TOMATIC ARATUC, et. al. VS.

THE COMMISSION ON Petitioner Maceda filed a petition for Prohibition

ELECTIONS, et al seeking to nullify the provisional increase. Petitioner
G.R. Nos. L-49705-09. February 08, 1979 maintains that this order of proof deprived him of his
right to finish his cross-examination of Petron's
FACTS: The Aratuc petition is expressly predicated on witnesses and denied him his right to cross-examine
the ground that respondent Comelec "committed grave each of the witnesses of Caltex and Shell. He points out
abuse of discretion, amounting to lack of jurisdiction" in that this relaxed procedure resulted in the denial of due
eight specifications. According to counsel for Aratuc, et process.
al.; "petitioners submitted their various comments on
the reports, the principal gist of which was that it would Solicitor General has pointed out that "x x x The order of
appear uniformly in all the reports submitted by the testimony both with respect to the examination of the
Comelec-NBI experts that the registered voters were not particular witness and to the general course of the trial
the ones who voted as shown by the fact that the is within the discretion of the court and the exercise of
thumbprints appearing in Form 1 were different from this discretion in permitting to be introduced out of the
the thumbprints of the voters in Form 5. On the other order prescribed by the rules is not improper. Such a
hand, the Mandangan petition raises pure questions of relaxed procedure is especially true in administrative
law and jurisdiction. In other words, both petitions bodies, such as the ERB, which in matters of rate or
invoke the Court's certiorari jurisdiction, not its price fixing, is considered as exercising a quasi-
appellate authority of review. legislative, not quasi-judicial, function. As such
administrative agency, it is not bound by the strict or
ISSUE: Whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear case. technical rules of evidence governing court proceedings;
that aside from the increase in crude oil prices, all the
RULING: In regard to the jurisdictional and due process applications of the respondent oil companies filed with
points raised by herein petitioner, it is of decisive the ERB, covered claims from the OPSF.
importance to bear in mind that under Section 168 of
the Revised Election Code of 1978, "the Commission (on ISSUE: Whether the decision of ERB oppose the
Elections) shall have direct control and supervision over presidential review.
the board of canvassers" and that relatedly, Section 175
of the same Code provides that it "shall be the sole RULING: "The ERB is not averse to the idea of a
judge of all pre-proclamation controversies." While presidential review of its decision," except that there is
nominally, the procedure of bringing to the Commission no law at present authorizing the same. Perhaps, as
objections to the actuations of boards of canvassers has pointed out by Justice Padilla, our lawmakers may see
been quite loosely referred to in certain quarters, even the wisdom of allowing presidential review of the
by the Commission and by this Court, such as in the decisions of the ERB, since, despite its being a quasi-
guidelines of May 23, 1978 quoted earlier in this judicial body, it is still "an administrative body under the
opinion, as an appeal, the fact of the matter is that the Office of the President whose decisions should be
authority of the Commission in reviewing such appealed to the President under the established
actuations does not spring from any appellate principle of exhaustion of administrative remedies,
jurisdiction conferred by any specific provision of law, especially on a matter as transcendental as oil price
for there is none such provision anywhere in the increases which affect the lives of almost all Filipinos.
Election Code, but from the plenary prerogative of
direct control and supervision endowed to it by the
above-quoted provisions of Section 168. And in MARIA ELENA MALAGA, ET. AL VS. MANUEL R.
administrative law, it is a too well settled postulate to PENACHOS, JR., ET. AL
need any supporting citation here, that a superior body G.R. NO. 86695. SEPTEMBER 03, 1992
or office having supervision and control over another
may do directly what the latter is supposed to do or FACTS: The Iloilo State College of Fisheries issues an
ought to have done. Invitation to Bid for the construction of a Micro
Laboratory Building at ISCOF. The bids would be
received and opened on December 12, 1988, at 3
ERNESTO M. MACEDA, PETITIONER, VS. ENERGY o'clock in the afternoon. However, petitioners were not
REGULATORY BOARD, et. al. allowed to participate in the bidding because their
G.R. No. 96266. July 18, 1991 documents were considered late, having been
submitted after the cut-off time of ten o'clock in the
FACTS: Upon the outbreak of the Persian Gulf conflict, morning.
private respondents oil companies filed with the ERB
1ERB issued an order granting a provisional increase of The petitioners filed a complaint with the RTC against
P1.42 per liter. the chairman and members of PBAC in their official and
personal capacities and allege that they had submitted

Page | 1
their PRE-C1 on time, the PBAC refused without just date of bidding if the estimated project cost was
cause to accept them. Judge Lebaquin issued a between P1M and P5M. PBAC has not denied that these
restraining order prohibiting PBAC from conducting the forms were issued only on December 2, 1988, or only
bidding and awarding the project. The defendants filed ten days before the bidding scheduled for December 12,
a motion to lift the restraining order on the ground that 1988. At the very latest, PBAC should have issued them
the court was prohibited from issuing restraining orders, on November 12, 1988, or 30 days before the
preliminary injunctions, and preliminary mandatory scheduled bidding.
injunctions by P.D. 1818. The private respondents
maintain that since the members of the board of
trustees of the ISCOF are all government officials under FIDENCIO Y. BEJA, SR. VS. COURT OF APPEALS, et. al.
Section 7 of P.D. 1523 and since the operations and G.R. No. 97149. March 31, 1992
maintenance of the ISCOF are provided for in the
General Appropriations Law, it should be considered a FACTS: The PPA General Manager, Rogelio A. Dayan,
government institution whose infrastructure project is filed Administrative Case against petitioner Beja and
covered by P.D. 1818. Hernando G. Villaluz for grave dishonesty, grave
misconduct, willful violation of reasonable office rules
ISSUE: Whether P.D. 1818 does not cover the ISCOF and regulations and conduct prejudicial to the best
because of its separate and distinct corporate interest of the service. Beja and Villaluz allegedly
personality erroneously assessed storage fees resulting in the loss
of P38,150.77 on the part of the PPA. The charge
RULING: The 1987 Administrative Code defines a consisted of six (6) different specifications of
government instrumentality; Instrumentality refers to administrative offenses including fraud. Beja was also
any agency of the National Government, not integrated placed under preventive suspension pursuant to Sec.
within the department framework, vested with special 41 of P. D. No. 807.
functions or jurisdiction by law, endowed with some if
not all corporate powers, administering special funds, Beja challenges the legality of the preventive suspension
and enjoying operational autonomy, usually through a and the jurisdiction of the DOTC Secretary and/or the
charter. This term includes regulatory agencies, AAB to initiate and hear administrative cases against
chartered institutions, and government-owned or PPA personnel below the rank of Assistant General
controlled corporations. Manager. Petitioner anchors his contention that the PPA
general manager cannot subject him to a preventive
The same Code describes a chartered institution thus: suspension on the following provision of Sec. 8, Art. V of
Chartered institution - refers to any agency organized Presidential Decree No. 857 which provides. “(d) The
or operating under a special charter, and vested by law General Manager shall, subject to the approval of the
with functions relating to specific constitutional Board, appoint and remove personnel below the rank of
policies or objectives. This term includes the state Assistant General Manager." Petitioner contends that
universities and colleges, and the monetary authority under this provision, the PPA Board of Directors and
of the state. not the PPA General Manager is the "proper
disciplining authority."
It is clear from the above definitions that ISCOF is a
chartered institution and is therefore covered by P.D. ISSUE: Whether the DOTC Secretary and/or the AAB
1818. may initiate and hear administrative cases against PPA
personnel below the rank of Assistant General Manager
However, there are at least two irregularities committed
by PBAC that justified injunction of the bidding and the RULING: Under that law, the corporate powers of the
award of the project. We have held that where the law PPA were vested in a governing Board of Directors
requires a previous advertisement before government known as the Philippine Port Authority Council. Sec. 5(i)
contracts can be awarded, non-compliance with the of the same decree gave the Council the power "to
requirement will, as a general rule, render the same appoint, discipline and remove, and determine the
void and of no effect. The fact that an invitation for bids composition of the technical staff of the Authority and
has been communicated to a number of possible other personnel."
bidders is not necessarily sufficient to establish
compliance with the requirements of the law if it is P.D. No. 857. Sec. 4(a) thereof created the Philippine
shown that other possible bidders have not been Ports Authority which would be "attached" to the then
similarly notified. Department of Public Works, Transportation and
Communication. The Administrative Code of 1987
Second, PBAC was required to issue to pre-qualified classified the PPA as an agency "attached" to the
applicants the plans, specifications, and proposal book Department of Transportation and Communications
forms for the project to be bid thirty days before the (DOTC). Sec. 24 of Book IV, Title XV, Chapter 6 of the

Page | 2
same Code provides that the agencies attached to the Solicitor General however, chose to defend its ground
DOTC "shall continue to operate and function in that the instant petition states no cause of action
accordance with the respective charters or laws creating against the public respondent-CSC; the recommendation
them, except when they conflict with this Code." submitted to the president for appointment to a CESO
rank of petitioner Eugenio was a valid act of the career
Attachment of an agency to a Department is one of the executive service board of the civil service commission
three administrative relationships mentioned in Book IV, and it does not have any defect, among others.
Chapter 7 of the Administrative Code of 1987, the other
two being supervision and control and administrative ISSUE: Whether the CSC can abolish the Career
supervision. "Attachment" is defined in Sec. 38 thereof Executive Service Board. (NO)
as follows: "(3) Attachment. - (a) This refers to the
lateral relationship between the department or its RULING: The controlling fact is that the Career Executive
equivalent and the attached agency or corporation for Service Board (CESB) was created by Presidential Decree
purposes of policy and program coordination. No. 1 which adopted the Integrated Reorganization Plan.
Article IV, Chapter I, Part III. It cannot be disputed,
The inescapable conclusion is that with respect to the therefore, that as the CESB was created by law, it can
management of personnel, an attached agency is, to a only be abolished by the legislature. This follows an
certain extent, free from Departmental interference and unbroken stream of rulings that the creation and
control. The law impliedly grants said officials the power abolition of public offices is primarily a legislative
to investigate its personnel below the rank of Assistant function.
Manager who may be charged with an administrative
offense. During such investigation, the PPA General The inescapable conclusion is that respondent
Manager, as earlier stated, may subject the employee Commission's power to reorganize is limited to offices
concerned to preventive suspension. The investigation under its control as enumerated in Section 16, supra.
should be conducted in accordance with the procedure From its inception, the CESB was intended to be an
set out in Sec. 38 of P.D. No. 807. Only after gathering autonomous entity, albeit administratively attached to
sufficient facts may the PPA General Manager impose respondent Commission. As conceptualized by the
the proper penalty in accordance with law. It is the Reorganization Committee "the CESB shall be
latter action which requires the approval of the PPA autonomous. It is expected to view the problem of
Board of Directors. building up executive manpower in the government
with a broad and positive outlook." The essential
It is, therefore, clear that the transmittal of the autonomous character of the CESB is not negated by its
complaint by the PPA General Manager to the AAB was attachment to respondent Commission. By said
premature. The PPA General Manager should have first attachment, CESB was not made to fall within the
conducted an investigation, made the proper control of respondent Commission. Under the
recommendation for the imposable penalty and sought Administrative Code of 1987, the purpose of attaching
its approval by the PPA Board of Directors. It was one functionally inter-related government agency to
discretionary on the part of the herein petitioner to another is to attain "policy and program coordination."
elevate the case to the then DOTC Secretary Reyes. Only
then could the AAB take jurisdiction of the case.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. THE HONORABLE
SANDIGANBAYAN AND EFREN L. ALAS
AIDA D. EUGENIO VS. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION G.R. NOS. 147706-07. February 16, 2005
G.R. No. 115863. March 31, 1995
FACTS: Efren L. Alas was charged emanated from the
FACTS: the Civil Service Commission abolished the alleged anomalous advertising contracts entered into by
Career Executive Service Board. The resolution became him, in his capacity as President and Chief Operating
an impediment to the appointment of petitioner as Civil Officer of the Philippine Postal Savings Bank (PPSB), with
Service Officer, Rank IV. Finding herself bereft of further Bagong Buhay Publishing Company which purportedly
administrative relief as the Career Executive Service caused damage and prejudice to the government.
Board which recommended her CESO Rank IV has been
abolished, petitioner filed the petition at bench to Alas filed a motion to quash the informations for lack of
annul, among others, resolution No. 93-4359. jurisdiction, which motion was vehemently opposed by
The petition argue that resolution is in violation of the the prosecution. The arguments of both parties, the
constitution, respondent commission usurped the respondent court ruled that PPSB was a private
legislative functions of congress when it abolished the corporation and that its officers, particularly herein
CESB, an office created by law, through the issuance of respondent Alas, did not fall under Sandiganbayan
csc resolution no. 93-4359. jurisdiction,

Page | 3
Dissatisfied, the People arguing, in essence, that the this policy of the government, that is, to repress certain
PPSB was a government-owned or controlled acts not only of public officers but also of private
corporation as the term was defined under Section persons constituting graft or corrupt practices or which
2(13) of the Administrative Code of 1987. Likewise, in may lead thereto.
further defining the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan,
RA 8249 did not make a distinction as to the manner of
creation of the government-owned or controlled GUALBERTO J. DE LA LLANA, ET. AL. VS. MANUEL ALBA,
corporations for their officers to fall under its ET. AL.
jurisdiction. Hence, being President and Chief Operating G.R. No. 57883. March 12, 1982
Officer of the PPSB at the time of commission of the
crimes charged, respondent Alas came under the FACTS: Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 was enacted entitled
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. "An Act Reorganizing the Judiciary, Appropriating Funds
Therefor and for Other Purposes." The task of judicial
ISSUE: Whether the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over review, aptly characterized as exacting and delicate, is
the same officers in government-owned or controlled never more so than when a conceded legislative power,
corporations organized and incorporated under the that of judicial reorganization, may possibly collide with
Corporation Code in view of the delimitation provided the time-honored principle of the independence of the
for in Article IX-B Section 2(1) of the 1987 Constitution. judiciary as protected and safeguarded by this
constitutional provision. For the assailed legislation
RULING: YES. Section 2(13) of EO 292 defines mandates that Justices and judges of inferior courts
government-owned or controlled corporations AS from the Court of Appeals to municipal circuit courts,
FOLLOWS: except the occupants of the Sandiganbayan and the
(13) government owned or controlled corporations refer Court of Tax Appeals, unless appointed to the inferior
to any agency organized as a stock or non-stock courts established by such Act, would be considered
corporation vested with functions relating to public separated from the judiciary. It is the termination of
needs whether governmental or proprietary in nature, their incumbency that for petitioners justifies a suit of
and owned by the government directly or indirectly or this character, it being alleged that thereby the security
through its instrumentalities either wholly, or where of tenure provision of the Constitution has been ignored
applicable as in the case of stock corporations to the and disregarded. Petitioners sought to bolster their
extent of at least 51% of its capital stock: provided, that claim by imputing lack of good faith in its enactment
government owned or controlled corporations maybe and characterizing as an undue delegation of legislative
further categorized by the department of the budget, power to the President his authority to fix the
the civil service commission and the commission on compensation and allowances of the Justices and judges
audit for the purpose of the exercise and discharge of thereafter appointed and the determination of the date
their respective powers, functions and responsibilities when the reorganization shall be deemed completed.
with respect to such corporations.
ON the other hand, Solicitor General pointed out that
Congress, pursuant to its authority vested under the there is no valid justification for the attack on the
1987 Constitution, enacted RA 7975 maintaining the constitutionality of this statute, it being a legitimate
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan over presidents, exercise of the power vested in the Batasang Pambansa
directors or trustees, or managers of government- to reorganize the judiciary, the allegations of absence of
owned or controlled corporations without any good faith as well as the attack on the independence of
distinction whatsoever. It is a basic principle of statutory the judiciary being unwarranted and devoid of any
construction that when the law does not distinguish, we support in law.
should not distinguish.
ISSUE: Whether Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 is
In Quimpo v. Tanodbayan, this Court, already mindful of constitutional.
the pertinent provisions of the 1987 Constitution, ruled
that the concerned officers of government-owned or RULING: Yes. Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 is not
controlled corporations, whether created by special law unconstitutional. Nothing is better settled in our law
or formed under the Corporation Code, come under the than that the abolition of an office within the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan for purposes of the competence of a legitimate body if done in good faith
provisions of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. suffers from no infirmity. The ponencia of Justice J.B.L.
Otherwise, as we emphasized therein, a major policy of Reyes in Cruz v. Primicias, Jr. reiterated such a doctrine:
Government, which is to eradicate, or at the very least "We find this point urged by respondents, to be without
minimize, the graft and corruption that has permeated merit. No removal or separation of petitioners from the
the fabric of the public service like a malignant social service is here involved, but the validity of the abolition
cancer, would be seriously undermined. In fact, Section of their offices. This is a legal issue that is for the Courts
1 of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act embodies to decide. It is well-known rule also that valid abolition

Page | 4
of offices is neither removal nor separation of the ISSUE: Whether the court is correct in dismissing the
incumbents. * * * And, of course, if the abolition is void, case.
the incumbent is deemed never to have ceased to hold
office. The preliminary question laid at rest, we pass to RULING: Section 2 of Commonwealth Act No. 598,
the merits of the case. As well-settled as the rule that which provides: "The Civil Service Board of Appeals shall
the abolition of an office does not amount to an illegal have the power and authority to hear and decide all
removal of its incumbent is the principle that, in order administrative cases brought before it on appeal, and its
to be valid, the abolition must be made in good faith." decisions in such cases shall be final, unless revised or
modified by the President of the Philippines.
The legislature may abolish courts inferior to the
Supreme Court and therefore may reorganize them It is urged on the appeal that there is no duty imposed
territorially or otherwise thereby necessitating new on a party against whom a decision has been rendered
appointments and commissions. Section 2, Article VIII of by the Civil Service Board of Appeals to appeal to the
the Constitution vests in the National Assembly the President, and that the tendency of courts has been not
power to define, prescribe and apportion the to subject the decision of the President to judicial
jurisdiction of the various courts, subject to certain review. It is further argued that if decisions of the
limitations in the case of the Supreme Court. Auditor General may be appealed to the courts, those of
the Civil Service Board of Appeals need not be acted
Removal is, of course, to be distinguished from upon by the President also, before recourse may be had
termination by virtue of the abolition of the office. to the courts. It is also argued that if a case is appealed
There can be no tenure to a non-existent office. After to the President, his action should be final and not
the abolition, there is in law no occupant. In case of reviewable by the courts because such a course of
removal, there is an office with an occupant who would action would be derogatory to the high office of the
thereby lose his position. It is in that sense that from the President.
standpoint of strict law, the question of any impairment
of security of tenure does not arise. Nonetheless, for The objection to a judicial review of a Presidential act
the incumbents of inferior courts abolished, the effect is arises from a failure to recognize the most important
one of separation. As to its effect, no distinction exists principle in our system of government, i.e., the
between removal and the abolition of the office. separation of powers into three co-equal departments,
Realistically, it is devoid of significance. He ceases to be the executive, the legislative and the judicial, each
a member of the judiciary. In the implementation of the supreme within its own assigned powers and duties.
assailed legislation, therefore, it would be in accordance
with accepted principles of constitutional construction The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
that as far as incumbent justices and judges are requires that where an administrative remedy is
concerned, this Court be consulted and that its view be provided by statute, as in this case, relief must be
accorded the fullest consideration sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts
will act. doctrine is a device based on considerations of
comity and convenience. If a remedy is still available
LEONARDO MONTES VS. THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF within the administrative machinery, this should be
APPEALS AND THE SECRETARY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND resorted to before resort can be made to the courts,
COMMUNICATIONS not only to give the administrative agency opportunity
G.R. No. L-10759. May 20, 1957 to decide the matter by itself correctly, but also to
prevent unnecessary and premature resort to the
FACTS: An administrative Case instituted against courts.
Leonardo Montes for negligence in the performance of
duty. The Civil Service Board of Appeals find petitioner
guilty of contributory negligence in not pumping the DRIANITA BAGAOISAN, ET. AL VS. NATIONAL TOBACCO
water from the bilge, and ordered that he be considered ADMINISTRATION
resigned effective his last day of duty with pay, without G.R. No. 152845. August 05, 2003
prejudice to reinstatement at the discretion of the
appointing officer. FACTS: President Joseph Estrada issued Executive Order
No. 36, amending Executive Order No. 29, insofar as the
Petitioner filed an action in the Court of First Instance of new staffing pattern was concerned. In compliance
Manila to review the decision, but the said court therewith, the NTA prepared and adopted a new
dismissed the action on a motion to dismiss, on the Organization Structure and Staffing Pattern (OSSP)
ground that petitioner had not exhausted all his which was submitted to the Office of the President.
administrative remedies before he instituted the action. Petitioners, all occupying different positions at the NTA
office received individual notices of termination of their
employment with the NTA. Finding themselves without

Page | 5
any immediate relief from their dismissal from the which was allegedly sympathetic to the employer. The
service, petitioners filed a petition for certiorari, Court of Industrial Relation decided the case and
prohibition and mandamus, with prayer for preliminary elevated it to the Supreme Court, but a motion for new
mandatory injunction and/or temporary restraining trial was raised by the NLU. But the Ang Tibay filed a
order, with the Regional Trial Court (RTC). motion for opposing the said motion.

The RTC ordered the NTA to appoint petitioners in the The motion for new trial was raised because according
new OSSP to positions similar or comparable to their to NLU, there are documents that are so inaccessible to
respective former assignments. The appellate court them that even with the exercise of due diligence they
rendered a decision reversing and setting aside the could not be expected to have obtained them and
assailed orders of the trial court offered as evidence in the Court of Industrial Relations.
That these documents, which NLU have now attached as
ISSUE: Whether or not the President, through the exhibits are of such far-reaching importance and effect
issuance of an executive order, can validly carry out the that their admission would necessarily mean the
reorganization of the NTA. modification and reversal of the judgment rendered
therein.
RULING: "The general rule has always been that the
power to abolish a public office is lodged with the ISSUE: Whether the union was denied due process by
legislature. This proceeds from the legal precept that CIR.
the power to create includes the power to destroy. A
public office is either created by the Constitution, by RULING: To begin with the issue before us is to realize
statute, or by authority of law. Thus, except where the the functions of the CIR. The CIR is a special court whose
office was created by the Constitution itself, it may be functions are specifically stated in the law of its creation
abolished by the same legislature that brought it into which is the Commonwealth Act No. 103). It is more an
existence. administrative board than a part of the integrated
judicial system of the nation. It is not intended to be a
"The exception, however, is that as far as bureaus, mere receptive organ of the government.
agencies or offices in the executive department are
concerned, the President's power of control may justify Unlike a court of justice which is essentially passive,
him to inactivate the functions of a particular office, or acting only when its jurisdiction is invoked and deciding
certain laws may grant him the broad authority to carry only cases that are presented to it by the parties’
out reorganization measures. litigant, the function of the CIR, as will appear from
perusal of its organic law is more active, affirmative, and
It is important to emphasize that the questioned dynamic. It not only exercises judicial or quasi-judicial
Executive Orders No. 29 and No. 36 have not abolished functions in the determination of disputes between
the National Tobacco Administration but merely employers and employees but its functions are far more
mandated its reorganization through the streamlining or comprehensive and extensive. It has jurisdiction over
reduction of its personnel. Article VII, Section 17, of the the entire Philippines, to consider, investigate, decide,
Constitution, expressly grants the President control of all and settle any question, matter controversy or disputes
executive departments, bureaus, agencies and offices arising between, and/ or affecting employers and
which may justify an executive action to inactivate the employees or laborers, and landlords and tenants or
functions of a particular office or to carry out farm-laborers, and regulates the relations between
reorganization measures under a broad authority of law. them, subject to, and in accordance with, the provisions
of CA 103.

ANG TIBAY VS. THE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SC had the occasion to point out that the CIR is not
AND NATIONAL LABOR UNION, INC. narrowly constrained by technical rules of procedure,
G.R. No. 46496. February 27, 1940 and equity and substantial merits of the case, without
regard to technicalities or legal forms and shall not be
FACTS: Ang Tibay was a manufacturer of rubber slippers. bound by any technical rules of legal evidence but may
There was a shortage of leather soles, and it was inform its mind in such manner as it may deem just and
necessary to temporarily lay off members of the equitable.
National Labor Union. According to the Union however,
this was merely a scheme to systematically terminate The fact, however, that the CIR may be said to be free
the employees from work, and that the shortage of from rigidity of certain procedural requirements does
soles is unsupported. It claims that Ang Tibay is guilty of not mean that it can in justiciable cases coming before
unjust labor practice because the owner, Teodoro, is it, entirely ignore or disregard the fundamental and
discriminating against the National Labor Union, and essential requirements of due process in trials and
unjustly favoring the National Workers Brotherhood, investigations of an administrative character. There are

Page | 6
cardinal primary rights which must be respected even in RULING: When Presidential Executive Assistant Clave
proceedings of this character: said in his decision that he was "inclined to concur in
the recommendation of the Civil Service Commission",
(1) the right to a hearing, which includes the right to what he meant was that he was concurring with
present one’s cause and submit evidence in support Chairman Clave's recommendation: he was concurring
thereof; with himself.
(2) The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
(3) The decision must have something to support itself; Due process of law means fundamental fairness. It is not
(4) The evidence must be substantial; fair to Doctor Anzaldo that Presidential Executive
(5) The decision must be based on the evidence Assistant Clave should decide whether his own
presented at the hearing; or at least contained in the recommendation as Chairman of the Civil Service
record and disclosed to the parties affected; Commission, as to who between Doctor Anzaldo and
(6) The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on Doctor Venzon should be appointed Science Research
its own independent consideration of the law and facts Supervisor II, should be adopted by the President of the
of the controversy, and not simply accept the views of a Philippines.
subordinate;
(7) The Board or body should, in all controversial Common sense and propriety dictate that the
questions, render its decision in such manner that the Commissioner in the Civil Service Commission, who
parties to the proceeding can know the various Issue should be consulted by the Office of the President,
involved, and the reason for the decision rendered. should be a person different from the person in the
Office of the President who would decide the appeal of
SC said there was a failure to grasp the fundamental the protestant in a contested appointment. In this case,
issue involved due to failure to receive all relevant the person who acted for the Office of the President is
evidence. Thus, the motion for a new trial was granted the same person in the Civil Service Commission, who
and the entire record of this case is remanded to the was consulted by the Office of the President: Jacobo C.
CIR. Clave. The Civil Service Decree could not have
contemplated that absurd situation for, as held in the
Zambales Chromite case, that would not be fair to the
FELICIDAD ANZALDO VS. JACOBO C. CLAVE appellant.
G.R. No. 54597. December 15, 1982
The appointing authority, Doctor Afable, acted in
FACTS: Doctor Felicidad Estores-Anzaldo, seeks to annul accordance with law and properly exercised his
the decision of Presidential Executive Assistant Jacobo C. discretion in appointing Doctor Anzaldo to the contested
Clave dated March 20, 1980, revoking her appointment position.
dated January 5, 1978 as Science Research Supervisor II
and directing the appointment to that position of Considering that Doctor Anzaldo has competently and
Doctor Eulalia L. Venzon. The NIST Reorganization satisfactorily discharged the duties of the contested
Committee found her protest to be valid and position for more than four (4) years now and that she is
meritorious. Because of that impasse, which the NIST qualified for that position, her appointment should be
Commissioner did not resolve, the position was not upheld. Doctor Venzon's protest should be dismissed.
filled up.

Doctor Afable explained that the appointment was JUAN GALLANOSA FRIVALDO VS. COMMISSION ON
made after a thorough study and screening of the ELECTIONS AND THE LEAGUE OF MUNICIPALITIES,
qualifications of Doctors Anzaldo and Venzon and upon SORSOGON CHAPTER
the recommendation of the NIST Staff Evaluation G.R. No. 87193. June 23, 1989
Committee that gave 88 points to Doctor Anzaldo and
61 points to Doctor Venzon. Chairman Clave of the Civil FACTS: Petitioner Juan G. Frivaldo was proclaimed
Service Commission and Commissioner Jose A. R. Melo governor-elect of the province of Sorsogon on January
recommended in Resolution No. 1178 dated August 23, 22, 1988, and assumed office in due time.
1979 that Doctor Venzon be appointed to the contested
position, a recommendation which is in conflict with the On October 27, 1988, the League of Municipalities,
1978 appointment of Doctor Anzaldo which was duly Sorsogon Chapter (hereafter, League), represented by its
attested and approved by the Civil Service Commission. President, Salvador Estuye, who was also suing in his
personal capacity, filed with the Commission on
ISSUE: Whether Dr. Anzaldo was denied due process by Elections a petition for the annulment of Frivaldo's
CIR. election and proclamation on the ground that he was
not a Filipino citizen, having been naturalized in the
United States on January 20, 1983.

Page | 7
 cannot be erased by the electorate alone. The will of
In his answer dated May 22, 1988, Frivaldo admitted the people as expressed through the ballot cannot cure
that he was naturalized in the United States as alleged the vice of ineligibility, especially if they mistakenly
but pleaded the special and affirmative defenses that he believed, as in this case, that the candidate was
had sought American citizenship only to protect himself qualified. Obviously, this rule requires strict application
against President Marcos. His naturalization, he said, when the deficiency is lack of citizenship. If a person
was "merely forced upon himself as a means of survival seeks to serve in the Republic of the Philippines, he
against the unrelenting persecution by the Martial Law must owe his total loyalty to this country only, abjuring
Dictator's agents abroad." He added that he had and renouncing all fealty and fidelity to any other state.
returned to the Philippines after the EDSA revolution to
help in the restoration of democracy. He also argued It is true as the petitioner points out that the status of
that the challenge to his title should be dismissed, being the natural-born citizen is favored by the Constitution
in reality a quo warranto petition that should have been and our laws, which is all the more reason why it should
filed within ten days from his proclamation, in be treasure like a pearl of great price. But once it is
accordance with Section 253 of the Omnibus Election surrendered and renounced, the gift is gone and cannot
Code. The League, moreover, was not a proper party be lightly restored. This country of ours, for all its
because it was not a voter and so could not sue under difficulties and limitations, is like a jealous and
the said section. He contends that by simply filing his possessive mother. Once rejected, it is not quick to
certificate of candidacy he had, without more, already welcome back with eager arms its prodigal if repentant
effectively recovered Philippine citizenship. But that is children. The returning renegade must show, by an
hardly the formal declaration the law envisions - surely, express and unequivocal act, the renewal of his loyalty
Philippine citizenship previously disowned is not that and love.
cheaply recovered.

Speaking for the public respondent, the Solicitor JUAN G. FRIVALDO VS. COMMISSION ON
General supported the contention that Frivaldo was not ELECTIONS, AND RAUL R. LEE
a citizen of the Philippines and had not repatriated G.R. No. 120295. June 28, 1996
himself after his naturalization as an American citizen.
As an alien, he was disqualified from public office in the FACTS: Juan G. Frivaldo, who unquestionably obtained
Philippines. His election did not cure this defect because the highest number of votes in three successive
the electorate of Sorsogon could not amend the elections but who was twice declared by this Court to
Constitution, the Local Government Code, and the be disqualified to hold such office due to his alien
Omnibus Election Code citizenship, and who now claims to have re-assumed his
lost Philippine citizenship thru repatriation; (ii) Raul R.
ISSUE: Whether Juan G. Frivaldo was a citizen of the Lee, who was the second placer in the canvass, but who
Philippines at the time of his election on January 18, claims that the votes cast in favor of Frivaldo should be
1988, as provincial governor of Sorsogon. considered void; that the electorate should be deemed
to have intentionally thrown away their ballots; and that
RULING: No. The reason for this inquiry is the provision legally, he secured the most number of valid votes; or
in Article XI, Section 9, of the Constitution that all public (iii) The incumbent Vice-Governor, Oscar G. Deri, who
officials and employees owe the State and the obviously was not voted directly to the position of
Constitution "allegiance at all times" and the specific governor, but who according to prevailing jurisprudence
requirement in Section 42 of the Local Government should take over the said post inasmuch as, by the
Code that a candidate for local elective office must be ineligibility of Frivaldo, a "permanent vacancy in the
inter alia a citizen of the Philippines and a qualified contested office has occurred"?
voter of the constituency where he is running. Section
117 of the Omnibus Election Code provides that a ISSUE: Who should be declared the rightful governor of
qualified voter must be, among other qualifications, a Sorsogon
citizen of the Philippines, this being an indispensable
requirement for suffrage under Article V, Section 1, of Ruling: Juan G. Frivaldo. The Supreme Court ruled in
the Constitution. favor of Frivaldo on all the issues. Frivaldo's repatriation
was valid and effective as of the date of his application.
This Court will not permit the anomaly of a person Frivaldo's lack of citizenship was not a continuing
sitting as provincial governor in this country while owing disqualification.
exclusive allegiance to another country. The fact that he
was elected by the people of Sorsogon does not excuse Under Sec. 39 of the Local Government Code, it will be
this patent violation of the salutary rule limiting public noted that the law does not specify any particular date
office and employment only to the citizens of this or time when the candidate must possess citizenship,
country. The qualifications prescribed for elective office unlike that for residence (which must consist of at least

Page | 8
one year's residency immediately preceding the day of being a Filipino citizen, lacks the fundamental
election) and age (at least twenty three years of age on qualification for the contested office. Philippine
election day). Even from a literal (as distinguished from citizenship is an indispensable requirement for holding
liberal) construction, it should be noted that Section 39 an elective office. As mandated by law: "An elective
of the Local Government Code speaks of local official must be a citizen of the Philippines."
"Qualifications" of 'ELECTIVE OFFICIALS', not of
candidates. Literally, such qualifications unless 2. The disqualification of petitioner Labo does not
otherwise expressly conditioned, as in the case of age necessarily entitle petitioner Ortega as the candidate
and residence should thus be possessed when the with the next highest number of votes to proclamation
"elective or elected official" begins to govern, i.e., at the as the mayor of Baguio City.
time he is proclaimed and at the start of his term.
Section 39, par. (a) (thereof) speaks of "elective local Sound policy dictates that public elective offices are
official" while par. (b) to (f) refer to "candidates." The filled by those who have received the highest number of
citizenship requirement in the Local Government Code votes cast in the election for that office, and it is a
is to be possessed by an elective official at the latest as fundamental idea in all republican forms of government
of the time he is proclaimed and at the start of the term that no one can be declared elected and no measure
of office to which he has been elected. can be declared carried unless he or it receives a
majority or plurality of the legal votes cast in the
election.
RAMON L. LABO, JR. VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS,
AND ROBERTO ORTEGA The fact that a candidate who obtained the highest
G.R. No. 105111. July 03, 1992 number of votes is later declared to be disqualified or
not eligible for the office to which he was elected does
FACTS: Shortly after petitioner Labo filed his certificate not necessarily entitle the candidate who obtained the
of candidacy, petitioner Ortega filed on March 26, 1992, second highest number of votes to be declared the
a disqualification proceeding against Labo before the winner of the elective office. The votes cast for a dead,
Commission on Elections (Comelec) seeking to cancel disqualified, or non-eligible person may be valid to vote
Labo's certificate of candidacy on the ground that Labo the winner into office or maintain him there. However,
made a false representation when he stated therein that in the absence of a statute which clearly asserts a
he (Labo) is a "natural-born" citizen of the Philippines. contrary political and legislative policy on the matter, if
the votes were cast in the sincere belief that the
It is the contention of petitioner Labo that he is a candidate was alive, qualified, or eligible, they should
Filipino citizen. Alleging lack of trial on the merits as well not be treated as stray, void or meaningless.’"
as the lack of opportunity to be heard in Labo v.
Commission on Elections (supra), it is the submission of The rule, therefore, is the ineligibility of a candidate
petitioner that he can prove his Filipino citizenship. receiving majority votes does not entitle the eligible
candidate receiving the next highest number of votes to
ISSUE: Whether Labo is a Filipino citizen and eligible to be declared elected. A minority or defeated candidate
hold the office of mayor of Baguio City. cannot be deemed elected to the office.

2. Whether the disqualification of petitioner Labo

entitles the candidate (Ortega) receiving the next FRANCISCO M. LECAROZ AND LENLIE LECAROZ VS.
highest number of votes to be proclaimed as the SANDIGANBAYAN AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
winning candidate for mayor of Baguio City
FACTS: Petitioner Francisco M. Lecaroz was the
RULING: No. A perusal of the above provision would Municipal Mayor of Santa Cruz, Marinduque, while his
readily disclose that the Comelec can legally suspend son and co-petitioner Lenlie Lecaroz, was the outgoing
the proclamation of petitioner Labo, his reception of the chairman of the Kabataang Barangay (KB) of Barangay
winning number of votes notwithstanding, especially so Bagong Silang, Santa Cruz, and currently a member of its
where, as in this case, Labo failed to present any Sangguniang Bayan (SB) representing the Federation of
evidence before the Comelec to support his claim of Kabataang Barangays. In the 1985 election of the
reacquisition of Philippine citizenship. Kabataang Barangay Jowil Red won as the KB Chairman
of Barangay Matalaba, Santa Cruz. Red was appointed
Petitioner Labo's status has not changed in the case at by then President Marcos as member of the
bar. To reiterate, he (Labo) was disqualified as a Sangguniang Bayan of Santa Cruz representing the KBs
candidate for being an alien. His election does not of the municipality. However, Mayor Lecaroz informed
automatically restore his Philippine citizenship, the Red that he could not yet sit as member of the
possession of which is an indispensable requirement for municipal council until the Governor of Marinduque had
holding public office. Undoubtedly, petitioner Labo, not cleared his appointment. When Red finally received his

Page | 9
appointment papers, President Aquino was already in holding over. Absent an express or implied
power. But still Red was not allowed to sit as sectoral constitutional or statutory provision to the contrary, an
representative in the Sanggunian. Meanwhile with the officer is entitled to stay in office until his successor is
approval of the Mayor, Lenlie continued to receive his appointed or chosen and has qualified. The legislative
salary for more than a year. Finally Red was able to intent of not allowing holdover must be clearly
secure appointment papers from the Aquino expressed or at least implied in the legislative
administration after three years and nine months from enactment, otherwise it is reasonable to assume that
the date he received his appointment paper from the law-making body favors the same. Indeed, the law
President Marcos. Subsequently, Red filed with the abhors a vacuum in public offices, and courts generally
Office of the Ombudsman several criminal complaints indulge in the strong presumption against a legislative
against the Mayor and Lenlie arising from the refusal of intent to create, by statute, a condition which may result
the two officials to let him assume the position of KB in an executive or administrative office becoming, for
sectoral representative. After preliminary investigation, any period of time, wholly vacant or unoccupied by one
the Ombudsman filed with the Sandiganbayan thirteen lawfully authorized to exercise its functions. This is
(13) informations for estafa through falsification of founded on obvious considerations of public policy, for
public documents against petitioners, and one (1) the principle of holdover is specifically intended to
information for violation of Sec. 3, par. (e) of RA No. prevent public convenience from suffering because of a
3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, against vacancy and to avoid a hiatus in the performance of
the Mayor alone. The Sandiganbayan rendered a government functions.
decision finding the two accused guilty on all counts of
estafa. However, with respect to the charge of violation
of RA No. 3019; the Sandiganbayan acquitted Mayor PATRICIO DUMLAO, ROMEO B. IGOT, AND ALFREDO
Lecaroz. The Sandiganbayan, having denied their motion SALAPANTAN, JR. VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
for reconsideration, the accused, elevated their case to G.R. No. L-52245. January 22, 1980
the Supreme Court.
FACTS: Patricio Dumlao, a former Governor of Nueva
The Supreme Court granted the petition and acquitted Vizcaya, filed his certificate of candidacy for the position
both petitioners of all the thirteen (13) counts of estafa of Governor in the upcoming elections. Dumlao
through falsification of public documents. The court a questioned the constitutionality of a provision that
quo used as indication of conspiracy the fact that the disqualified retired officials over 65 from running for the
accused Mayor certified the payrolls authorizing same elective local office from which they had retired.
payment of compensation to his son and as a Petitioners Romeo B. Igot and Alfredo Salapantan, Jr.
consequence thereof the latter collected his salaries. also challenged the validity of certain statutory
These are not legally accepted indicia, for they were the provisions, including the term of office for local elective
very same acts alleged in the informations as officials and the accreditation of political parties by the
constituting the crime of estafa through falsification. Commission on Elections.
They cannot qualify as proof of complicity or unity of
criminal intent. ISSUE: Is the provision disqualifying retired officials over
65 from running for the same local office constitutional?
ISSUE: Whether Red validly assumed the position of KB
sectoral representative and whether Lenlie Lecaroz RULING: Yes. In the case of a 65-year old elective local
could hold over after his term expired. official, who has retired from a provincial, city, or
municipal office, there is reason to disqualify him from
RULING: No. The concept of holdover when applied to a running for the same office from which he had retired,
public officer implies that the office has a fixed term and as provided for in the challenged provision. The need for
the incumbent is holding onto the succeeding term. It is new blood assumes relevance. The tiredness of the
usually provided by law that officers elected or retiree for government work is present, and what is
appointed for a fixed term shall remain in office not only emphatically significant is that the retired employee has
for that term but until their successors have been already declared himself tired and unavailable for the
elected and qualified. Where this provision is found, the same government work, but, which, by virtue of a
office does not become vacant upon the expiration of change of mind, he would like to assume again. It is for
the term if there is no successor elected and qualified to this very reason that inequality will neither result from
assume it, but the present incumbent will carry over the application of the challenged provision. Just as that
until his successor is elected and qualified, even though provision does not deny equal protection, neither does
it be beyond the term fixed by law. In the instant case, it permit of such denial (see People vs. Vera, 65 Phil. 56
although BP Blg. 51 does not say that a Sanggunian [1933]). Persons similarly situated are similarly treated.
member can continue to occupy his post after the
expiration of his term in case his successor fails to In fine, it bears reiteration that the equal protection
qualify, it does not also say that he is proscribed from clause does not forbid all legal classification. What it

Page | 10
proscribes is a classification which is arbitrary and In Civil Liberties Union vs. The Executive Secretary, we
unreasonable. That constitutional guarantee is not elucidated on the two constitutional prohibitions
violated by a reasonable classification based upon against holding multiple positions in the government
substantial distinctions, where the classification is and receiving double compensation: (1) the blanket
germane to the purpose of the law and applies to all prohibition of paragraph 2, Section 7, Article IX-B on all
those belonging to the same class (Peralta vs. Comelec, government employees against holding multiple
82 SCRA 30 [1978] citing Felwa vs. Salas) The purpose of government offices, unless otherwise allowed by law or
the law is to allow the emergence of younger blood in the primary functions of their positions, and (2) the
local governments. The classification in question being stricter prohibition under Section 13, Article VII on the
pursuant to that purpose, it cannot be considered President and his official family from holding any other
invalid "even if at times, it may be susceptible to the office, profession, business or financial interest, whether
objection that it is marred by theoretical government or private, unless allowed by the
inconsistencies" Constitution. Sections 54 and 56 of the Administrative
Code of 1987 also reiterate the constitutional
prohibition against multiple positions in the government
and receiving additional or double compensation.

The NAC ex oficio members’ representatives who were

all appointive officials with ranks below Assistant
NATIONALAMNESTY COMMISSION, VS. COMMISSION Secretary are covered by the two constitutional
ON AUDIT, JUANITO G. ESPINO, ET. AL. prohibitions. The NAC ex oficio members’
G.R. No. 156982. September 08, 2004 representatives are not exempt from the general
prohibition because there is no law or administrative
FACTS: The NAC ex oficio members’ representatives who order creating a new office or position and authorizing
were all appointive officials with ranks below Assistant additional compensation therefor. The representatives
Secretary are covered by the constitutional prohibitions in fact assumed their responsibilities not by virtue of a
against holding multiple positions in the government new appointment but by mere designation from the ex
and receiving double compensation. Further, the oficio members who were themselves also designated
representatives in fact assumed their responsibilities by as such. The ex oficio members’ representatives are also
mere designation from the ex oficio members who were covered by the strict constitutional prohibition imposed
themselves also designated as such. The representatives on the President and his official family. Again, in Civil
are not entitled to something their own principals are Liberties Union, we held that cabinet secretaries,
prohibited from receiving. including their deputies and assistants, who hold
positions in ex oficio capacities, are proscribed from
National Amnesty Commission (NAC) filed a petition to receiving additional compensation because their
annul the decisions of the Commission on Audit (COA) services are already paid for and covered by the
disallowing the payment of honoraria to representatives compensation attached to their principal offices. Thus,
of ex officio members. COA's decisions were based on in the attendance of the NAC meetings, the ex oficio
COA Memorandum No. 97-038, which prohibited the members were not entitled to, and were in fact
payment of additional compensation to cabinet prohibited from, collecting extra compensation,
secretaries, their deputies and assistants, or their whether it was called per diem, honorarium, allowance
representatives. NAC argued that COA committed grave or some other euphemism. Such additional
abuse of discretion in implementing the memorandum compensation is prohibited by the Constitution.
without proper notice and publication, applying it to the Furthermore, in de la Cruz vs. COA and Bitonio vs. COA,
NAC ex officio members' representatives, and we upheld COA’s disallowance of the payment of
interpreting laws and rules outside of its mandate. honoraria and per diems to the officers concerned who
sat as ex oficio members or alternates. The agent,
ISSUE: Whether the COA's disallowance of the payment alternate or representative cannot have a better right
of honoraria to the NAC ex officio members' than his principal, the ex oficio member. The laws, rules,
representatives is valid. prohibitions or restrictions that cover the ex oficio
member apply with equal force to his representative. In
RULING: No. The Constitution mandates the short, since the ex oficio member is prohibited from
Commission on Audit to ensure that the funds and receiving additional compensation for a position held in
properties of the government are validly, efficiently, and an ex oficio capacity, so is his representative likewise
conscientiously used. Thus, Article IX-D of the restricted
Constitution ordains the COA to exercise exclusive and
broad auditing powers over all government entities or
trustees, without any exception. Disqualifications
Under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code:

Page | 11
1. Is a permanent resident of or an immigrant to a 1. Insane or incompetent
foreign country [unless he has waived such status in 2. Sentenced by final judgment for:
accordance with the residency requirement for the a. Subversion, insurrection, rebellion;
concerned position]; b. Any offense for which he has been sentenced to a
2. Given money or other material consideration to penalty of more than 18 months imprisonment; or
influence, induce or corrupt voters or public officials c. A crime involving moral turpitude [Sec. 12].
performing electoral functions;
3. Committed acts of terrorism to enhance his N.B. As to disqualifications under Sec. 12:
candidacy; • These will not apply if the person has been given
4. Spent in his election campaign an amount in excess plenary pardon or amnesty.
of that allowed; • These are deemed removed upon declaration by
5. Solicited, received or made prohibited contributions; competent authority that the insanity/incompetence
6. Violated provisions of the Omnibus Election Code, has been removed, or after the expiration of a period of
specifically: five years from service of sentence
a. Engaged in election campaign or partisan political
activity outside the campaign period and not pursuant In Magno v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 147904 (2002)], it was
to a political party nomination [Sec. 80]; held that there appears to be an irreconcilable conflict
b. Removed, destroyed, defaced lawful election between the five-year disqualification period under Sec.
propaganda [Sec. 83]; 12, OEC and the two-year disqualification period under
c. Engaged in prohibited forms of election propaganda Sec. 40 of the Local Government Code (infra). Court held
[Sec. 85]; that Sec. 40 of the LGC is deemed to have repealed Sec.
d. Violated election rules and regulations on election 12 of the OEC, the former being the later legislative
propaganda through mass media [Sec. 86]; enactment. Furthermore, Sec. 40 of the LGC partakes of
e. Coerced, intimidated, compelled, or influenced any of a special law applicable to candidates for local elective
his subordinates, members, or employees to aid, positions as opposed to Sec. 12 of the OEC which
campaign or vote for or against any candidate or applies to candidates for any public office. Thus, the
aspirant for the nomination or selection of candidates former must prevail over the latter
[Sec. 261.d] – expressly repealed by R.A. No. 7890. The
effect of this repeal is to remove Section 261(d) from Under Section 40 of the Local Government Code
among those listed as ground for disqualification under 1. Sentenced by final judgment for an offense (a)
Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code [see Javier v. involving moral turpitude or (b) punishable by at least 1-
COMELEC, G.R. No. 215847 (2016)]; year imprisonment. The disqualification lasts for two
f. Threatened, intimidated, caused, inflicted or produced years after service of sentence.
any violence, injury, punishment, damage, loss or
disadvantage upon any person or of the immediate The provision “within 2 years after serving sentence”
members of his family, his honor or property, or used applies both to (1) those who have been sentenced by
fraud to compel, induce or prevent the registration of final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude
any voter, or the participation in any campaign, or the and (2) those who have been sentenced by final
casting of any vote, or any promise of such registration, judgment for an offense punishable by one year or more
campaign, vote, or omission therefrom [Sec. 261.e]; of imprisonment
g. Unlawful electioneering [Sec. 261.k];
h. Violated the prohibition against release, Those who have not served their sentence by reason of
disbursement or expenditure of public funds 45 days the grant of probation should not be disqualified from
before a regular election or 30 days before a special running for a local elective office because the 2-year
election [Sec. 261.v]; i. Solicited votes or undertook period of ineligibility does not even begin to run
propaganda on election day for or against any candidate [Moreno v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 168550 (2006)].
or any political party within the polling place or within a
30m radius [Sec. 261.cc.6]; and 2. Removed from office as a result of an administrative
j. Conviction for robbery by final judgment with the case. This disqualification does not retroactively apply to
penalty of prision mayor, to which perpetual special those who were removed from office as a result of an
disqualification attaches by operation of law, is not a administrative case before the effectivity of the LGC
ground for a petition under Section 68 because robbery [Grego v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 125955 (1997)].
is not one of the offenses enumerated in Section 68.
Insofar as crimes are concerned, Section 68 refers only 3. Convicted by final judgment for violating the oath of
to election offenses under the Omnibus Election Code allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines.
and not to crimes under the Revised Penal Code
[Jalosjos, Jr. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 193237 (2012)]. 4. Dual citizenship. Dual citizenship as a disqualification
must refer to citizens with dual allegiance. For
Under Section 12 of the Omnibus Election Code candidates with mere dual citizenship, the filing of

Page | 12
certificate of candidacy is considered as an election of promulgated judgment of conviction [Rodriquez v.
Filipino citizenship and renunciation of foreign COMELEC, G.R. No. 120099 (1996)].
citizenship [Mercado v. Manzano, supra].
6. Insane or feeble-minded.
For a natural born Filipino, who reacquired or retained
his Philippine citizenship under RA 9225, to run for
public office, he must: (1) meet the qualifications for
holding such public office as required by the
Constitution and existing laws; and (2) make a personal
and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign
citizenships before any public officer authorized to
administer oath [Japzon v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 180088
(2009)].

With respect to a person with dual allegiance,

candidate’s oath of allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines and his Certificate of Candidacy do not
substantially comply with the requirement of a personal
and sworn renunciation of foreign citizenship. Section
5(2) of R.A. No. 9225 compels natural-born Filipinos,
who have been naturalized as citizens of a foreign
country, but who reacquired or retained their Philippine
citizenship (1) to take the oath of allegiance under
Section 3 of Republic Act No. 9225, and (2) for those
seeking elective public offices in the Philippines, to
additionally execute a personal and sworn renunciation
of any and all foreign citizenship before an authorized
public officer prior or simultaneous to the filing of their
certificates of candidacy, to qualify as candidates in
Philippine elections. [Jacot v. Dal, G.R. No. 179848
(2008); De Guzman v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 129118
(2009)].

Hence, based on jurisprudence, the mere filing of

certificate of candidacy is a sufficient form of
renunciation for dual citizens but not for those who
reacquired/retained Filipino citizenship under R.A. 9225.

While the act of using a foreign passport is not one of

the acts constituting renunciation and loss of Philippine
citizenship, it is nevertheless an act which repudiates
the very oath of renunciation required for a former
Filipino citizen who is also a citizen of another country
to be qualified to run for a local elective position
[Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. 195649 (2013)].

Compare Maquiling with Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC:

There, the use of the foreign passport by the
presidential candidate occurred before she formally
renounced her foreign citizenship; hence, the use was
not taken against her.

5. Fugitive from justice in criminal and nonpolitical cases

here and abroad. “Fugitive from justice” includes (a)
those who flee after conviction to avoid punishment and
(b) those who, after being charged, flee to avoid
prosecution. This presupposes knowledge by the fleeing
subject of either an already instituted indictment or of a

Page | 13