (respondent Sulong's) motion had consequently
remained pending. Respondent Sulong denied he had been removed from office by
virtue of the decision in AC No. 12-91. The case was submitted for resolution, however,
because COMELEC was unable to render judgment before elections, respondent was reelected in 2001.
ISSUE
Whether or not there could be disqualification from running for any elective
local position of those removed from office due to an administrative case without final
decision by the court?
HELD

It appears that the 1992 decision of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, finding

respondent Sulong guilty of dishonesty, falsification and malversation of public funds,
has not until now become final. The records show that upon receipt of a copy of the
judgment of the Sanggunian, respondent Sulong filed a "motion for reconsideration
and/or notice of appeal." Thereafter, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, required
Jim Lingating (complainant) to comment but has failed to do so nor has the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan resolved respondent's motion. The filing of his motion for
reconsideration prevented the decision of Sangguniang Panlalawigan from becoming
final. While R.A. No. 7160 on disciplinary actions is silent on the filing of a motion for
reconsideration, the same cannot be interpreted as a prohibition against the filing of
a motion for reconsideration. Neither can the succession of the then vice-mayor of
Lapuyan, Vicente Imbing, and the highest ranking municipal councilor of Lapuyan,
Romeo Tan, to the offices of mayor and vice-mayor, respectively, be considered proof
that the decision in AC No. 12-91 had become final because it appears to have been
made pursuant to 68 of the Local Government Code, which makes decisions in
administrative cases immediately executory. |||