enera v Comm|ss|on on L|ect|ons (CCMLLLC) et a|

Gk 181613
11 September 2009

Iacts 1he CCMLLLC dlsquallfled peLlLloner 8osallnda A enera (enera) as a candldaLe for mayor of Lhe MunlclpallLy of SLa
Monlca Surlgao del norLe for unlawfully engaglng ln elecLlon campalgn before Lhe sLarL of Lhe campalgn perlod for Lhe 2007
Synchronlzed naLlonal and Local LlecLlons ln vlolaLlon of SecLlon 80 of 8aLas ambansa 881 (Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code) 1he
CCMLLLC found LhaL enera and her parLymaLes afLer flllng Lhelr CerLlflcaLes of Candldacy conducLed a moLorcade Lhrough
SLa Monlca and Lhrew candles Lo onlookers aboard Lrucks fesLooned wlLh balloons and banners bearlng Lhelr names and
plcLures and Lhe munlclpal poslLlons for whlch Lhey were seeklng elecLlon one of whlch Lrucks had a sound sysLem LhaL
broadcasL Lhelr lnLenL Lo run ln Lhe 2007 elecLlons CCMLLLC Commlssloner 8ene v SarmlenLo dlssenLed Pe emphaslzed LhaL
under SecLlon 13 of 8epubllc AcL 8436 (Lhe law auLhorlzlng Lhe CCMLLLC Lo use an auLomaLed elecLlon sysLem for Lhe process
of voLlng counLlng of voLes and canvasslng/consolldaLlng Lhe resulLs of Lhe naLlonal and local elecLlons) as amended by
8epubllc AcL no 9369 one ls now consldered a candldaLe only aL Lhe sLarL of Lhe campalgn perlod 1hus before Lhe sLarL of Lhe
campalgn perlod Lhere can be no elecLlon campalgn or parLlsan pollLlcal acLlvlLy because Lhere ls no candldaLe Lo speak of
Accordlngly enera could noL be dlsquallfled for premaLure campalgnlng because Lhe moLorcade Look place ouLslde Lhe
campalgn perlod when enera was noL yeL a candldaLe" SarmlenLo poslLed LhaL SecLlon 13 of 8A no 8436 as amended by
8A 9369 has pracLlcally made lL lmposslble Lo commlL premaLure campalgnlng aL any Llme and has Lhus effecLlvely repealed
SecLlon 80 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code enera flled a eLlLlon for cettlototl before Lhe Supreme CourL Lo nulllfy Lhe
dlsquallflcaLlon She argued LhaL Lhe evldence was grossly lnsufflclenL Lo warranL Lhe CCMLLLC's rullng She malnLalned LhaL
Lhe moLorcade was sponLaneous and unplanned and Lhe supporLers merely [olned her and Lhe oLher candldaLes

ssue WheLher or noL enera should be dlsquallfled for engaglng ln elecLlon campalgn or parLlsan pollLlcal acLlvlLy ouLslde Lhe
campalgn perlod

no|d|ng (A) 1he Supreme CourL Ln 8anc dlsmlssed enera's eLlLlon and afflrmed her dlsquallflcaLlon because (1) enera
ralsed a quesLlon of facL 1he Supreme CourL ls noL a Lrler of facLs and Lhe sole funcLlon of a wrlL of cerLlorarl ls Lo address
lssues of wanL of [urlsdlcLlon or grave abuse of dlscreLlon and does noL lnclude a revlew of Lhe Lrlbunal's evaluaLlon of Lhe
evldence (2) 1he CCMLLLC dld noL gravely abuse lLs dlscreLlon Lvldence presenLed Lo Lhe CCMLLLC lncludlng enera's own
evldence and admlsslons sufflclenLly esLabllshed LhaL enera and her parLymaLes afLer flllng Lhelr CCCs x x parLlclpaLed ln a
moLorcade whlch passed Lhrough Lhe dlfferenL barangays of SLa Monlca walved Lhelr hands Lo Lhe publlc and Lhrew candles
Lo Lhe onlookers" WlLh vehlcles balloons and even candles on hand enera can hardly persuade Lhe CourL LhaL Lhe
moLorcade was sponLaneous and unplanned (1)he conducL of a moLorcade ls a form of elecLlon campalgn or parLlsan pollLlcal
acLlvlLy falllng squarely wlLhln Lhe amblL of SecLlon 79(b)(2) of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code on 'holdlng pollLlcal caucuses
conferences meeLlngs rallles parades or oLher slmllar assemblles for Lhe purpose of sollclLlng voLes and/or underLaklng any
campalgn or propaganda for or agalnsL a candldaLe' x x 1he obvlous purpose of Lhe conducL of moLorcades ls Lo lnLroduce Lhe
candldaLes and Lhe poslLlons Lo whlch Lhey seek Lo be elecLed Lo Lhe voLlng publlc or Lo make Lhem more vlslble so as Lo
faclllLaLe Lhe recognlLlon and recollecLlon of Lhelr names ln Lhe mlnds of Lhe voLers come elecLlon Llme unmlsLakably
moLorcades are underLaken for no oLher purpose Lhan Lo promoLe Lhe elecLlon of a parLlcular candldaLe or candldaLes" SecLlon
80 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code prohlblLs any person wheLher a voLer a candldaLe or a parLy from engaglng ln any elecLlon
campalgn or parLlsan pollLlcal acLlvlLy ouLslde Lhe campalgn perlod (excepL LhaL pollLlcal parLles may hold pollLlcal convenLlons
or meeLlngs Lo nomlnaLe Lhelr offlclal candldaLes wlLhln 30 days before Lhe campalgn perlod and 43 days for resldenLlal and
vlceresldenLlal elecLlon) And under SecLlon 68 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code a candldaLe declared by flnal declslon Lo have
engaged ln premaLure campalgnlng shall be dlsquallfled from conLlnulng as a candldaLe or lf he has been elecLed from holdlng
Lhe offlce Sald candldaLe may also face crlmlnal prosecuLlon for an elecLlon offense under SecLlon 262 of Lhe same Code 1hus
enera who had been elecLed Mayor of SLa Monlca before Lhe CCMLLLC rendered lLs declslon was dlsquallfled from holdlng
Lhe sald offlce 1he proclalmed vlceMayor was declared her rlghLful successor pursuanL Lo SecLlon 44 of Lhe Local CovernmenL
Code whlch provldes LhaL lf Lhe mayor falls Lo quallfy or ls removed from offlce Lhe vlcemayor shall become Lhe mayor (8) 1he
Supreme CourL dlsagreed wlLh CCMLLLC Commlssloner SarmlenLo saylng LhaL SecLlon 80 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code
remalns relevanL and appllcable desplLe SecLlon 13 of 8epubllc AcL no 8436 as amended 1he CourL gave Lhe followlng
reasons (1) 8epubllc AcL no 9369 whlch amended 8epubllc AcL no 8436 dld noL expressly repeal SecLlon 80 of Lhe Cmnlbus
LlecLlon Code An express repeal may noL be presumed lmplled repeals are dlsfavored absenL a showlng of repugnance clear
and convlnclng ln characLer When confronLed wlLh apparenLly confllcLlng sLaLuLes courLs should endeavor Lo reconclle Lhe
same lnsLead of declarlng ouLrlghL Lhe lnvalldlLy of one as agalnsL Lhe oLher (2) 1here ls no absoluLe and lrreconcllable
lncompaLlblllLy beLween SecLlon 13 of 8epubllc AcL no 8436 as amended and SecLlon 80 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code whlch
prohlblLs premaLure campalgnlng lL ls posslble Lo harmonlze and reconclle Lhese Lwo provlslons and Lhus glve effecL Lo boLh
Lo wlL (a) SecLlon 80 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code prohlblLs any person wheLher or noL a voLer or candldaLe" from engaglng
ln elecLlon campalgn or parLlsan pollLlcal acLlvlLy ouLslde Lhe campalgn perlod 1hus premaLure campalgnlng may be
commlLLed even by a person who ls noL a candldaLe Accordlngly Lhe declaraLlon ln ooot vs cOMc (C8 no 164838 16
november 2006) LhaL (w)haL SecLlon 80 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code prohlblLs ls 'an elecLlon campalgn or parLlsan pollLlcal
acLlvlLy' by a 'candldaLe' 'ouLslde' of Lhe campalgn perlod" ls erroneous (b) lL ls Lrue LhaL under SecLlon 13 of 8epubllc AcL no
8436 as amended a person ls noL yeL offlclally consldered a candldaLe before Lhe sLarL of Lhe campalgn perlod even afLer Lhe
flllng of hls CoC noneLheless upon Lhe flllng of hls CCC such person already expllclLly declares hls lnLenLlon Lo run as a
candldaLe When Lhe campalgn perlod sLarLs and he proceeds wlLh hls candldacy hls lnLenL Lurnlng lnLo acLuallLy acL/s
consLlLuLlng elecLlon campalgn or parLlsan acLlvlLy under SecLlon 79(b) of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code (holdlng rallles or parades
maklng speeches eLc) whlch he may have commlLLed afLer flllng hls CoC and before Lhe campalgn perlod can already be
consldered as Lhe promoLlon of hls elecLlon as a candldaLe consLlLuLlng premaLure campalgnlng for whlch he may be
dlsquallfled Conversely lf he wlLhdraws hls CoC before Lhe campalgn perlod hls acL can no longer be vlewed as for Lhe
promoLlon of hls elecLlon and Lhere can be no premaLure campalgnlng as Lhere ls no candldaLe Lo begln wlLh 1hus a person
afLer flllng hls/her CCC buL prlor Lo hls becomlng a candldaLe (prlor Lo Lhe sLarL of Lhe campalgn perlod) can already commlL
Lhe acLs descrlbed under SecLlon 79(b) of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code as elecLlon campalgn or parLlsan pollLlcal acLlvlLy
Powever lL ls only afLer sald person offlclally becomes a candldaLe aL Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe campalgn perlod can sald acLs be
glven effecL as premaLure campalgnlng under SecLlon 80 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code Cnly afLer sald person offlclally
becomes a candldaLe aL Lhe sLarL of Lhe campalgn perlod can hls/her dlsquallflcaLlon be soughL for acLs consLlLuLlng premaLure
campalgnlng (c) Whlle a provlso ln SecLlon 13 of 8epubllc AcL no 8436 as amended provldes LhaL any unlawful acL or
omlsslon appllcable Lo a candldaLe shall Lake effecL only upon Lhe sLarL of Lhe campalgn perlod" Lhls does noL mean LhaL Lhe
acLs consLlLuLlng premaLure campalgnlng can only be commlLLed durlng Lhe campalgn perlod nowhere ln Lhe sald provlso was
lL sLaLed LhaL campalgnlng before Lhe sLarL of Lhe campalgn perlod ls lawful lf Lhe CourL were Lo rule oLherwlse noL only wlll
Lhe prohlblLed acL of premaLure campalgnlng be offlclally decrlmlnallzed Lhe slgnlflcance of havlng a campalgn perlod before
Lhe elecLlons would also be negaLed Any unscrupulous lndlvldual wlLh Lhe deepesL of campalgn war chesLs could Lhen afford Lo
spend hls/her resources Lo promoLe hls/her candldacy well ahead of everyone else Lhus undermlne Lhe conducL of falr and
credlble elecLlons Such ls Lhe very evll LhaL Lhe law seeks Lo prevenL Cur lawmakers could noL have lnLended Lo cause such an
absurd slLuaLlon"

GADCk vs CCMLLLC
Gk No LS236S
Ianuary 22 1980

1hls peLlLlon for ooJos wlLh a prayer for a wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlon was flled on !anuary 21 1980 aL 447pm asklng
Lhe Supreme CourL Lo lmmedlaLely order Lhe respondenL CCMLLLC Lo lnclude Lhe name hls name ln Lhe llsL of candldaLes for
Mayor of Lhe ClLy of Czamlz
Iacts 1he peLlLlon alleges LhaL Lhe peLlLloner ls a candldaLe for Lhe Cfflce of Mayor of Lhe ClLy of Czamlz as lndependenL Lhls
comlng !anuary 30 1980 local elecLlon Pe flled hls cerLlflcaLe of candldacy wlLh Lhe LlecLlon 8eglsLrar of Czamls ClLy on !anuary
7 1980 because of Lhe news ln Lhe 8ulleLln 1oday 1he sald news sLaLed LhaL Lhe respondenL CCMLLLC lssued a resoluLlon for
Lhe exLenslon of Llme for flllng CCC Powever Lhe resldenL denled sald resoluLlon 1herefore respondenL CCMLLLC lnformed
Lhe peLlLloner LhaL hls name mlghL noL be lncluded ln Lhe llsL of candldaLes for mayor because of Lhe sald lncldenL 1hus Lhls
peLlLlon

SSUL WCn Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy of Lhe peLlLloner whlch was flled on !anuary 7 1980 ls valld

ku||ng nC A cerLlflcaLe of candldacy flled beyond reglemenLary perlod ls vold SecLlon 7 8aLasang ambansa 8llang 32
provldes LhaL 1he sworn cerLlflcaLe of candldacy shall be flled ln LrlpllcaLe noL laLer Lhan !anuary 4 1980" lL ls a facL admlLLed
by Lhe peLlLloner LhaL Lhe resldenL had noL exLended Lhe perlod wlLhln whlch Lo flle Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy 1hls CourL ls
powerless Lo granL Lhe remedy prayed for ln Lhe peLlLlon Pavlng been flled beyond !anuary 4 1980 Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy
of Lhe peLlLloner ls vold

CCNULLA v CCMLLLC
Gk No 139801
May 31 2000
IAC1S 8C8L81C CCnCulLLA assalls ln Lhls speclal clvll acLlon for nettlototl Lhe Ln 8anc 8esoluLlon of CCMLLLC whlch afflrmed
Lhe 8esoluLlon of lLs llrsL ulvlslon dlsmlsslng hls eLlLlon for CancellaLlon of CerLlflcaLe of Candldacy and ulsquallflcaLlon (SA
no 98132) agalnsL prlvaLe respondenL LuuA8uC A ALA8lLLA for lack of merlL LuuA8uC A ALA8lLLA flled hls CerLlflcaLe of
Candldacy wlLh Lhe Munlclpal LlecLlon Cfflcer of Meycauayan 8ulacan wlLhouL however lndlcaLlng Lhe elecLlve poslLlon whlch
he was asplrlng for Powever aLLached LhereLo and flled wlLh hls CerLlflcaLe of Candldacy was ALA8lLLAs CerLlflcaLe of
nomlnaLlon and AccepLance whlch sLaLes
l !CSL uL vLnLClA !8 (LAkAS nuCuuMu) as lLs SecreLaryCeneral hereby nomlnaLe LuuA8uC A ALA8lLLA as Lhe
arLy's offlclal candldaLe ln Lhe May 11 1998 elecLlons for Lhe poslLlon of MunlClAL MA?C8 of Lhe MunlclpallLy of
Meycauayan ln Lhe lourLh ulsLrlcL of 8ulacan
Cn 14 Aprll 1998 CCnCulLLA flled wlLh Lhe CCMLLLC a eLlLlon for dockeLed as SA no 98132 praylng LhaL prlvaLe
respondenL ALA8lLLA's CerLlflcaLe of Candldacy be expunged and cancelled on Lhe ground LhaL lL was null and vold for falllng Lo
speclfy Lhe elecLlve poslLlon he was runnlng for and consequenLly he be dlsquallfled Lo run for any poslLlon n Meycauayan
8ulacan uurlng Lhe pendency of SA no 98132 Lhe 8oard of Canvassers proclalmed ALA8lLLA as Lhe MayorelecL of
Meycauayan 8ulacan 1hereafLer Lhe llrsL ulvlslon of CCMLLLC dlsmlssed SA no 98132

SSUL CCnCulLLA conLends LhaL publlc respondenL CCMLLLC commlLLed grave abuse of dlscreLlon
1 ln afflrmlng lo toto Lhe 8esoluLlon of Lhe llrsL ulvlslon dlsmlsslng SA no 98132 for lack of merlL and ln rullng LhaL Lhe
CerLlflcaLe of nomlnaLlon and AccepLance aLLached Lo prlvaLe respondenLs CerLlflcaLe of Candldacy could be used as basls ln
deLermlnlng Lhe elecLlve poslLlon prlvaLe respondenL was seeklng and
2 ln noL resolvlng Lhe moLlon Lo suspend prlvaLe respondenLs proclamaLlon as MayorelecL of Meycauayan 8ulacan
3 AddlLlonally CCnCulLLA conLends LhaL CCMLLLC erred ln dlsmlsslng hls appeal for laLe flllng

nLLD
1 lL ls correcLly observed by Lhe llrsL ulvlslon of CCMLLLC and afflrmed by CCMLLLC Ln 8anc LhaL Lhe lnformaLlon omlLLed ln
Lhe CerLlflcaLe of Candldacy was supplled ln Lhe CerLlflcaLe of nomlnaLlon and AccepLance aLLached LhereLo As Lhe CCMLLLC
lLself has clarlfled cerLlflcaLes of nomlnaLlon and accepLance are procedurally requlred Lo be flled wlLh and form an lnLegral
parL of Lhe cerLlflcaLes of candldacy of offlclal candldaLes of pollLlcal parLles AddlLlonally Lhe llrsL ulvlslon ruled LhaL ALA8lLLA
was able Lo correcL hls omlsslon by flllng an Amended CerLlflcaLe of Candldacy on 21 Aprll 1998 (afLer Lhe flllng and before Lhe
dlsmlssal of SC no 98132) clearly lndlcaLlng Lhereln LhaL he was runnlng for Lhe poslLlon of Munlclpal Mayor Meycauayan
8ulacan
2 lL cannoL be denled LhaL ALA8lLLA was elecLed Mayor of Meycauayan 8ulacan ln Lhe 11 May 1998 elecLlons lf subsLanLlal
compllance wlLh Lhe LlecLlon Law should glve way Lo a mere LechnlcallLy Lhe wlll of Lhe elecLoraLe as far as ALA8lLLA ls
concerned would be frusLraLed
3 Powever CCnCulLLA'S moLlon for reconslderaLlon was noL flled laLe on 1 !une 1998 conslderlng LhaL 31 May 1998 was a
Sunday hence he had unLll Lhe nexL worklng day whlch was 1 !une 1998 wlLhln whlch Lo ask for reconslderaLlon

Go v CCMLLLC

IAC1S eLlLloner ls Lhe lncumbenL represenLaLlve of Lhe llfLh ulsLrlcL provlnce of LeyLe whose Lerm of offlce wlll explre aL
noon on 30 !une 2001
Cn 27 lebruary 2001 peLlLloner flled wlLh Lhe munlclpal elecLlon offlcer of Lhe munlclpallLy of 8aybay LeyLe a cerLlflcaLe of
candldacy for mayor of 8aybay LeyLe Cn 28 lebruary 2001 aL 1147 pm peLlLloner flled wlLh Lhe provlnclal elecLlon
supervlsor of LeyLe wlLh offlce aL 1acloban ClLy anoLher cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for governor of Lhe provlnce of LeyLe
SlmulLaneously LherewlLh she aLLempLed Lo flle wlLh Lhe provlnclal elecLlon supervlsor an affldavlL of wlLhdrawal of her
candldacy for mayor of Lhe munlclpallLy of 8aybay LeyLe Plowever Lhe provlnclal elecLlon supervlsor of LeyLe refused Lo
accepL Lhe affldavlL of wlLhdrawal and suggesLed LhaL pursuanL Lo a CCMLLLC resoluLlon she should flle lL wlLh Lhe munlclpal
elecLlon offlcer of 8aybay LeyLe where she flled her cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for mayor
AL LhaL laLer hour wlLh only mlnuLes lefL Lo mldnlghL Lhe deadllne for flllng cerLlflcaLes of candldacy or wlLhdrawal Lhereof and
conslderlng LhaL Lhe Lravel Llme from 1acloban Lo 8aybay was Lwo (2) hours peLlLloner declded Lo send her affldavlL of
wlLhdrawal by fax4 Lo her faLher aL 8aybay LeyLe and Lhe laLLer submlLLed Lhe same Lo Lhe offlce of Lhe elecLlon offlcer of
8aybay LeyLe aL 1228 am 01 March 20013 Cn Lhe same day aL 113 pm Lhe elecLlon offlcer of 8aybay LeyLe recelved Lhe
orlglnal of Lhe affldavlL of wlLhdrawal
Cn 03 March 2001 respondenL MonLe[o flled wlLh Lhe provlnclal elecLlon supervlsor of LeyLe aL 1acloban ClLy a peLlLlon Lo deny
due course and/or Lo cancel Lhe cerLlflcaLes of candldacy of peLlLloner 8espondenL AnLonl flled a slmllar peLlLlons namely LhaL
for mayor of 8aybay LeyLe and LhaL for governor of LeyLe Lhus maklng her lnellglble for boLh
Cn 06 March 2001 ALLy Manuel L vlllegas Lhe provlnclal elecLlon supervlsor of LeyLe by 1sL lndorsemenL referred Lhe cases
Lo Lhe Commlsslon on LlecLlon Manlla Law ueparLmenL on Lhe ground LhaL he was lnhlblLlng hlmself due Lo hls prlor acLlon of
refuslng Lo recelve Lhe peLlLloner's affldavlL of wlLhdrawal Lendered slmulLaneously wlLh Lhe flllng of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy
for governor on 28 lebruary 2001
ln Lhe meanLlme Lhe Law ueparLmenL CCMLLLC under ulrecLor !ose 8albuena made a sLudy of Lhe cases wlLhouL affordlng
peLlLloner an opporLunlLy Lo be heard or Lo submlL responslve pleadlngs Cn 03 Aprll 2001 Lhey submlLLed a reporL and
recommendaLlon Lo Lhe CCMLLLC eo boon
eLlLloners' ground Lo deny due course and/or Lo cancel Lhe sald cerLlflcaLe of candldacy ls anchored on SecLlon 73 of Lhe
Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code
Moreover peLlLloners conLended LhaL CA1ALlnA LCLZ LC8L1CCo ls lnellglble Lo run elLher Mayor of 8aybay LeyLe or
Covernor of LeyLe rovlnce
8ased on Lhe cerLlfled llsL of candldaLe for Lhe provlnclal candldaLes of LeyLe on March 7 2001 Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy of
CaLallna Lopez LoreLoCo for Lhe poslLlon of Covernor of LeyLe was flled wlLh Lhe Cfflce of Lhe rovlnclal LlecLlon Supervlsor on
lebruary 28 2001 aL 1147 pm Lhe lasL day for flllng cerLlflcaLes of candldacy
ln supporL of Lhe peLlLlons of ALLy MonLe[o and ALLy AnLonl ls a cerLlfled machlne copy of Lhe affldavlL of wlLhdrawal of
CaLallna L LoreLoCo whlch was flled on march 01 2001 aL Lhe Cfflce of Lhe LlecLlon Cfflcer of 8aybay LeyLe whlch she flled
on lebruary 28 2001
1he affldavlL of wlLhdrawal of CaLallna LoreLoCo a porLlon of whlch reads
1 1haL lasL lebruary 27 2001 l flled my cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for mayor for Lhe MunlClALl1? Cl 8A?8A? LL?1L
2 1haL due Lo pollLlcal exlgency and lnfluence form my pollLlcal leaders urglng me Lo run for mayor of Lhe MunlclpallLy of
baybay leyLe l have no oLher recourse buL Lo follow deslre of my pollLlcal consLlLuenLs
3 1haL Lherefore l am formally wlLhdrawlng my cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for Mayor of Lhe MunlclpallLy of 8aybay leyLe and ln
lL sLead l am formally flllng my cerLlflcaLe for Covernor of LeyLe
A careful scruLlny and examlnaLlon of CaLallna LoreLoCo cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for Covernor of LeyLe rovlnce alLhough flled
on Lhe lasL day of lebruary 28 2001 her affldavlL of wlLhdrawal for Mayor of 8aybay LeyLe was flled only on March 1 2001 or
one (1) day afLer Lhe lebruary 28 2001 deadllne ln oLher word Lhere are Lwo (2) cerLlflcaLes of candldacy flled by CaLallna
LoreLoCo one for governor of LeyLe and Lhe oLher for Mayor of 8aybay LeyLe
Clearly on March 1 2001 when she flled her affldavlL of wlLhdrawal for Mayor of baybay LeyLe boLh her cerLlflcaLes of
candldacy for Mayor of 8aybay leyLe and Covernor of LeyLe were sLlll subslsLlng and effecLlve maklng her llable for flllng Lwo
cerLlflcaLes of candldacy on dlfferenL elecLlve poslLlons Lhus renderlng her lnellglble for boLh poslLlons ln accordance wlLh
SecLlon (1) (b) of Comelec 8esoluLlon no 3233A
Cn 23 Aprll 2001 Lhe CCMLLLC en banc approved Lhe recommendaLlon of Lhe ulrecLor Law ueparLmenL and adopLed Lhe
resoluLlon ln quesLlon as seL ouL ln Lhe openlng paragraph of Lhls declslon
Pence Lhls peLlLlon

SSULS
l ls peLlLloner dlsquallfled Lo be candldaLe for governor of LeyLe and mayor of 8aybay LeyLe because she flled cerLlflcaLes of
candldacy for boLh poslLlons?
ll Was Lhere a valld wlLhdrawal of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for munlclpal mayor of 8aybay LeyLe?
(a) MusL Lhe affldavlL of wlLhdrawal be flled wlLh Lhe elecLlon offlcer of Lhe place where Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy was flled?
(b) May Lhe affldavlL of wlLhdrawal be valldly flled by fax?
lll Was Lhere denlal Lo peLlLloner of procedural due process of law?

nLLD
We granL Lhe peLlLlon We annul Lhe CCMLLLC resoluLlon declarlng peLlLloner dlsquallfled for boLh poslLlons of governor of
LeyLe and mayor of Lhe munlclpallLy of 8aybay LeyLe 1he flllng of Lhe affldavlL of wlLhdrawal wlLh Lhe elecLlon offlcer of
8aybay LeyLe aL 1228 am 1 March 2001 was a subsLanLlal compllance wlLh Lhe requlremenL of Lhe law14 We hold LhaL
peLlLloner's wlLhdrawal of her cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for mayor of 8aybay LeyLe was effecLlve for all legal purposes and lefL ln
full force her cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for governor
SecLlon 73 8aLas ambansa 8lg 881 oLherwlse known as Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code provldes LhaL
SLC 73 CerLlflcaLe of candldacy no person shall be ellglble for any elecLlve publlc offlce unless he flles a sworn cerLlflcaLe of
candldacy wlLhln Lhe perlod flxed hereln
A person who has flled a cerLlflcaLe of candldacy may prlor Lo Lhe elecLlon wlLhdraw Lhe same by submlLLlng Lo Lhe offlce
concerned a wrlLLen declaraLlon under oaLh
no person shall be ellglble for more Lhan one offlce Lo be fllled ln Lhe same elecLlon and lf he flles hls cerLlflcaLe of candldacy
for more Lhan one offlce he shall noL be ellglble for any of Lhem Powever before Lhe explraLlon of Lhe perlod for Lhe flllng of
cerLlflcaLes of candldacy Lhe person who has flle more Lhan one cerLlflcaLe of candldacy may declare under oaLh Lhe offlce for
whlch he deslres Lo be ellglble and cancel Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for Lhe oLher offlce or offlces"
1here ls noLhlng ln Lhls SecLlon whlch mandaLes LhaL Lhe affldavlL of wlLhdrawal musL be flled wlLh Lhe same offlce where Lhe
cerLlflcaLe of candldacy Lo be wlLhdrawn was flled 1hus lL can be flled dlrecLly wlLh Lhe maln offlce of Lhe CCMLLLC Lhe offlce
of Lhe reglonal elecLlon dlrecLor concerned Lhe offlce of Lhe provlnclal elecLlon supervlsor of Lhe provlnce Lo whlch Lhe
munlclpallLy lnvolved belongs or Lhe offlce of Lhe munlclpal elecLlon offlcer of Lhe sald munlclpallLy
Whlle lL may be Lrue LhaL SecLlon 12 of CCMLLLC 8esoluLlon no 3233A adopLed on 20 november 2000 requlres LhaL Lhe
wlLhdrawal be flled before Lhe elecLlon offlcer of Lhe place where Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy was flled such requlremenL ls
merely dlrecLory and ls lnLended for convenlence lL ls noL mandaLory or [urlsdlcLlonal An admlnlsLraLlve resoluLlon can noL
conLradlcL much less amend or repeal a law or supply a deflclency ln Lhe law Pence Lhe flllng of peLlLloner's affldavlL of
wlLhdrawal of candldacy for mayor of 8aybay wlLh Lhe provlnclal elecLlon supervlsor of LeyLe sufflced Lo effecLlvely wlLhdraw
such candldacy Lhe CCMLLLC Lhus acLed wlLh grave abuse of dlscreLlon when lL declare peLlLloner lnellglble for boLh poslLlons
for whlch she flled cerLlflcaLes of candldacy
1here ls anoLher lmporLanL moleLy LhaL affecLs Lhe valldlLy of Lhe CCMLLLC resoluLlon cancellng peLlLloner's cerLlflcaLes of
candldacy lL ls LhaL peLlLloner was deprlved of procedural due process of law 1he peLlLlon Lo cancel her cerLlflcaLe of candldacy
or Lo deny due course Lo boLh were flled before Lhe provlnclal elecLlon supervlsor of LeyLe who lnhlblLed hlmself and referred
Lhe cases Lo Lhe Law ueparLmenL CCMLLLC Manlla Cn 11 Aprll 2001 Lhe CCMLLLC llrsL ulvlslon acLlng on Lhe flrsL
lndorsemenL of ALLy vlllegas approved hls lnhlblLlon and requlred Lhe provlnclal elecLlon supervlsor of LeyLe Lo lmmedlaLely
forward hls copy of Lhe records of Lhese cases Lo Lhe 8eglonal LlecLlon ulrecLor 8eglon 08 aL 1acloban LeyLe for hearlng Cn
18 Aprll 2001 8eglonal LlecLlon ulrecLor 8eglon 08 ALLy Adolfo A lbanez lssued summons/subpoena Lo peLlLloner Co Lo
submlL her consolldaLed answer Lo Lhe peLlLlons and counLeraffldavlLs lncludlng poslLlon paper wlLhln Lhree (3) days form
noLlce Cn 23 Aprll 2001 peLlLloner submlLLed her consolldaLed poslLlon paper Cn 23 Aprll 2001 aL 900 am ulrecLor lbanez
seL Lhe cases for hearlng for recepLlon of evldence of Lhe parLles
ln Lhe meanLlme however Lhe Law ueparLmenL CCMLLLC conducLed an exparLe sLudy of Lhe cases lL dld noL glve peLlLloner
an opporLunlLy Lo be heard eLlLloner was noL requlred Lo submlL a commenL or opposlLlon Lo Lhe peLlLlons for cancellaLlon of
her cerLlflcaLes of candldacy and/or for dlsquallflcaLlon lL dld noL seL Lhe cases for hearlng lL was noL even aware of Lhe
proceedlngs before ulrecLor lbanez ln 1acloban AfLer an exparLe sLudy of Lhe cases on 03 Aprll 2001 Lhe Law ueparLmenL
submlLLed lLs reporL and recommendaLlon approved by ulrecLor 8albuena Lo Lhe CCMLLLC en banc
uurlng Lhe oral argumenL on 07 May 2001 ulrecLor 8albuena candldly admlLLed LhaL Lhe CCMLLLC 8ules of rocedure requlres
LhaL noLlce be glven Lo Lhe respondenL lndeed SecLlon 3 8ule 23 of sald 8ules on peLlLlon Lo deny due course Lo or cancel
cerLlflcaLes of candldacy expllclLly provldes
8ule 23 eLlLlon Lo ueny uue Course Lo or Cancel CerLlflcaLes of Candldacy
xxxx
Sec 3 Summary roceedlng 1he peLlLlon shall be heard summarlly afLer due noLlce

u|nto vs Come|ec
G k No 189698

IAC1S eLlLloners Lleazar CulnLo and Cerlno A 1olenLlno !r flled a peLlLlon for nettlototl and prohlblLlon agalnsL Lhe
CCMLLLC for lssulng a resoluLlon declarlng appolnLlve offlclals who flled Lhelr cerLlflcaLe of candldacy as lpso fonto reslgned
from Lhelr poslLlons ln Lhls defense Lhe CCMLLLC avers LhaL lL only copled Lhe provlslon from Sec 13 of 8A 9369

SSUL WheLher or noL Lhe sald CCMLLLC resoluLlon was valld

nLLD nC ln Lhe otlos case Lhe peLlLloners challenged Sec 14 of 8A 9006 repeallng Sec 66 of Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code
(CLC) for glvlng undue beneflL Lo elecLlve offlclals ln comparlson wlLh appolnLlve offlclals lncldenLally Lhe CourL upheld Lhe
subsLanLlal dlsLlncLlons beLween Lhe Lwo and pronounced LhaL Lhere was no vlolaLlon of Lhe equal proLecLlon clause Powever
ln Lhe presenL case Lhe CourL held LhaL Lhe dlscusslon on Lhe equal proLecLlon clause was an obltet Jlnt slnce Lhe lssue
ralsed Lhereln was agalnsL Lhe repeallng clause lL dldn'L squarely challenge Sec 66
Sec 13 of 8A 9369 unduly dlscrlmlnaLed appolnLlve and elecLlve offlclals Applylng Lhe 4 requlslLes of a valld classlflcaLlon Lhe
provlso does noL comply wlLh Lhe second requlremenL LhaL lL musL be germane Lo Lhe purpose of Lhe law
1he obvlous reason for Lhe challenged provlslon ls Lo prevenL Lhe use of a governmenLal poslLlon Lo promoLe one's candldacy
or even Lo wleld a dangerous or coerclve lnfluence of Lhe elecLoraLe 1he measure ls furLher almed aL promoLlng Lhe efflclency
lnLegrlLy and dlsclpllne of Lhe publlc servlce by ellmlnaLlng Lhe danger LhaL Lhe dlscharge of offlclal duLy would be moLlvaLed by
pollLlcal conslderaLlons raLher Lhan Lhe welfare of Lhe publlc 1he resLrlcLlon ls also [usLlfled by Lhe proposlLlon LhaL Lhe enLry of
clvll servanLs Lo Lhe elecLoraLe arena whlle sLlll ln offlce could resulL ln neglecL or lnefflclency ln Lhe performance of duLy
because Lhey would be aLLendlng Lo Lhelr campalgn raLher Lhan Lo Lhelr offlce work
Sec 13 of 8A 9369 perLalns Lo all clvll servanLs holdlng appolnLlve posLs wlLhouL dlsLlncLlon as Lo wheLher Lhey occupy hlgh
poslLlons ln governmenL or noL CerLalnly a uLlllLy worker ln Lhe governmenL wlll also be consldered as lpso fonto reslgned once
he flles hls cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for Lhe elecLlon 1hls scenarlo ls absurd for lndeed lL ls unlmaglnable how he can use hls
poslLlon ln Lhe governmenL Lo wleld lnfluence ln Lhe pollLlcal world
1he provlslon s dlrecLed Lo Lhe acLlvlLy any and all publlc offlces wheLher Lhey be parLlsan or non parLlsan ln characLer wheLher
Lhey be ln Lhe naLlonal munlclpal or barangay level Congress has noL shown a compelllng sLaLe lnLeresL Lo resLrlcL Lhe
fundamenLal rlghL lnvolved on such a sweeplng scale

MC1CN ICk kLCCNSDLkA1CN
l4c15 1hls ls a moLlon for reconslderaLlon flled by Lhe Commlsslon on LlecLlons 1he laLLer moved Lo quesLlon an earller
declslon of Lhe Supreme CourL declarlng SecLlon 4 (a) of CCMLLLC 8esoluLlon no 8678 unconsLlLuLlonal SecLlon 4 (a) of
CCMLLLC 8esoluLlon no 8678 provldes LhaL Any person holdlng a publlc appolnLlve offlce or poslLlon lncludlng acLlve
members of Lhe Armed lorces of Lhe hlllpplnes and oLher offlcers and employees ln governmenLowned or conLrolled
corporaLlons shall be consldered lpso fonto reslgned from hls offlce upon Lhe flllng of hls cerLlflcaLe of candldacy" 8e lL noLed
LhaL peLlLloners of Lhe aboveenLlLled case are appolnLlve offlclals who lnLend Lo be elecLed ln Lhe prevlously held 2010
elecLlons and who felL aggrleved by Lhe lssuance of Lhe quesLloned resoluLlon

55u WheLher or noL SecLlon 4 (a) of CCMLLLC 8esoluLlon no 8678 ls consLlLuLlonal

kuL- 1he Supreme CourL overruled lLs prevlous declslon declarlng Lhe assalled resoluLlon unconsLlLuLlonal Pere lL sLrongly
upholds Lhe consLlLuLlonallLy of Lhe resoluLlon saylng LhaL lL does noL vlolaLe Lhe equal proLecLlon clause lL ls seLLled LhaL Lhe
equal proLecLlon clause does noL demand absoluLe equallLy lL merely requlres LhaL all persons shall be LreaLed allke under llke
clrcumsLances and condlLlons boLh as Lo prlvlleges conferred and llablllLles enforced 1he LesL used ls reasonableness whlch
requlres LhaL
1 1he classlflcaLlon resLs on subsLanLlal dlsLlncLlons
2 lL ls germane Lo Lhe purposes of Lhe law
3 lL ls noL llmlLed Lo exlsLlng condlLlons only and
4 lL applles equally Lo all members of Lhe same class
ln Lhe case under conslderaLlon Lhere ls a subsLanLlal dlsLlncLlon beLween publlc and elecLlve offlclals whlch has been rendered
mooL and academlc by Lhe rullng made ln Lhe case of otloos etl ol vs xentlve 5entetoty et ol
SecLlon 4 (a) of CCMLLLC 8esoluLlon no 8678 ls consLlLuLlonal

I|||aber v CCMLLLC Gk No 148326 111S01 02]14]2011

Iacts eLlLloner seeks Lo annul Comelec resoluLlon dlsquallfylng hlm as congresslonal candldaLe of uavao uel Sur and for Lhe
cancellaLlon of hls cerLlflcaLe of candldacy and denlal of moLlon for reconslderaLlon eLlLloner was dlsquallfled upon Lhe
peLlLlon of hls rlval candldaLe for dlsquallflcaLlon on grounds of hls prevlous convlcLlon ln vlolaLlon of 8 22 (bounclng check
law) whlch consLlLuLes moral LurplLude a ground for dlsquallflcaLlon for elecLoral candldacy under Lhe Cmnlbus LlecLlon Code

ssue WCn a vlolaLlon of 8 22 consLlLuLes a dlsquallflcaLlon for elecLoral candldacy

ku||ng A vlolaLlon of 8 22 lnvolves Lhe followlng elemenLs
1 Accused makes draws lssues any check Lo apply Lo accounL or for value
2 Accused knows aL Lhe Llme of Lhe lssuance LhaL Lhere ls no sufflclenL fund on Lhe drawee bank for Lhe paymenL of Lhe
check ln full upon lLs presenLmenL
3 1he check ls subsequenLly dlshonored by Lhe drawee bank
1he presence of Lhe 2nd elemenL represenLs moral LurplLude as sLaLed ln Lhe rullng of eople v ALLy le 1uanda where
convlcLlon for vlolaLlon of 8 22 lnvolves decelL and affecLs Lhe good moral characLer of a person


Gk No 168SS0 August 10 2006
Uk8ANC M MCkLNC eLlLloner
vs
CCMMSSCN CN LLLC1CNS and NCkMA L MLILS CnCCNA2AkC 8espondenLs
u L C l S l C n
1NGA
ln Lhls eLlLlon
1
daLed !uly 6 2003 urbano M Moreno (Moreno) assalls Lhe 8esoluLlon
2
of Lhe Commlsslon on LlecLlons
(Comelec) eo boon daLed !une 1 2003 afflrmlng Lhe 8esoluLlon
3
of Lhe Comelec llrsL ulvlslon daLed november 13 2002 whlch
ln Lurn dlsquallfled hlm from runnlng for Lhe elecLlve offlce of unong 8arangay of 8arangay Cabugao uaram Samar ln Lhe !uly
13 2002 Synchronlzed 8arangay and Sanggunlang kabaLaan LlecLlons
1he followlng are Lhe undlspuLed facLs
norma L Me[es (Me[es) flled a peLlLlon Lo dlsquallfy Moreno from runnlng for unong 8arangay on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe laLLer
was convlcLed by flnal [udgmenL of Lhe crlme of ArblLrary ueLenLlon and was senLenced Lo suffer lmprlsonmenL of lour (4)
MonLhs and Cne (1) uay Lo 1wo (2) ?ears and lour (4) MonLhs by Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL 8ranch 28 of CaLbalogan Samar on
AugusL 27 1998
Moreno flled an answer averrlng LhaL Lhe peLlLlon sLaLes no cause of acLlon because he was already granLed probaLlon
Allegedly followlng Lhe case of onloyoo v Mtlo
4
Lhe lmposlLlon of Lhe senLence of lmprlsonmenL as well as Lhe accessory
penalLles was Lhereby suspended Moreno also argued LhaL under Sec 16 of Lhe robaLlon Law of 1976 (robaLlon Law) Lhe
flnal dlscharge of Lhe probaLlon shall operaLe Lo resLore Lo hlm all clvll rlghLs losL or suspended as a resulL of hls convlcLlon and
Lo fully dlscharge hls llablllLy for any flne lmposed 1he order of Lhe Lrlal courL daLed uecember 18 2000 allegedly LermlnaLed
hls probaLlon and resLored Lo hlm all Lhe clvll rlghLs he losL as a resulL of hls convlcLlon lncludlng Lhe rlghL Lo voLe and be voLed
for ln Lhe !uly 13 2002 elecLlons
1he case was forwarded Lo Lhe Cfflce of Lhe rovlnclal LlecLlon Supervlsor of Samar for prellmlnary hearlng AfLer due
proceedlngs Lhe lnvesLlgaLlng Cfflcer recommended LhaL Moreno be dlsquallfled from runnlng for unong 8arangay
1he Comelec llrsL ulvlslon adopLed Lhls recommendaLlon Cn moLlon for reconslderaLlon flled wlLh Lhe Comelec eo boon Lhe
8esoluLlon of Lhe llrsL ulvlslon was afflrmed Accordlng Lo Lhe Comelec eo boon Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code
provldes LhaL Lhose senLenced by flnal [udgmenL for an offense lnvolvlng moral LurplLude or for an offense punlshable by one
(1) year or more of lmprlsonmenL wlLhln Lwo (2) years afLer servlng senLence are dlsquallfled from runnlng for any elecLlve
local poslLlon
3
Slnce Moreno was released from probaLlon on uecember 20 2000 dlsquallflcaLlon shall commence on Lhls
daLe and end Lwo (2) years Lhence 1he granL of probaLlon Lo Moreno merely suspended Lhe execuLlon of hls senLence buL dld
noL affecL hls dlsquallflcaLlon from runnlng for an elecLlve local offlce
lurLher Lhe Comelec eo boon held LhaL Lhe provlslons of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code Lake precedence over Lhe case of
onloyoo v Mtlo clLed by Moreno and Lhe robaLlon Law because lL ls a much laLer enacLmenL and a speclal law seLLlng forLh
Lhe quallflcaLlons and dlsquallflcaLlons of elecLlve local offlclals
ln Lhls peLlLlon Moreno argues LhaL Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon under Lhe Local CovernmenL Code applles only Lo Lhose who have
served Lhelr senLence and noL Lo probaLloners because Lhe laLLer do noL serve Lhe ad[udged senLence 1he robaLlon Law
should allegedly be read as an excepLlon Lo Lhe Local CovernmenL Code because lL ls a speclal law whlch applles only Lo
probaLloners lurLher even assumlng LhaL he ls dlsquallfled hls subsequenL elecLlon as unong 8arangay allegedly consLlLuLes
an lmplled pardon of hls prevlous mlsconducL
ln lLs CommenL
6
daLed november 18 2003 on behalf of Lhe Comelec Lhe Cfflce of Lhe SollclLor Ceneral argues LhaL Lhls CourL
ln uelo 1otte v coelen
7
deflnlLlvely seLLled a slmllar conLroversy by rullng LhaL convlcLlon for an offense lnvolvlng moral
LurplLude sLands even lf Lhe candldaLe was granLed probaLlon 1he dlsquallflcaLlon under Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL
Code subslsLs and remalns LoLally unaffecLed noLwlLhsLandlng Lhe granL of probaLlon
Moreno flled a 8eply Lo CommenL
8
daLed March 27 2006 relLeraLlng hls argumenLs and polnLlng ouL maLerlal dlfferences
beLween hls case and uelo 1otte v coelen whlch allegedly warranL a concluslon favorable Lo hlm Accordlng Lo Moreno uelo
1otte v coelen lnvolves a convlcLlon for vlolaLlon of Lhe AnLllenclng Law an offense lnvolvlng moral LurplLude covered by Lhe
flrsL parL of Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code uela 1orre Lhe peLlLloner ln LhaL case applled for probaLlon nearly four
(4) years afLer hls convlcLlon and only afLer appeallng hls convlcLlon such LhaL he could noL have been ellglble for probaLlon
under Lhe law
ln conLrasL Moreno alleges LhaL he applled for and was granLed probaLlon wlLhln Lhe perlod speclfled Lherefor Pe never served
a day of hls senLence as a resulL Pence Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon under Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code does noL apply Lo
hlm
1he resoluLlon of Lhe presenL conLroversy depends on Lhe appllcaLlon of Lhe phrase wlLhln Lwo (2) years afLer servlng
senLence found ln Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code whlch reads
Sec 40 ulspollflnotloos 1he followlng persons are dlsquallfled from runnlng for any elecLlve local poslLlon
(a) 1hose senLenced by flnal [udgmenL for an offense lnvolvlng moral LurplLude or or an oense pun|shab|e by one (1) year or
more o |mpr|sonment w|th|n two (2) years ater serv|ng sentence Lmphasls supplled

We should menLlon aL Lhls [uncLure LhaL Lhere ls no need Lo rule on wheLher ArblLrary ueLenLlon Lhe crlme of whlch Moreno
was convlcLed by flnal [udgmenL lnvolves moral LurplLude falllng under Lhe flrsL parL of Lhe abovequoLed provlslon 1he
quesLlon of wheLher ArblLrary ueLenLlon ls a crlme lnvolvlng moral LurplLude was never ralsed ln Lhe peLlLlon for dlsquallflcaLlon
because Lhe ground relled upon by Me[es and whlch Lhe Comelec used ln lLs assalled resoluLlons ls hls alleged dlsquallflcaLlon
from runnlng for a local elecLlve offlce wlLhln Lwo (2) years from hls dlscharge from probaLlon afLer havlng been convlcLed by
flnal [udgmenL for an offense punlshable by lour (4) MonLhs and Cne (1) uay Lo 1wo (2) ?ears and lour (4) MonLhs 8esldes a
deLermlnaLlon LhaL Lhe crlme of ArblLrary ueLenLlon lnvolves moral LurplLude ls noL declslve of Lhls case Lhe cruclal lssue belng
wheLher Moreno's senLence was ln facL served
ln Lhls sense uelo 1otte v coelen ls noL squarely appllcable Cur pronouncemenL Lhereln LhaL Lhe granL of probaLlon does noL
affecL Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon under Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code was based prlmarlly on Lhe flndlng LhaL Lhe crlme of
fenclng of whlch peLlLloner was convlcLed lnvolves moral LurplLude a clrcumsLance whlch does noL obLaln ln Lhls case AL any
raLe Lhe phrase wlLhln Lwo (2) years afLer servlng senLence should have been lnLerpreLed and undersLood Lo apply boLh Lo
Lhose who have been senLenced by flnal [udgmenL for an offense lnvolvlng moral LurplLude ooJ Lo Lhose who have been
senLenced by flnal [udgmenL for an offense punlshable by one (1) year or more of lmprlsonmenL 1he placlng of Lhe comma ()
ln Lhe provlslon means LhaL Lhe phrase modlfles boLh parLs of Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code
1he CourL's declaraLlon on Lhe effecL of probaLlon on Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code we should add oughL Lo be
consldered an obltet ln vlew of Lhe facL LhaL uela 1orre was noL even enLlLled Lo probaLlon because he appealed hls convlcLlon
Lo Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL whlch however afflrmed hls convlcLlon lL has been held LhaL Lhe perfecLlon of an appeal ls a
rellnqulshmenL of Lhe alLernaLlve remedy of avalllng of Lhe robaLlon Law Lhe purpose of whlch ls Lo prevenL speculaLlon or
opporLunlsm on Lhe parL of an accused who alLhough already ellglble dld noL aL once apply for probaLlon buL dld so only afLer
falllng ln hls appeal
9

Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code appears lnnocuous enough aL flrsL glance 1he phrase servlce of senLence
undersLood ln lLs general and common sense means Lhe conflnemenL of a convlcLed
person ln a penal faclllLy for Lhe perlod ad[udged by Lhe courL
10
1hls seemlngly clear and unamblguous provlslon however has
spawned a conLroversy worLhy of Lhls CourL's aLLenLlon because Lhe Comelec ln Lhe assalled resoluLlons ls alleged Lo have
broadened Lhe coverage of Lhe law Lo lnclude even Lhose who dld noL serve a day of Lhelr senLence because Lhey were granLed
probaLlon
Moreno argues qulLe persuaslvely LhaL he should noL have been dlsquallfled because he dld noL serve Lhe ad[udged senLence
havlng been granLed probaLlon and flnally dlscharged by Lhe Lrlal courL
ln onloyoo v Mtlo Lhe CourL declared LhaL an order placlng defendanL on probaLlon ls noL a senLence buL ls raLher ln effecL
a suspenslon of Lhe lmposlLlon of senLence We held LhaL Lhe granL of probaLlon Lo peLlLloner suspended Lhe lmposlLlon of Lhe
prlnclpal penalLy of lmprlsonmenL as well as Lhe accessory penalLles of suspenslon from publlc offlce and from Lhe rlghL Lo
follow a professlon or calllng and LhaL of perpeLual speclal dlsquallflcaLlon from Lhe rlghL of suffrage We Lhus deleLed from Lhe
order granLlng probaLlon Lhe paragraph whlch requlred LhaL peLlLloner refraln from conLlnulng wlLh her Leachlng professlon
Applylng Lhls docLrlne Lo Lhe lnsLanL case Lhe accessory penalLles of suspenslon from publlc offlce from Lhe rlghL Lo follow a
professlon or calllng and LhaL of perpeLual speclal dlsquallflcaLlon from Lhe rlghL of suffrage aLLendanL Lo Lhe penalLy of ottesto
oyot ln lLs maxlmum perlod Lo ptlsloo nottennloool ln lLs mlnlmum perlod
11
lmposed upon Moreno were slmllarly suspended
upon Lhe granL of probaLlon
lL appears Lhen LhaL durlng Lhe perlod of probaLlon Lhe probaLloner ls noL even dlsquallfled from runnlng for a publlc offlce
because Lhe accessory penalLy of suspenslon from publlc offlce ls puL on hold for Lhe duraLlon of Lhe probaLlon
Clearly Lhe perlod wlLhln whlch a person ls under probaLlon cannoL be equaLed wlLh servlce of Lhe senLence ad[udged Sec 4 of
Lhe robaLlon Law speclflcally provldes LhaL Lhe granL of probaLlon suspends Lhe execuLlon of Lhe senLence uurlng Lhe perlod
of probaLlon
12
Lhe probaLloner does noL serve Lhe penalLy lmposed upon hlm by Lhe courL buL ls merely requlred Lo comply
wlLh all Lhe condlLlons prescrlbed ln Lhe probaLlon order
13

lL ls regreLLable LhaL Lhe Comelec and Lhe CSC have mlsapprehended Lhe real lssue ln Lhls case 1hey focused on Lhe facL LhaL
Moreno's [udgmenL of convlcLlon aLLalned flnallLy upon hls appllcaLlon for probaLlon lnsLead of Lhe quesLlon of wheLher hls
senLence had been served
1he Comelec could have correcLly resolved Lhls case by slmply applylng Lhe law Lo Lhe leLLer Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL
Code unequlvocally dlsquallfles only Lhose who have been senLenced by flnal [udgmenL for an offense punlshable by
lmprlsonmenL of one (1) year or more ltblo to (2) yeots oftet setvloq seoteone
1hls ls as good a Llme as any Lo clarlfy LhaL Lhose who have noL served Lhelr senLence by reason of Lhe granL of probaLlon whlch
we relLeraLe should noL be equaLed wlLh servlce of senLence should noL llkewlse be dlsquallfled from runnlng for a local
elecLlve offlce because Lhe Lwo (2)year perlod of lnellglblllLy under Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code does noL even
begln Lo run
1he facL LhaL Lhe Lrlal courL already lssued an order flnally dlscharglng Moreno forLlfles hls poslLlon Sec 16 of Lhe robaLlon
Law provldes LhaL Lhe flnal dlscharge of Lhe probaLloner shall operaLe Lo resLore Lo hlm all clvll rlghLs losL or suspended as a
resulL of hls convlcLlon and Lo fully dlscharge hls llablllLy for any flne lmposed as Lo Lhe offense for whlch probaLlon was
granLed 1hus when Moreno was flnally dlscharged upon Lhe courL's flndlng LhaL he has fulfllled Lhe Lerms and condlLlons of
hls probaLlon hls case was deemed LermlnaLed and all clvll rlghLs losL or suspended as a resulL of hls convlcLlon were resLored
Lo hlm lncludlng Lhe rlghL Lo run for publlc offlce
Lven assumlng LhaL Lhere ls an amblgulLy ln Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code whlch glves room for [udlclal
lnLerpreLaLlon
14
our concluslon wlll remaln Lhe same
lL ls unforLunaLe LhaL Lhe dellberaLlons on Lhe Local CovernmenL Code afford us no clue as Lo Lhe lnLended meanlng of Lhe
phrase servlce of senLence le wheLher Lhe leglslaLure also meanL Lo dlsquallfy Lhose who have been granLed probaLlon 1he
CourL's funcLlon ln Lhe face of Lhls seemlng dlssonance ls Lo lnLerpreL and harmonlze Lhe robaLlon Law and Lhe Local
CovernmenL Code lotetptetote et noonotJote leqls leqlbs est optls lotetptetooJl
robaLlon ls noL a rlghL of an accused buL a mere prlvllege an acL of grace and clemency or lmmunlLy conferred by Lhe sLaLe
whlch ls granLed Lo a deservlng defendanL who Lhereby escapes Lhe exLreme rlgors of Lhe penalLy lmposed by law for Lhe
offense of whlch he was convlcLed
13
1hus Lhe robaLlon Law lays ouL raLher sLrlngenL sLandards regardlng who are quallfled
for probaLlon lor lnsLance lL provldes LhaL Lhe beneflLs of probaLlon shall noL be exLended Lo Lhose senLenced Lo serve a
maxlmum Lerm of lmprlsonmenL of more Lhan slx (6) years convlcLed of any offense agalnsL Lhe securlLy of Lhe SLaLe Lhose
who have prevlously been convlcLed by flnal [udgmenL of an offense punlshed by lmprlsonmenL of noL less Lhan one (1) monLh
and one (1) day and/or a flne of noL less Lhan 20000 Lhose who have been once on probaLlon and Lhose who are already
servlng senLence aL Lhe Llme Lhe subsLanLlve provlslons of Lhe robaLlon Law became appllcable
16

lL ls lmporLanL Lo noLe LhaL Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon under Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code covers offenses punlshable by
one (1) year or more of lmprlsonmenL a penalLy whlch also covers probaLlonable offenses ln splLe of Lhls Lhe provlslon does
noL speclflcally dlsquallfy probaLloners from runnlng for a local elecLlve offlce 1hls omlsslon ls slgnlflcanL because lL offers a
gllmpse lnLo Lhe leglslaLlve lnLenL Lo LreaL probaLloners as a dlsLlncL class of offenders noL covered by Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon
lurLher lL should be menLloned LhaL Lhe presenL Local CovernmenL Code was enacLed ln 1991 some seven (7) years afLer
onloyoo v Mtlo was declded When Lhe leglslaLure approved Lhe enumeraLed dlsquallflcaLlons under Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local
CovernmenL Code lL ls presumed Lo have knowledge of our rullng ln onloyoo v Mtlo on Lhe effecL of probaLlon on Lhe
dlsquallflcaLlon from holdlng publlc offlce 1haL lL chose noL Lo lnclude probaLloners wlLhln Lhe purvlew of Lhe provlslon ls a
clear expresslon of Lhe leglslaLlve wlll noL Lo dlsquallfy probaLloners
Cn Lhls score we agree wlLh Moreno LhaL Lhe robaLlon Law should be consLrued as an excepLlon Lo Lhe Local CovernmenL
Code Whlle Lhe Local CovernmenL Code ls a laLer law whlch seLs forLh Lhe quallflcaLlons and dlsquallflcaLlons of local elecLlve
offlclals Lhe robaLlon Law ls a speclal leglslaLlon whlch applles only Lo probaLloners lL ls a canon of sLaLuLory consLrucLlon LhaL
a laLer sLaLuLe general ln lLs Lerms and noL expressly repeallng a prlor speclal sLaLuLe wlll ordlnarlly noL affecL Lhe speclal
provlslons of such earller sLaLuLe
17

ln consLrulng Sec 40(a) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code ln a way LhaL broadens Lhe scope of Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon Lo lnclude
Moreno Lhe Comelec commlLLed an egreglous error whlch we here correcL We rule LhaL Moreno was noL dlsquallfled Lo run
for unong 8arangay of 8arangay Cabugao uaram Samar ln Lhe !uly 13 2002 Synchronlzed 8arangay and Sanggunlang
kabaLaan LlecLlons
llnally we noLe LhaL Moreno was Lhe lncumbenL unong 8arangay aL Lhe Llme of hls convlcLlon of Lhe crlme of ArblLrary
ueLenLlon Pe clalms Lo have obLalned a fresh mandaLe from Lhe people of 8arangay Cabugao uaram Samar ln Lhe !uly 13
2002 elecLlons 1hls slLuaLlon calls Lo mlnd Lhe polgnanL words of Mr !usLlce now Chlef !usLlce ArLemlo anganlban ln tlvolJo
v coelen
18
where he sald LhaL lL would be far beLLer Lo err ln favor of popular soverelgnLy Lhan Lo be rlghL ln complex buL
llLLle undersLood legallsms
WPL8LlC8L Lhe peLlLlon ls C8An1Lu 1he 8esoluLlon of Lhe Commlsslon on LlecLlons eo boon daLed !une 1 2003 and Lhe
8esoluLlon of lLs llrsL ulvlslon daLed november 13 2002 as well as all oLher acLlons and orders lssued pursuanL LhereLo are
AnnuLLLu and SL1 ASluL 1he Commlsslon on LlecLlons ls dlrecLed Lo proceed ln accordance wlLh Lhls ueclslon no
pronouncemenL as Lo cosLs
SC C8uL8Lu
valles vs CCMLLLC
O rlnclple of [us sangulnls
O Pow hlllpplne clLlzenshlp ls acqulred
O LffecL of flllng cerLlflcaLe of candldacy express renunclaLlon of oLher clLlzenshlp

IAC1S

8osallnd ?basco Lopez was born on May 16 1934 ln AusLralla Lo a llllplno faLher and an AusLrallan moLher ln 1949 aL Lhe age
of flfLeen she lefL AusLralla and came Lo seLLle ln Lhe hlllpplnes where she laLer marrled a llllplno and has slnce Lhen
parLlclpaLed ln Lhe elecLoral process noL only as a voLer buL as a candldaLe as well ln Lhe May 1998 elecLlons she ran for
governor buL valles flled a peLlLlon for her dlsquallflcaLlon as candldaLe on Lhe ground LhaL she ls an AusLrallan

SSUL
O Jhether or not kosa||nd |s an Austra||an or a I|||p|no

nLLD
1he hlllpplne law on clLlzenshlp adheres Lo Lhe prlnclple of [us sangulnls 1hereunder a chlld follows Lhe naLlonallLy or
clLlzenshlp of Lhe parenLs regardless of Lhe place of hls/her blrLh as opposed Lo Lhe docLrlne of [us soll whlch deLermlnes
naLlonallLy or clLlzenshlp on Lhe basls of place of blrLh

8osallnd ?basco Lopez was born a year before Lhe 1933 ConsLlLuLlon Look lnLo effecL and aL LhaL Llme whaL served as Lhe
ConsLlLuLlon of Lhe hlllpplnes were Lhe prlnclpal organlc acLs by whlch Lhe unlLed SLaLes governed Lhe counLry 1hese were Lhe
hlllpplne 8lll of !uly 1 1902 and Lhe hlllpplne AuLonomy AcL of Aug 29 1916 also known as Lhe !ones Law

under boLh organlc acLs all lnhablLanLs of Lhe hlllpplnes who were Spanlsh sub[ecLs on Aprll 11 1899 and reslded Lhereln
lncludlng Lhelr chlldren are deemed Lo be hlllpplne clLlzens rlvaLe respondenLs faLher 1elesforo ?basco was born on !an 3
1879 ln uaeL Camarlnes norLe 1hus under Lhe hlllpplne 8lll of 1902 and Lhe !ones Law 1elesforo ?basco was deemed Lo be
a hlllpplne clLlzen 8y vlrLue of Lhe same laws whlch were Lhe laws ln force aL Lhe Llme of her blrLh 1elesforo's daughLer
hereln prlvaLe respondenL 8osallnd ?basco Lopez ls llkewlse a clLlzen of Lhe hlllpplnes

1he slgnlng lnLo law of Lhe 1933 hlllpplne ConsLlLuLlon has esLabllshed Lhe prlnclple of [us sangulnls as basls for Lhe acqulslLlon
of hlllpplne clLlzenshlp xxx

So also Lhe prlnclple of [us sangulnls whlch confers clLlzenshlp by vlrLue of blood relaLlonshlp was subsequenLly reLalned
under Lhe 1973 and 1987 ConsLlLuLlons 1hus Lhe hereln prlvaLe respondenL 8osallnd ?basco Lopez ls a llllplno clLlzen havlng
been born Lo a llllplno faLher 1he facL of her belng born ln AusLralla ls noL LanLamounL Lo her loslng her hlllpplne clLlzenshlp lf
AusLralla follows Lhe prlnclple of [us soll Lhen aL mosL prlvaLe respondenL can also clalm AusLrallan clLlzenshlp resulLlng Lo her
possesslon of dual clLlzenshlp


Gk No 182701 Iu|y 23 2008
LUSL8C LUGLNC k LCL2 eLlLloner
vs
CCMMSSCN CN LLLC1CNS and 1LSSL ILLANULIA 8espondenLs
8 L S C L u 1 l C n
kLLS k1
A llllplnoAmerlcan or any dual clLlzen cannoL run for any elecLlve publlc poslLlon ln Lhe hlllpplnes unless he or she personally
swears Lo a renunclaLlon of all forelgn clLlzenshlp aL Lhe Llme of flllng Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy
1hls ls a peLlLlon for cerLlorarl under 8ule 63 ln relaLlon Lo 8ule 64 of Lhe 8ules on Clvll rocedure assalllng Lhe (1) 8esoluLlon
1

and (2) Cmnlbus Crder
2
of Lhe Commlsslon on LlecLlons (CCMLLLC) Second ulvlslon dlsquallfylng peLlLloner from runnlng as
8arangay Chalrman
eLlLloner Luseblo Lugenlo k Lopez was a candldaLe for Lhe poslLlon of Chalrman of 8arangay 8agacay San ulonlslo llollo ClLy
ln Lhe synchronlzed 8arangay and Sanggunlang kabaLaan LlecLlons held on CcLober 29 2007
Cn CcLober 23 2007 respondenL 1essle vlllanueva flled a peLlLlon
3
before Lhe rovlnclal LlecLlon Supervlsor of Lhe rovlnce
of llollo praylng for Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon of peLlLloner on Lhe ground LhaL he ls an Amerlcan clLlzen hence lnellglble from
runnlng for any publlc offlce ln hls Answer
4
peLlLloner argued LhaL he ls a dual clLlzen a llllplno and aL Lhe same Llme an
Amerlcan by vlrLue of 8epubllc AcL (8A) no 9223 oLherwlse known as Lhe ClLlzenshlp 8eLenLlon and 8eacqulslLlon AcL of
2003
3
Pe reLurned Lo Lhe hlllpplnes and reslded ln 8arangay 8agacay 1hus he sald he possessed all Lhe quallflcaLlons Lo run
for 8arangay Chalrman
AfLer Lhe voLes for 8arangay Chalrman were canvassed peLlLloner emerged as Lhe wlnner
6

Cn lebruary 6 2008 CCMLLLC lssued Lhe assalled 8esoluLlon granLlng Lhe peLlLlon for dlsquallflcaLlon dlsposlng as follows
WPL8LlC8L premlses consldered Lhe lnsLanL eLlLlon for ulsquallflcaLlon ls C8An1Lu and respondenL Luseblo Lugenlo k
Lopez ls ulSCuALlllLu from runnlng as 8arangay Chalrman of 8arangay 8agacay San ulonlslo llollo
SC C8uL8Lu
7

ln rullng agalnsL peLlLloner Lhe CCMLLLC found LhaL he was noL able Lo regaln hls llllplno clLlzenshlp ln Lhe manner provlded by
law Accordlng Lo Lhe poll body Lo be able Lo quallfy as a candldaLe ln Lhe elecLlons peLlLloner should have made a personal
and sworn renunclaLlon of any and all forelgn clLlzenshlp 1hls peLlLloner falled Lo do
Pls moLlon for reconslderaLlon havlng been denled peLlLloner resorLed Lo Lhe presenL peLlLlon lmpuLlng grave abuse of
dlscreLlon on Lhe parL of Lhe CCMLLLC for dlsquallfylng hlm from runnlng and assumlng Lhe offlce of 8arangay Chalrman
We dlsmlss Lhe peLlLlon
8elylng on valles v Commlsslon on LlecLlons
8
peLlLloner argues LhaL hls flllng of a cerLlflcaLe of candldacy operaLed as an
effecLlve renunclaLlon of forelgn clLlzenshlp
We noLe however LhaL Lhe operaLlve facLs LhaL led Lo Lhls CourL's rullng ln valles are subsLanLlally dlfferenL from Lhe presenL
case ln valles Lhe candldaLe 8osallnd ?basco Lopez was a dual clLlzen by accldenL of blrLh on forelgn soll
9
Lopez was born of
llllplno parenLs ln AusLralla a counLry whlch follows Lhe prlnclple of [us solllopbl1 As a resulL she acqulred AusLrallan
clLlzenshlp by operaLlon of AusLrallan law buL she was also consldered a llllplno clLlzen under hlllpplne law She dld noL
perform any acL Lo swear alleglance Lo a counLry oLher Lhan Lhe hlllpplnes
ln conLrasL peLlLloner was born a llllplno buL he dellberaLely soughL Amerlcan clLlzenshlp and renounced hls llllplno
clLlzenshlp Pe laLer on became a dual clLlzen by reacqulrlng llllplno clLlzenshlp1opbl1
More lmporLanLly Lhe CourL's 2000 rullng ln valles has been superseded by Lhe enacLmenL of 8A no 9223
10
ln 2003 8A no
9223 expressly provldes for Lhe condlLlons before Lhose who reacqulred llllplno clLlzenshlp may run for a publlc offlce ln Lhe
hlllpplnes SecLlon 3 of Lhe sald law sLaLes
SecLlon 3 civi/ ond Po/itico/ kiqhts ond Liobi/ities 1hose who reLaln or reacqulre hlllpplne clLlzenshlp under Lhls AcL shall
en[oy full clvll and pollLlcal rlghLs and be sub[ecL Lo all aLLendanL llablllLles and responslblllLles under exlsLlng laws of Lhe
hlllpplnes and Lhe followlng condlLlons
x x x x
(2) 1hose seeklng elecLlve publlc offlce ln Lhe hlllpplnes shall meeL Lhe quallflcaLlon for holdlng such publlc offlce as requlred
by Lhe ConsLlLuLlon and exlsLlng laws and aL Lhe Llme of Lhe flllng of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy make a personal and sworn
renunclaLlon of any and all forelgn clLlzenshlp before any publlc offlcer auLhorlzed Lo admlnlsLer an oaLh (Lmphasls added)
eLlLloner reacqulred hls llllplno clLlzenshlp under Lhe clLed law 1hls new law expllclLly provldes LhaL should one seek elecLlve
publlc offlce he should flrsL make a personal and sworn renunclaLlon of any and all forelgn clLlzenshlp before any publlc offlcer
auLhorlzed Lo admlnlsLer an oaLh
eLlLloner falled Lo comply wlLh Lhls requlremenL We quoLe wlLh approval Lhe CCMLLLC observaLlon on Lhls polnL
Whlle respondenL was able Lo regaln hls llllplno ClLlzenshlp by vlrLue of Lhe uual ClLlzenshlp Law when he Look hls oaLh of
alleglance before Lhe vlce Consul of Lhe hlllpplne ConsulaLe Ceneral's Cfflce ln Los Angeles Callfornla Lhe same ls noL enough
Lo allow hlm Lo run for a publlc offlce 1he abovequoLed provlslon of law mandaLes LhaL a candldaLe wlLh dual clLlzenshlp musL
make a personal and sworn renunclaLlon of any and all forelgn clLlzenshlp before any publlc offlcer auLhorlzed Lo admlnlsLer an
oaLh 1here ls no evldence presenLed LhaL wlll show LhaL respondenL complled wlLh Lhe provlslon of 8A no 9223 AbsenL such
proof we cannoL allow respondenL Lo run for 8arangay Chalrman of 8arangay 8agacay
lor Lhe renunclaLlon Lo be valld lL musL be conLalned ln an affldavlL duly execuLed before an offlcer of law who ls auLhorlzed Lo
admlnlsLer an oaLh 1he afflanL musL sLaLe ln clear and unequlvocal Lerms LhaL he ls renounclng all forelgn clLlzenshlp for lL Lo be
effecLlve ln Lhe lnsLanL case respondenL Lopez's fallure Lo renounce hls Amerlcan clLlzenshlp as proven by Lhe absence of an
affldavlL LhaL wlll prove Lhe conLrary leads Lhls Commlsslon Lo belleve LhaL he falled Lo comply wlLh Lhe poslLlve mandaLe of law
lor fallure of respondenL Lo prove LhaL he abandoned hls alleglance Lo Lhe unlLed SLaLes Lhls Commlsslon holds hlm
dlsquallfled from runnlng for an elecLlve poslLlon ln Lhe hlllpplnes
11
(Lmphasls added)
Whlle lL ls Lrue LhaL peLlLloner won Lhe elecLlons Look hls oaLh and began Lo dlscharge Lhe funcLlons of 8arangay Chalrman hls
vlcLory can noL cure Lhe defecL of hls candldacy Carnerlng Lhe mosL number of voLes does noL valldaLe Lhe elecLlon of a
dlsquallfled candldaLe because Lhe appllcaLlon of Lhe consLlLuLlonal and sLaLuLory provlslons on dlsquallflcaLlon ls noL a maLLer
of popularlLy
12

ln sum Lhe CCMLLLC commlLLed no grave abuse of dlscreLlon ln dlsquallfylng peLlLloner as candldaLe for Chalrman ln Lhe
8arangay elecLlons of 2007
WPL8LlC8L Lhe peLlLlon ls ulSMlSSLu
SC C8uL8Lu

Marquez v CCMLLLC
Iacts Marquez a candldaLe for an elecLlve poslLlon ln Cuezon rovlnce durlng Lhe 1998 elecLlons flled a peLlLlon praylng for
Lhe cancellaLlon of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of candldacy of 8odrlguez on Lhe ground of dlsquallflcaLlon under secLlon 40 of Lhe Local
CovernmenL Code (SecLlon 40 ulsquallflcaLlon 1he followlng persons are dlsquallfled from runnlng for any local elecLlve
poslLlon (e) luglLlve from [usLlce ln crlmlnal or nonpollLlcal cases here or abroad) 8odrlguez ls allegedly crlmlnally charged
wlLh lnsurance fraud ln Lhe unlLed SLaLes and LhaL hls arresL ls yeL Lo be served because of hls fllghL from Lhe counLry 1he
CCMLLLC dlsmlssed Marquez's eLlLlon 8odrlguez was proclalmed Lhe CovernorelecL of Cuezon
ssues WCn 8odrlguez aL Lhe Llme of flllng hls cerLlflcaLe of candldacy ls sald Lo be a fuglLlve from [usLlce as provlded for ln
secLlon 40 of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code
ne|d luglLlve from [usLlce" does noL mean a person convlcLed by flnal [udgmenL lL lncludes Lhose who afLer belng charged
flee Lo avold prosecuLlon 1he CCMLLLC ls dlrecLed Lo proceed and seLLle Lhe case ln conformlLy of Lhe glven clarlflcaLlon wlLh
Lhe Lerm fuglLlve from [usLlce"
Gk No 120099 Iu|y 24 1996
LDUAkDC 1 kCDkGUL2 peLlLloner
vs
CCMMSSCN CN LLLC1CNS 8LNILNDC C MAkUL2 Ik respondenLs

IkANCSCC p
eLlLloner Lduardo 1 8odrlguez and prlvaLe respondenL 8lenvenldo C Marquez !r (8odrlguez and Marquez for
brevlLy) were proLagonlsLs for Lhe gubernaLorlal posL of Cuezon rovlnce ln Lhe May 1992 elecLlons 8odrlguez won
and was proclalmed dulyelecLed governor
Marquez challenged 8odrlguez vlcLory vla peLlLlon for po ottooto before Lhe CCMLLLC (LC no 9228) Marquez
revealed LhaL 8odrlguez lefL Lhe unlLed SLaLes where a charge flled on november 12 1983 ls pendlng agalnsL Lhe
laLLer before Lhe Los Angeles Munlclpal CourL for fraudulenL lnsurance clalms grand LhefL and aLLempLed grand LhefL
of personal properLy 8odrlguez ls Lherefore a fqltlve fto jstlne whlch ls a ground for hls
dlsquallflcaLlon/lnellglblllLy under SecLlon 40(e) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code (8A 7160) so argued Marquez
1he CCMLLLC dlsmlssed Marquez po ottooto peLlLlon (LC no 9228) ln a resoluLlon of lebruary 2 1993 and
llkewlse denled a reconslderaLlon Lhereof
Marquez challenged Lhe CCMLLLC dlsmlssal of LC no 9228 before Lhls CourL vla peLlLlon for nettlototl dockeLed as
C8 no 112889 1he crux of sald peLlLlon ls wheLher 8odrlguez ls a fqltlve fto jstlne as conLemplaLed by
SecLlon 40 (e) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code based on Lhe alleged pendency of a crlmlnal charge agalnsL hlm (as
prevlously menLloned)
ln resolvlng LhaL Marquez peLlLlon (112889) Lhe CourL ln Marquez !r vs CCMLLLC promulgaLed on Aprll 18 1993
now appearlng ln volume 243 page 338 of Lhe SC8A and herelnafLer referred Lo as Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo declared
LhaL
fuglLlve from [usLlce lncludes noL only Lhose who flee afLer convlcLlon Lo avold punlshmenL buL
llkewlse Lhose who afLer belng charged flee Lo avold prosecuLlon 1hls deflnlLlon Lruly flnds supporL from
[urlsprudence ( ) and lL may be so conceded as expresslng Lhe general and ordlnary connoLaLlon of Lhe
Lerm
1

WheLher or noL 8odrlguez ls a fqltlve fto jstlne under Lhe deflnlLlon Lhus glven was noL passed upon by Lhe
CourL 1haL Lask was Lo devolve on Lhe CCMLLLC upon remand of Lhe case Lo lL wlLh Lhe dlrecLlve Lo proceed
LherewlLh wlLh dlspaLch conformably wlLh Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo 8odrlguez soughL a reconslderaLlon Lhereof Pe
also flled an urgenL MoLlon Lo AdmlL AddlLlonal ArgumenL ln SupporL of Lhe MoLlon for 8econslderaLlon Lo whlch
was aLLached a cerLlflcaLlon from Lhe Commlsslon on lmmlgraLlon showlng LhaL 8odrlguez lefL Lhe uS on !une 23
1983 roughly flve (3) monLhs prlor Lo Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of Lhe crlmlnal complalnL flled agalnsL hlm before Lhe Los
Angeles courL 1he CourL however denled a reconslderaLlon of Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo
ln Lhe May 8 1993 elecLlon 8odrlguez and Marquez renewed Lhelr rlvalry for Lhe same poslLlon of governor 1hls
Llme Marquez challenged 8odrlguez candldacy vla peLlLlon for dlsquallflcaLlon before Lhe CCMLLLC based
prlnclpally on Lhe same allegaLlon LhaL 8odrlguez ls a fqltlve fto jstlne 1hls peLlLlon for dlsquallflcaLlon (SA no
93089) was flled by Marquez on Aprll 11 1993 when 8odrlguez peLlLlon for nettlototl (112889) from where Lhe
Aprll 18 1993 MAkOu2 uenlsloo sprung was sLlll Lhen pendlng before Lhe CourL
Cn May 7 1993 and afLer Lhe promulgaLlon of Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo Lhe CCMLLLC promulgaLed a ConsolldaLed
8esoluLlon for LC no 9228 (po ottooto case) and SA nC 93089 (dlsquallflcaLlon case) ln [usLlfylng a [olnL
resoluLlon of Lhese Lwo (2) cases Lhe CCMLLLC explalned LhaL
1 LC no 9228 and SA no 93089 are lnherenLly relaLed cases
2 Lhe parLles facLs and lssue lnvolved are ldenLlcal ln boLh cases
3 Lhe same evldence ls Lo be uLlllzed ln boLh cases ln deLermlnlng Lhe common lssue of wheLher 8odrlguez ls a
fqltlve fto jstlne
4 on consulLaLlon wlLh Lhe Commlsslon o oon Lhe Commlssloners unanlmously agreed LhaL a consolldaLed
resoluLlon of Lhe Lwo (2) cases ls noL procedurally flawed
Colng now lnLo Lhe meaL of LhaL ConsolldaLed 8esoluLlon Lhe CCMLLLC allegedly havlng kepL ln mlnd Lhe MAkOu2
uenlsloo deflnlLlon of fqltlve fto jstlne found 8odrlguez Lo be one Such flndlng was essenLlally based on
Marquez documenLary evldence conslsLlng of
1 an auLhenLlcaLed copy of Lhe november 12 1993 warranL of arresL lssued by Lhe Los Angeles munlclpal courL
agalnsL 8odrlguez and
2 an auLhenLlcaLed copy of Lhe felony complalnL
whlch Lhe CCMLLLC allowed Lo be presenLed expotte afLer 8odrlguez walkedouL of Lhe hearlng of Lhe case on Aprll
26 1993 followlng Lhe CCMLLLCs denlal of 8odrlguez moLlon for posLponemenL WlLh Lhe walkouL Lhe CCMLLLC
consldered 8odrlguez as havlng walved hls rlghL Lo dlsprove Lhe auLhenLlclLy of Marquez aforemenLloned
documenLary evldence 1he CCMLLLC Lhus made Lhe followlng analysls
1he auLhenLlcaLed documenLs submlLLed by peLlLloner (Marquez) Lo show Lhe pendency of a crlmlnal
complalnL agalnsL Lhe respondenL (8odrlguez) ln Lhe Munlclpal CourL of Los Angeles Callfornla uSA and
Lhe facL LhaL Lhere ls an ouLsLandlng warranL agalnsL hlm amply proves peLlLloners conLenLlon LhaL Lhe
respondenL ls a fuglLlve from [usLlce 1he Commlsslon cannoL look wlLh favor on respondenLs defense LhaL
long before Lhe felony complalnL was allegedly flled respondenL was already ln Lhe hlllpplnes and he dld
noL know of Lhe flllng of Lhe same nor was he aware LhaL he was belng proceeded agalnsL crlmlnally ln a
sense Lhru Lhls defense respondenL lmpllclLly conLends LhaL he cannoL be deemed a fuglLlve from [usLlce
because Lo be so one musL be aware of Lhe flllng of Lhe crlmlnal complalnL and hls dlsappearance ln Lhe
place where Lhe long arm of Lhe law Lhru Lhe warranL of arresL may reach hlm ls predlcaLed on a clear
deslre Lo avold and evade Lhe warranL 1hls allegaLlon ln Lhe Answer however was noL even forLlfled wlLh
any aLLached documenL Lo show when he lefL Lhe unlLed SLaLes and when he reLurned Lo Lhls counLry facLs
upon whlch Lhe concluslon of absence of knowledge abouL Lhe crlmlnal complalnL may be derlved Cn Lhe
conLrary Lhe facL of arresL of respondenLs wlfe on november 6 1983 ln Lhe unlLed SLaLes by Lhe lraud
8ureau lnvesLlgaLors ln an aparLmenL pald for respondenL ln LhaL counLry can hardly rebuL whaLever
presumpLlon of knowledge Lhere ls agalnsL Lhe respondenL
2

And proceedlng Lherefrom Lhe CCMLLLC ln Lhe dlsposlLlve porLlon declared
WPL8LlC8L conslderlng LhaL respondenL has been proven Lo be fuglLlve from [usLlce he ls hereby ordered
dlsquallfled or lnellglble from assumlng and performlng Lhe funcLlons of Covernor of Cuezon rovlnce
8espondenL ls ordered Lo lmmedlaLely vacaLe sald offlce lurLher he ls hereby dlsquallfled from runnlng for
Covernor for Cuezon rovlnce ln Lhe May 8 1993 elecLlons LasLly hls cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for Lhe May
8 1993 elecLlons ls hereby seL aslde
AL any raLe 8odrlguez agaln emerge as Lhe vlcLorlous candldaLe ln Lhe May 8 1993 elecLlon for Lhe poslLlon of
governor
Cn May 10 and 11 1993 Marquez flled urgenL moLlons Lo suspend 8odrlguez proclamaLlon whlch Lhe CCMLLLC
granLed on May 11 1993 1he rovlnclal 8oard of Canvassers noneLheless proclalmed 8odrlguez on May 12 1993
1he CCMLLLC ConsolldaLed 8esoluLlon ln LC no 9228 and SA no 93089 and Lhe May 11 1993 8esoluLlon
suspendlng 8odrlguez proclamaLlon Lhus gave rlse Lo Lhe flllng of Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon for nettlototl (C8 no 120099)
on May 16 1993
Cn May 22 1993 Marquez flled an Cmnlbus MoLlon 1o Annul 1he roclamaLlon of 8odrlguez 1o roclalm Marquez
And 1o ClLe 1he rovlnclal 8oard of Canvassers ln ConLempL before Lhe CCMLLLC (ln LC no 9228 and SA no 93
089)
AcLlng on Marquez omnlbus moLlon Lhe CCMLLLC ln lLs 8esoluLlon of !une 23 1993 nulllfled 8odrlguez
proclamaLlon and ordered cerLaln members of Lhe Cuezon rovlnce rovlnclal 8oard of Canvassers Lo explaln why
Lhey should noL be clLed ln conLempL for dlsobeylng Lhe poll bodys May 11 1993 8esoluLlon suspendlng 8odrlguez
proclamaLlon 8uL wlLh respecL Lo Marquez moLlon for hls proclamaLlon Lhe CCMLLLC deferred acLlon unLll afLer Lhls
CourL has resolved Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon (C8 no 120099)
8odrlguez flled a moLlon Lo admlL supplemenLal peLlLlon Lo lnclude Lhe aforesald CCMLLLC !une 23 1993 8esoluLlon
aparL from Lhe May 7 and May 11 1993 8esoluLlons (ConsolldaLed 8esoluLlon and Crder Lo suspend 8odrlguez
proclamaLlon respecLlvely)
As dlrecLed by Lhe CourL oral argumenLs were had ln relaLlon Lo Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon (C8 no 120099) on !uly 13
1993
Marquez on AugusL 3 1993 flled an urgenL MoLlon for 1emporary 8esLralnlng Crder Cr rellmlnary ln[uncLlon
whlch soughL Lo reLaln and en[oln 8odrlguez from exerclslng Lhe powers funcLlons and prerogaLlves of Covernor of
Cuezon AcLlng favorably Lhereon Lhe CourL ln a 8esoluLlon daLed AugusL 8 1993 lssued a Lemporary resLralnlng
order 8odrlguez urgenL MoLlon Lo LlfL 1emporary 8esLralnlng Crder And/Cr lor 8econslderaLlon was denled by
Lhe CourL ln an AugusL 13 1993 8esoluLlon AnoLher slmllar urgenL moLlon was laLer on flled by 8odrlguez whlch Lhe
CourL also denled
ln a 8esoluLlon daLed CcLober 24 1993 Lhe CourL
8LSCLvLu Lo ul8LC1 tbe cboltoo of tbe colssloo oo lentloos (cOMc) to Jeslqoote o
colsslooet ot o tookloq offlnlol of tbe cOMc Lo 8LCLlvL Anu LvALuA1L such legally admlsslble
evldence as hereln peLlLloner Lduardo 8odrlguez may be mlnded Lo presenL by way of refuLlng Lhe evldence
hereLofore submlLLed by prlvaLe respondenL 8lenvenldo Marquez Sr or LhaL whlch can Lend Lo esLabllsh
peLlLloners conLenLlon LhaL he does noL fall wlLhln Lhe legal concepL of a fuglLlve from [usLlce rlvaLe
respondenL Marquez may llkewlse lf he so deslres lnLroduce addlLlonal and admlsslble evldence ln supporL
of hls own poslLlon 1he provlslons of SecLlons 3 Lo 10 8ule 33 of Lhe 8ules of CourL may be applled ln Lhe
recepLlon of Lhe evldence 1be cboltoo of tbe cOMc sboll bove tbe ptoneeJloqs nopleteJ ooJ tbe
nottespooJloq tepott sbltteJ Lo Lhls CourL wlLhln LhlrLy (30) days from noLlce hereof
1he CCMLLLC complled LherewlLh by flllng before Lhe CourL on uecember 26 1993 a reporL enLlLled LvluLnCL Cl
1PL A81lLS and CCMMlSSlCnS LvALuA1lCn whereln Lhe CCMLLLC afLer callbraLlng Lhe parLles evldence
declared LhaL 8odrlguez ls nC1 a fqltlve fto jstlne as deflned ln Lhe maln oplnlon ln Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo Lhus
maklng a 180degree Lurnaround from lLs flndlng ln Lhe ConsolldaLed 8esoluLlon ln arrlvlng aL Lhls new concluslon
Lhe CCMLLLC oplned LhaL loteot to evoJe ls a maLerlal elemenL of Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo deflnlLlon Such loteot to
evoJe ls absenL ln 8odrlguez case because evldence has esLabllshed LhaL 8odrlguez arrlved ln Lhe hlllpplnes (!une
23 1983) long before Lhe crlmlnal charge was lnsLlLuLed ln Lhe Los Angeles CourL (november 12 1983)
8uL Lhe CCMLLLC reporL dld noL end Lhere 1he poll body expressed whaL lL descrlbes as lLs petslsteot Jlsnofott on
wheLher lL read and applled correcLly Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo deflnlLlon of fqltlve fto jstlne So as noL Lo mlss
anyLhlng we quoLe Lhe CCMLLLCs observaLlons ln full
1he maln oplnlons deflnlLlon of a fuglLlve from [usLlce lonlJe noL only Lhose who flee afLer
convlcLlon Lo avold punlshmenL buL also Lhose who afLer belng charged flee Lo avold prosecuLlon lL
proceeded Lo sLaLe LhaL
1hls deflnlLlon Lruly flnds supporL from [urlsprudence (hlllpplne Law ulcLlonary 1hlrd
LdlLlon p 399 by l8 Moreno 8lacks Law ulcLlonary SlxLh LdlLlon p 671 klng v noe
244 SC 344 137 SL 2d 102 103 Pughes v flanz 138 lederal 8eporLer 980 1obln v
Casaus 273 aclflc 8eporLer 2d p 792) and lL may be so conceded as expresslng Lhe
general and ordlnary connoLaLlon of Lhe Lerm
8uL ln Lhe ma[orlLy of Lhe cases clLed Lhe deflnlLlon of Lhe Lerm fuglLlve from [usLlce conLemplaLes oLher
lnsLances noL expllclLly menLloned ln Lhe maln oplnlon 8lacks Law ulcLlonary beglns Lhe deflnlLlon of Lhe
Lerm by referrlng Lo a fuglLlve from [usLlce as
(A) person who havlng commlLLed a crlme flees from [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe courL where
crlme was commlLLed or deparLs from hls usual place of abode and conceals hlmself
wlLhln Lhe dlsLrlcL
1hen clLlng klng v noe Lhe deflnlLlon conLlnues and concepLuallzes a fuglLlve from [usLlce as
a person who bovloq noltteJ ot beeo nbotqeJ ltb o ntle ln one sLaLe has lefL
lLs [urlsdlcLlon and ls found wlLhln Lhe LerrlLory of anoLher when lL ls soughL Lo sub[ecL
hlm Lo Lhe crlmlnal process of Lhe former sLaLe (our emphasls)
ln nqbes v lflooz Lhe Lerm was deflned as
a person who havlng commlLLed wlLhln a sLaLe a crlme when soughL for Lo be
sub[ecLed Lo crlmlnal process ls found wlLhln Lhe LerrlLory of anoLher sLaLe
Morenos hlllpplne Law ulcLlonary 3Lh Ld conslders Lhe Lerm as an
expresslon whlch refers Lo one havlng commlLLed or belng accused of a crlme ln one
[urlsdlcLlon and ls absenL fot ooy teosoo fto tbot jtlsJlntloo
Speclflcally one who flees Lo avold punlshmenL (emphasls ours)
lrom Lhe above rullngs lL can be gleaned LhaL Lhe ob[ecLlve facLs sufflclenL Lo consLlLuLe fllghL from [usLlce
are (a) a person commlLLed a crlme or has been charged for Lhe commlsslon Lhereof and (b) LhereafLer
leaves Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe courL where sald crlme was commlLLed or hls usual place of abode
llllng of charges prlor Lo fllghL ls noL always an anLecedenL requlremenL Lo label one a fuglLlve from
[usLlce Mere commlsslon of a crlme wlLhouL charges havlng been flled for Lhe same and fllghL
subsequenL LhereLo sufflclenLly meeL Lhe deflnlLlon ALLenLlon ls dlrecLed aL Lhe use of Lhe word crlme
whlch ls noL employed Lo connoLe gullL or convlcLlon for Lhe commlsslon Lhereof !usLlce uavldes separaLe
oplnlon ln C8 no 112889 elucldaLes LhaL Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon for belng a fuglLlve does noL lnvolve Lhe lssue
of Lhe presumpLlon of lnnocence Lhe reason for dlsquallflcaLlon belng LhaL a person was noL broughL
wlLhln Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe courL because he had successfully evaded arresL or lf he was broughL wlLhln
Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe courL and was Lrled and convlcLed he has successfully evaded servlce of senLence
because he had [umped ball or escaped 1he dlsquallflcaLlon Lhen ls based on hls fllqbt fto jstlne
CLher rullngs of Lhe unlLed SLaLes Supreme CourL furLher ampllfy Lhe vlew LhaL lnLenL and purpose for
deparLure ls lnconsequenLlal Lo Lhe lnqulry 1he LexLs whlch are persuaslve ln our [urlsdlcLlon are more
unequlvocal ln Lhelr pronouncemenLs ln kloq v u5 (144 l 2nd 729) clLlng kobetts v kellly (116 uS 80) Lhe
unlLed SLaLes Supreme CourL held
lL ls noL necessary LhaL Lhe parLy should have lefL Lhe sLaLe or Lhe [udlclal dlsLrlcL
where Lhe crlme ls alleged Lo have been commlLLed afLer an lndlcLmenL found ot fot
tbe ptpose of ovolJloq oo ootlnlpoteJ ptosentloo buL LhaL havlng commlLLed a crlme
wlLhln a sLaLe or dlsLrlcL he has lefL and ls found ln anoLher [urlsdlcLlon (emphasls
supplled)
ClLlng 5tote v klnbtet (37 Mlnn 436) Lhe CourL furLher ruled ln unmlsLakeable language
1he slmple facL LhaL Lhey (person who have commlLLed crlme wlLhln a sLaLe) are noL wlLhln Lhe sLaLe Lo
answer lLs crlmlnal process when requlred renders Lhem ln legal lnLendmenL fuglLlves from [usLlce
1PL8LlC8L l1 ALA8S 1PA1 ClvLn 1PL Au1PC8l1lLS Cl1Lu ln C8 nC 112889 1PL ML8L lAC1 1PA1
1PL8L A8L LnulnC CPA8CLS ln 1PL unl1Lu S1A1LS Anu 1PA1 L1l1lCnL8 8Cu8lCuLZ lS ln 1PL
PlLllnLS MAkL L1l1lCnL8 A luCl1lvL l8CM !uS1lCL
lrom Lhe foregolng dlscusslons Lhe deLermlnaLlon of wheLher or noL 8odrlguez ls a fuglLlve from [usLlce
hlnges on wheLher or noL 8odrlguez evldence shall be measured agalnsL Lhe Lwo lnsLances menLloned ln
Lhe maln oplnlon or ls Lo be expanded as Lo lnclude oLher slLuaLlons alluded Lo by Lhe forelgn [urlsprudence
clLed by Lhe CourL ln facL Lhe splrlLed legal fray beLween Lhe parLles ln Lhls case focused on each camps
aLLempL Lo consLrue Lhe CourLs deflnlLlon so as Lo flL or Lo exclude peLlLloner wlLhln Lhe deflnlLlon of a
fuglLlve from [usLlce Conslderlng Lherefore Lhe equally valld yeL dlfferenL lnLerpreLaLlons resulLlng from
Lhe Supreme CourL declslon ln C8 no 112889 Lhe Commlsslon deems lL mosL conformable Lo sald
declslon Lo evaluaLe Lhe evldence ln llghL of Lhe varled consLrucLlons open Lo lL and Lo respecLfully submlL
Lhe flnal deLermlnaLlon of Lhe case Lo Lhe Ponorable Supreme CourL as Lhe flnal lnLerpreLer of Lhe law
1he lnsLanL peLlLlon dwells on LhaL nagglng lssue of wheLher 8odrlguez ls a fqltlve fto jstlne Lhe deLermlnaLlon
of whlch as we have dlrecLed Lhe CCMLLLC on Lwo (2) occaslons (ln Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo and ln Lhe CourLs
CcLober 24 1993 8esoluLlon) musL conform Lo how such Lerm has been deflned by Lhe CourL ln Lhe MAkOu2
uenlsloo 1o relLeraLe a fqltlve fto jstlne
lncludes noL only Lhose who flee afLer convlcLlon Lo avold punlshmenL buL llkewlse who afLer belng
charged flee Lo avold prosecuLlon
1he deflnlLlon Lhus lndlcaLes LhaL Lhe loteot to evoJe ls Lhe compelllng facLor LhaL anlmaLes ones fllghL from a
parLlcular [urlsdlcLlon And obvlously Lhere can only be an loteot to evoJe prosecuLlon or punlshmenL when Lhere ls
knowledge by Lhe fleelng sub[ecL of an already lnsLlLuLed lndlcLmenL or of a promulgaLed [udgmenL of convlcLlon
8odrlguez case [usL cannoL flL ln Lhls concepL 1here ls no dlspuLe LhaL hls arrlval ln Lhe hlllpplnes from Lhe uS on
!une 23 1983 as per cerLlflcaLlons lssued by Lhe 8ureau of lmmlgraLlons daLed Aprll 27
3
and !une 26 of 1993
4

pteneJeJ Lhe flllng of Lhe felony complalnL ln Lhe Los Angeles CourL on november 12 1983 and of Lhe lssuance on
even daLe of Lhe arresL warranL by Lhe same forelgn courL by olost flve (5) ootbs lL was clearly lmposslble for
8odrlguez Lo have known abouL such felony complalnL and arresL warranL aL Lhe Llme he lefL Lhe uS as Lhere was ln
facL no complalnL and arresL warranL much less convlcLlon Lo speak of yeL aL such Llme WhaL prosecuLlon or
punlshmenL Lhen was 8odrlguez dellberaLely runnlng away from wlLh hls deparLure from Lhe uS? 1he very essence of
belng a fqltlve fto jstlne under Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo deflnlLlon ls [usL nowhere Lo be found ln Lhe
clrcumsLances of 8odrlguez
WlLh LhaL Lhe CourL glves due credlL Lo Lhe CCMLLLC ln havlng made Lhe same analysls ln lLs CCMMlSSlCnS
LvALuA1lCn 1here are ln facL oLher observaLlons conslsLenL wlLh such analysls made by Lhe poll body LhaL are
equally formldable so as Lo merlL Lhelr adopLlon as parL of Lhls declslon Lo wlL
lL ls acknowledged LhaL Lhere was an aLLempL by prlvaLe respondenL Lo show 8odrlguez lnLenL Lo evade Lhe
law 1hls was done by offerlng for admlsslon a volumlnous copy of an lnvesLlgaLlon reporL (LxhlblLs l Lo l17
and ! Lo !87 lncluslve) on Lhe alleged crlmes commlLLed whlch led Lo Lhe flllng of Lhe charges agalnsL
peLlLloner lL was offered for Lhe sole purpose of esLabllshlng Lhe facL LhaL lL was lmposslble for peLlLloner
noL Lo have known of sald lnvesLlgaLlon due Lo lLs magnlLude unforLunaLely such concluslon mlsleads
because lnvesLlgaLlons of Lhls naLure no maLLer how exLenslve or prolonged are shrouded wlLh uLmosL
secrecy Lo afford law enforcers Lhe advanLage of surprlse and effecL Lhe arresL of Lhose who would be
charged CLherwlse Lhe lndlscreeL conducL of Lhe lnvesLlgaLlon would be noLhlng shorL of a wellpubllclzed
announcemenL Lo Lhe perpeLraLors of Lhe lmmlnenL flllng of charges agalnsL Lhem And havlng been
forewarned every efforL Lo saboLage Lhe lnvesLlgaLlon may be resorLed Lo by lLs lnLended ob[ecLs 8uL lf
prlvaLe respondenLs aLLempL Lo show 8odrlguez lnLenL Lo evade Lhe law aL Lhe Llme he lefL Lhe unlLed
SLaLes has any legal consequence aL all lL wlll be noLhlng more Lhan proof LhaL even prlvaLe respondenL
accepLs LhaL lnLenL Lo evade Lhe law ls a maLerlal elemenL ln Lhe deflnlLlon of a fuglLlve
1he clrcumsLanLlal facL LhaL lL was sevenLeen (17) days afLer 8odrlguez deparLure LhaL charges agalnsL hlm
were flled cannoL overLurn Lhe presumpLlon of good falLh ln hls favor 1he same suggesLs noLhlng more Lhan
Lhe sequence of evenLs whlch Lransplred A sub[ecLlve facL as LhaL of peLlLloners purpose cannoL be lnferred
from Lhe ob[ecLlve daLa aL hand ln Lhe absence of furLher proof Lo subsLanLlaLe such clalm ln facL Lhe
evldence of peLlLloner 8odrlguez sufflclenLly proves LhaL hls compulslon Lo reLurn Lo Lhe hlllpplnes was due
Lo hls deslre Lo [oln and parLlclpaLe vlgorously ln Lhe pollLlcal campalgns agalnsL former resldenL lerdlnand
L Marcos lor lndeed noL long afLer peLlLloners arrlval ln Lhe counLry Lhe upheaval wroughL by Lhe
pollLlcal forces and Lhe avalanche of evenLs whlch occurred resulLed ln one of Lhe more colorful evenLs ln
Lhe hlllpplne hlsLory 1he LuSA 8evoluLlon led Lo Lhe ousLer of former res Marcos and preclplLaLed
changes ln Lhe pollLlcal cllmaLe And belng a flgure ln Lhese developmenLs peLlLloner 8odrlguez began
servlng hls home provlnce as ClC8oard Member of Lhe Sanggunlang anlalawlgan ng Cuezon ln 1986
1hen he was elecLed Covernor ln 1988 and conLlnues Lo be lnvolved ln pollLlcs ln Lhe same capaclLy as re
elecLed Covernor ln 1992 and Lhe dlspuLed reelecLlon ln 1993 AlLogeLher Lhese landmark daLes hem ln for
peLlLloner a perlod of relenLless lnLenslve and exLenslve acLlvlLy of varled pollLlcal campalgns flrsL agalnsL
Lhe Marcos governmenL Lhen for Lhe governorshlp And servlng Lhe people of Cuezon provlnce as such Lhe
poslLlon enLalls absoluLe dedlcaLlon of ones Llme Lo Lhe demands of Lhe offlce
Pavlng esLabllshed peLlLloners lack of knowledge of Lhe charges Lo be flled agalnsL hlm aL Lhe Llme he lefL
Lhe unlLed SLaLes lL becomes lmmaLerlal under such consLrucLlon Lo deLermlne Lhe exacL Llme when he was
made aware Lhereof Whlle Lhe law as lnLerpreLed by Lhe Supreme CourL does noL counLenance fllghL from
[usLlce ln Lhe lnsLance LhaL a person flees Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of anoLher sLaLe afLer charges agalnsL hlm or a
warranL for hls arresL was lssued or even ln vlew of Lhe lmmlnenL flllng and lssuance of Lhe same
peLlLloners pllghL ls alLogeLher a dlfferenL slLuaLlon When ln good falLh a person leaves Lhe LerrlLory of a
sLaLe noL hls own homeward bound and learns subsequenLly of charges flled agalnsL hlm whlle ln Lhe
relaLlve peace and servlce of hls own counLry Lhe facL LhaL he does noL sub[ecL hlmself Lo Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of
Lhe former sLaLe does noL quallfy hlm ouLrlghL as a fuglLlve from [usLlce
1he severlLy of Lhe law consLrued ln Lhe manner as Lo requlre of a person LhaL he sub[ecL hlmself Lo Lhe
[urlsdlcLlon of anoLher sLaLe whlle already ln hls counLry or else be dlsquallfled from offlce ls more apparenL
when applled ln peLlLloners case 1he crlmlnal process of Lhe unlLed SLaLes exLends only wlLhln lLs
LerrlLorlal [urlsdlcLlon 1haL peLlLloner has already lefL sald counLry when Lhe laLLer soughL Lo sub[ecL hlm Lo
lLs crlmlnal process ls hardly peLlLloners faulL ln Lhe absence of an lnLenL Lo evade Lhe laws of Lhe unlLed
SLaLes peLlLloner had every rlghL Lo deparL Lherefrom aL Lhe preclse Llme LhaL he dld and Lo reLurn Lo Lhe
hlllpplnes noL [usLlflable reason exlsLed Lo curLall or feLLer peLlLloners exerclse of hls rlghL Lo leave Lhe
unlLed SLaLe and reLurn home Pence susLalnlng Lhe conLrary proposlLlon would be Lo unduly burden and
punlsh peLlLloner for exerclslng a rlghL as he cannoL be faulLed for Lhe clrcumsLances LhaL broughL hlm
wlLhln hlllpplne LerrlLory aL Lhe Llme he was soughL Lo be placed under arresL and Lo answer for charges
flled agalnsL hlm
CranLlng as Lhe evldence warranLs LhaL peLlLloner 8odrlguez came Lo know of Lhe charges only laLer and
under hls clrcumsLances ls Lhere a law LhaL requlres peLlLloner Lo Lravel Lo Lhe unlLed SLaLes and sub[ecL
hlmself Lo Lhe moneLary burden and Ledlous process of defendlng hlmself before Lhe counLrys courLs?
lL musL be noLed LhaL moral uprlghLness ls noL a sLandard Loo farreachlng as Lo demand of pollLlcal
candldaLe Lhe performance of duLles and obllgaLlons LhaL are supererogaLory ln naLure We do noL dlspuLe
LhaL an alleged fuglLlve from [usLlce musL perform acLs ln order noL Lo be so caLegorlzed Clearly a person
who ls aware of Lhe lmmlnenL flllng of charges agalnsL hlm or of Lhe same already flled ln connecLlon wlLh
acLs he commlLLed ln Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of a parLlcular sLaLe ls under an obllgaLlon noL Lo flee sald place of
commlsslon Powever as ln peLlLloners case hls deparLure from Lhe unlLed SLaLes may noL place hlm
under a slmllar obllgaLlon Pls subsequenL knowledge whlle ln Lhe hlllpplnes and nonsubmlsslon Lo Lhe
[urlsdlcLlon of Lhe former counLry does noL operaLe Lo label peLlLloner auLomaLlcally a fuglLlve from [usLlce
As he was a publlc offlcer appolnLed and elecLed lmmedlaLely afLer hls reLurn Lo Lhe counLry peLlLloner
8odrlguez had every reason Lo devoLe uLmosL prlorlLy Lo Lhe servlce of hls offlce Pe could noL have gone
back Lo Lhe unlLed SLaLes ln Lhe mlddle of hls Lerm nor could he have Lraveled lnLermlLLenLly LhereLo
wlLhouL [eopardlzlng Lhe lnLeresL of Lhe publlc he serves 1he requlre LhaL of peLlLloner would be Lo puL hlm
ln a paradoxlcal quandary where he ls compelled Lo vlolaLe Lhe very funcLlons of hls offlce
Powever Marquez and Lhe CCMLLLC (ln lLs CCMMlSSlCnS LvALuA1lCn as earller quoLed) seem Lo urge Lhe CourL
Lo redeflne fqltlve fto jstlne 1hey espouse Lhe broader concepL of Lhe Lerm and culled from forelgn auLhorlLles
(malnly of uS vlnLage) clLed ln Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo lLself le LhaL one becomes a fqltlve fto jstlne by Lhe
mere facL LhaL he leaves Lhe [urlsdlcLlon where a charge ls pendlng agalnsL hlm regardless of wheLher or noL Lhe
charge has already been flled aL Lhe Llme of hls fllghL
Sufflce lL Lo say LhaL Lhe lo of tbe nose docLrlne forblds Lhe CourL Lo crafL an expanded redeflnlLlon of fqltlve
fto jstlne (whlch ls aL varlance wlLh Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo) and proceed Lherefrom ln resolvlng Lhe lnsLanL
peLlLlon 1he varlous deflnlLlons of LhaL docLrlne have been lald down ln leople v llollo 103 hll 992 999 Lo wlL
Law of Lhe case has been deflned as Lhe oplnlon dellvered on a former appeal More speclflcally lL means
LhaL whaLever ls once lrrevocably esLabllshed as Lhe conLrolllng legal rule of declslon beLween Lhe same
parLles ln Lhe same case conLlnues Lo be Lhe law of Lhe case wheLher correcL on a general prlnclples or noL
so long as Lhe facLs on whlch such declslon was predlcaLed conLlnue Lo be Lhe facLs of Lhe case before Lhe
courL (21 C!S 330)
lL may be sLaLed as a rule of general appllcaLlon LhaL where Lhe evldence on a second or succeedlng appeal
ls subsLanLlally Lhe same as LhaL on Lhe flrsL or precedlng appeal all maLLers quesLlons polnLs or lssues
ad[udlcaLed on Lhe prlor appeal are Lhe lo of tbe nose on all subsequenL appeals and wlll noL be consldered
or read[udlcaLed Lhereln (3 C!S 1267)
ln accordance wlLh Lhe general rule sLaLed ln SecLlon 1821 where afLer a deflnlLe deLermlnaLlon Lhe courL
has remanded Lhe cause for furLher acLlon below lL wlll refuse Lo examlne quesLlon oLher Lhan Lhose arlslng
subsequenLly Lo such deLermlnaLlon and remand or oLher Lhan Lhe proprleLy of Lhe compllance wlLh lLs
mandaLe and lf Lhe courL below has proceeded ln subsLanLlal conformlLy Lo Lhe dlrecLlons of Lhe appellaLe
courL lLs acLlon wlll noL be quesLloned on a second appeal
As a general rule a declslon on a prlor appeal of Lhe same case ls held Lo be Lhe lo of tbe nose wheLher LhaL
declslon ls rlghL or wrong Lhe remedy of Lhe parLy deemlng hlmself aggrleved belng Lo seek a rehearlng (3
C!S 127677)
CuesLlons necessarlly lnvolved ln Lhe declslon on a former appeal wlll be regarded as Lhe lo of tbe nose on
a subsequenL appeal alLhough Lhe quesLlons are noL expressly LreaLed ln Lhe oplnlon of Lhe courL as Lhe
presumpLlon ls LhaL all Lhe facLs ln Lhe case bearlng on Lhe polnL declded have recelved due conslderaLlon
wheLher all or none of Lhem are menLloned ln Lhe oplnlon (3 C!S 128687)
1o elaboraLe Lhe same parLles (8odrlguez and Marquez) and lssue (wheLher or noL 8odrlguez ls a fqltlve fto
jstlne) are lnvolved ln Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo and Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon 1he MAkOu2 uenlsloo was an appeal from
LC no 9228 (Lhe Marquez po ottooto peLlLlon before Lhe CCMLLLC) 1he lnsLanL peLlLlon ls also an appeal from
LC no 9228 alLhough Lhe CCMLLLC resolved Lhe laLLer [olnLly wlLh SA no 93089 (Marquez peLlLlon for Lhe
dlsquallflcaLlon of 8odrlguez) 1herefore whaL was lrrevocably esLabllshed as Lhe conLrolllng legal rule ln Lhe
MAkOu2 uenlsloo musL govern Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon And we speclflcally refer Lo Lhe concepL of fqltlve fto jstlne
as deflned ln Lhe maln oplnlon ln Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo whlch hlghllghLs Lhe slgnlflcance of an loteot to evoJe buL
whlch Marquez and Lhe CCMLLLC wlLh Lhelr proposed expanded deflnlLlon seem Lo Lrlvlallze
8esldes Lo redeflne fqltlve fto jstlne would only fomenL lnsLablllLy ln our [urlsprudence when hardly has Lhe lnk
drled ln Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo
1o summarlze Lhe Lerm fqltlve fto jstlne as a ground for Lhe dlsquallflcaLlon or lnellglblllLy of a person seeklng
Lo run for any elecLlve local peLlLlon under SecLlon 40(e) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code should be undersLood
accordlng Lo Lhe deflnlLlon glven ln Lhe MAkOu2 uenlsloo Lo wlL
A fuglLlve from [usLlce lncludes noL only Lhose who flee oftet noovlntloo to ovolJ polsbeot buL llkewlse
Lhose who oftet beloq nbotqeJ flee to ovolJ ptosentloo (Lmphasls ours)
loteot to evoJe on Lhe parL of a candldaLe musL Lherefore be esLabllshed by proof LhaL Lhere has already been a
convlcLlon or aL leasL a charge has already been flled aL Lhe Llme of fllghL noL belng a fqltlve fto jstlne under
Lhls deflnlLlon 8odrlguez cannoL be denled Lhe Cuezon rovlnce gubernaLorlal posL
WPL8LlC8L ln vlew of Lhe foregolng Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon ls hereby C8An1Lu and Lhe assalled 8esoluLlons of Lhe
CCMLLLC daLed May 7 1993 (ConsolldaLed 8esoluLlon) May 11 1993 (8esoluLlon suspendlng 8odrlguez
proclamaLlon) and !une 23 1993 (8esoluLlon nulllfylng 8odrlguez proclamaLlon and orderlng Lhe Cuezon rovlnce
rovlnclal 8oard and Canvassers Lo explaln why Lhey should noL be clLed ln conLempL) are SL1 ASluL
SC C8uL8Lu
8or[a vs Come|ec
lacLs
rlvaLe respondenL !ose 1 Capco !r was elecLed vlcemayor of aLeros on !anuary 18 1988 for a Lerm endlng !une 30 1992
Cn SepLember 2 1989 he became mayor by operaLlon of law upon Lhe deaLh of Lhe lncumbenL Cesar 8or[a lor Lhe nexL Lwo
succeedlng elecLlons ln 1992 and 1993 he was agaln reelecLed as Mayor
Cn March 27 1998 prlvaLe respondenL Capco flled a cerLlflcaLe of candldacy for mayor of aLeros relaLlve Lo Lhe May 11 1998
elecLlons eLlLloner 8en[amln u 8or[a !r who was also a candldaLe for mayor soughL Capco's dlsquallflcaLlon on Lhe Lheory
LhaL Lhe laLLer would have already served as mayor for Lhree consecuLlve Lerms by !une 30 1998 and would Lherefore be
lnellglble Lo serve for anoLher Lerm afLer LhaL
1he Second ulvlslon of Lhe Commlsslon on LlecLlons ruled ln favor of peLlLloner and declared prlvaLe respondenL Capco
dlsquallfled from runnlng for reelecLlon as mayor of aLeros buL ln Lhe moLlon for reconslderaLlon ma[orlLy overLurned Lhe
orlglnal declslon
lssue WheLher Capco has served for Lhree consecuLlve Lerms as Mayor?
8ullng no ArLlcle x 8 of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon provldes
SLC 8 1he Lerm of offlce of elecLlve local offlclals excepL barangay offlclals whlch shall be deLermlned by law shall be Lhree
years and no such offlclal shall serve for more Lhan Lhree consecuLlve Lerms volunLary renunclaLlon of Lhe offlce for any lengLh
of Llme shall noL be consldered as an lnLerrupLlon ln Lhe conLlnulLy of hls servlce for Lhe full Lerm for whlch he was elecLed
1hls provlslon ls resLaLed ln 43(b) of Lhe Local CovernmenL Code (8A no 7160)
Sec 43 1erm of Cfflce
(b) no local elecLlve offlclal shall serve for more Lhan Lhree (3) consecuLlve Lerms ln Lhe same poslLlon volunLary renunclaLlon
of Lhe offlce for any lengLh of Llme shall noL be consldered as an lnLerrupLlon ln Lhe conLlnulLy of servlce for Lhe full Lerm for
whlch Lhe elecLlve offlclal concerned was elecLed
A LexLual analysls supporLs Lhe rullng of Lhe CCMLLLC LhaL ArL x 8 conLemplaLes servlce by local offlclals for Lhree
consecuLlve Lerms as a resulL of elecLlon
1he flrsL senLence speaks of Lhe Lerm of offlce of elecLlve local offlclals" and bars such offlclals" from servlng for more Lhan
Lhree consecuLlve Lerms
1he second senLence ln explalnlng when an elecLlve local offlclal may be deemed Lo have served hls full Lerm of offlce sLaLes
LhaL volunLary renunclaLlon of Lhe offlce for any lengLh of Llme shall noL be consldered as an lnLerrupLlon ln Lhe conLlnulLy of
hls servlce for Lhe full Lerm for whlch he was elecLed"
1he Lerm served musL Lherefore be one for whlch Lhe offlclal concerned was elecLed" 1he purpose of Lhls provlslon ls Lo
prevenL a clrcumvenLlon of Lhe llmlLaLlon on Lhe number of Lerms an elecLlve offlclal may serve Conversely lf he ls noL servlng
a Lerm for whlch he was elecLed because he ls slmply conLlnulng Lhe servlce of Lhe offlclal he succeeds such offlclal cannoL be
consldered Lo have fully served Lhe Lerm now wlLhsLandlng hls volunLary renunclaLlon of offlce prlor Lo lLs explraLlon
8eference ls made Lo Commlssloner 8ernas' commenL on ArL vl 7 whlch slmllarly bars members of Lhe Pouse of
8epresenLaLlves from servlng for more Lhan Lhree Lerms Commlssloner 8ernas sLaLes LhaL lf one ls elecLed 8epresenLaLlve Lo
serve Lhe unexplred Lerm of anoLher LhaL unexplred Lerm no maLLer how shorL wlll be consldered one Lerm for Lhe purpose of
compuLlng Lhe number of successlve Lerms allowed"
1hls ls acLually based on Lhe oplnlon expressed by Commlssloner uavlde ln answer Lo a query of Commlssloner Suarez lor
example a speclal elecLlon ls called for a SenaLor and Lhe SenaLor newly elecLed would have Lo serve Lhe unexplred porLlon of
Lhe Lerm Would LhaL mean LhaL servlng Lhe unexplred porLlon of Lhe Lerm ls already consldered one Lerm? So half a Lerm
whlch ls acLually Lhe correcL sLaLemenL plus one Lerm would dlsquallfy Lhe SenaLor concerned from runnlng? ls LhaL Lhe
meanlng of Lhls provlslon on dlsquallflcaLlon Madam resldenL?" Commlssloner uavlde sald ?es because we speak of
Lerm" and lf Lhere ls a speclal elecLlon he wlll serve only for Lhe unexplred porLlon of LhaL parLlcular Lerm plus one more Lerm
for Lhe SenaLor and Lwo more Lerms for Lhe Members of Lhe Lower Pouse"
1o recaplLulaLe Lhe Lerm llmlL for elecLlve local offlclals musL be Laken Lo refer Lo Lhe rlghL Lo be elecLed as well as Lhe rlghL Lo
serve ln Lhe same elecLlve poslLlon ConsequenLly lL ls noL enough LhaL an lndlvldual has served Lhree consecuLlve Lerms ln an
elecLlve local offlce he musL also have been elecLed Lo Lhe same poslLlon for Lhe same number of Llmes before Lhe
dlsquallflcaLlon can apply