4th Legislative District of Leyte

may need another election

It seems ridiculous the recent election for representative of the 4th Legislative District of Leyte may need
another election. We have to look over the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court to find out why there may
be a need for another election.
Congressman-elect Lucy Torres-Gomez filed her certificate of candidacy after her husband
Richard Gomez was disqualified. The Resolution of the Comelec En Banc in Buenaventura O. Juntilla vs.
Richard I. Gomez, SPA 09-059 (DC), pertinent portion states:
“In the instant case, the Respondent has not presented sufficient proof that would establish his
ties to Ormoc City. The absence of such ties indicates his lack of intention to stay permanently in the said
locality. However, having no substantial ties to Ormoc City, it can hardly be expected from him to be
cognizant and sensitive to the needs of the locality. This defeats the spirit of representation. This is the
very evil which the residency requirement sought to avoid.
“WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Commission RESOLVED, as it is hereby RESOLVES,
to GRANT the Petition to Disqualify Candidate for Lack of Qualification filed by BUENAVENTURA O.
JUNTILLA against RICHARD I. GOMEZ. Accordingly, RICHARD GOMEZ is DISQUALIFIED as a
candidate for the Office of Congressman, Fourth District of Leyte, for lack of residency requirement.”
In the same Comelec En Banc Resolution is quoted the case of Velasco v. Comelec & Panlaqui, G.R.
No. 179851, April 18, 2008, that states:
“The first requirement that may fall when an unqualified reading is made is Section 39 of the LGC
which specifies the basic qualifications of local government officials. Equally susceptive of being rendered
toothless is Section 74 of the OEC that sets out what should be stated in a COC. Section 78 may likewise
be emasculated as mere delay in the resolution of the petition to cancel or deny due course to a COC can
render a Section 78 petition useless if a candidate with false COC data wins. To state the obvious,
candidates may risk falsifying their COC qualifications if they know that an election victory will cure any
defect that their COCs may have. Election victory then becomes a magic formula to bypass election
eligibility requirements.”
Clearly stated from the above-quote jurisprudence that Section 78 petition can be useless if a
candidate with false COC data wins. Will this ruling apply to the case of Lucy Torres-Gomez whose
certificate of candidacy was issued by the Comelec performing a ministerial duty to receive application for
certificate of candidacy? Well the answer is in Francis G. Ong vs. Joseph Stanley Alegre and Comelec,
G.R. No. 163295; Rommel G. Ong vs. Joseph Stanley Alegre and Comelec, G.R. 163354, January 23,
2006, that states:
“Not to be overlooked is the Court's holding in Miranda vs. Abaya,]that a candidate whose
certificate of candidacy has been cancelled or not given due course cannot be substituted by another
belonging to the same political party as that of the former, thus:
“While there is no dispute as to whether or not a nominee of a registered or accredited political
party may substitute for a candidate of the same party who had been disqualified for any cause, this does
not include those cases where the certificate of candidacy of the person to be substituted had been
denied due course and cancelled under Section 78 of the Code.
“Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. While the law enumerated the occasions where a
candidate may be validly substituted, there is no mention of the case where a candidate is excluded not
only by disqualification but also by denial and cancellation of his certificate of candidacy. Under the
foregoing rule, there can be no valid substitution for the latter case, much in the same way that a
nuisance candidate whose certificate of candidacy is denied due course and/or cancelled may not be
substituted. If the intent of the lawmakers were otherwise, they could have so easily and conveniently
included those persons whose certificates of candidacy have been denied due course and/or cancelled
under the provisions of Section 78 of the Code.xxx xxx xxx
“A person without a valid certificate of candidacy cannot be considered a candidate in much the
same way as any person who has not filed any certificate of candidacy at all cannot, by any stretch of the
imagination, be a candidate at all.
xxx xxx xxx
“After having considered the importance of a certificate of candidacy, it can be readily understood
why in Bautista [Bautista vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 133840, November 13, 1998] we ruled that a person with
a cancelled certificate is no candidate at all. Applying this principle to the case at bar and considering that
Section 77 of the Code is clear and unequivocal that only an official candidate of a registered or
accredited party may be substituted, there demonstrably cannot be any possible substitution of a person
whose certificate of candidacy has been cancelled and denied due course.”
The views express by some Comelec officials that the disqualification of Richard Gomez did not
cancel his certificate of candidacy is not well-founded on the bases of the above Supreme Court ruling;
hence, the 4th Legislative District of Leyte may need another election. The Supreme ruling Court decision
in Ocampo vs. HRET and Crespo, G. R. No. 158466, June 15, 2004, ruled:
“Anent the second issue, we revert back to the settled jurisprudence that the subsequent
disqualification of a candidate who obtained the highest number of votes does not entitle the candidate
who garnered the second highest number of votes to be declared the winner. This principle has been
reiterated in a number our decisions, such as Labo, Jr. vs. COMELEC, Abella vs. COMELEC, Benito vs.
COMELEC and Domino vs. COMELEC. As a matter of fact, even as early as 1912, it was held that the
candidate who lost in an election cannot be proclaimed the winner in the event that the candidate who
won is found to be ineligible for the office for which he was elected.
“In Geronimo vs. Ramos, if the winning candidate is not qualified and cannot qualify for the office
to which he was elected, a permanent vacancy is thus created. The second placer is just that, a second
placer – he lost in the elections, he was repudiated by either the majority or plurality of voters. He could
not be proclaimed winner as he could not be considered the first among the qualified candidates. To rule
otherwise is to misconstrue the nature of the democratic electoral process and the sociological and
psychological underpinnings behind voters’ preferences.”
So what will happen if Lucy Torres-Gomez is disqualified because the petition of Juntilla is not yet
decided by the Comelec before Election Day? In the same decision, the Supreme Court ruled:
“Congressional elections are different from local government elections. In local government
elections, when the winning candidate for governor or mayor is subsequently disqualified, the vice-
governor or the vice-mayor, as the case may be, succeeds to the position by virtue of the Local
Government Code. It is different in elections for representative. When a voter chooses his congressional
candidate, he chooses only one. If his choice is concurred in by the majority of voters, that candidate is
declared the winner. Voters are not afforded the opportunity of electing a ‘substitute congressman’ in the
eventuality that their first choice dies, resigns, is disqualified, or in any other way leaves the post vacant.
There can only be one representative for that particular legislative district. There are no runners-up or
second placers. Thus, when the person vested with the mandate of the majority is disqualified from
holding the post he was elected to, the only recourse to ascertain the new choice of the electorate is to
hold another election xxx”
It is a pity for the candidates who spent their hard earn money turned into waste. The law must be
change. The law department of the Comelec should study and make recommendations to change the
law. After winning, another court battle will decide the fate of the winning candidates, if there are shortcuts
committed in the election.
Well, c’est la vie (that’s life).(Email g_duna@yahoo.com)