Jalosjos v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Rommel Jalosjos, born in Quezon City, migrated to Australia in 1981 at age eight, where he acquired Australian citizenship. On November 22, 2008, he returned to the Philippines, residing with his brother in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. He took an oath of allegiance, reacquiring Philippine citizenship, and subsequently renounced his Australian citizenship in compliance with Republic Act (R.A.) 9225. He acquired property in Ipil and a fishpond in Naga, Zamboanga Sibugay. His application to register as a voter was opposed by Barangay Captain Dan Erasmo, Sr., but was approved by the Election Registration Board. Procedural History: Erasmo filed a petition for exclusion of Jalosjos' name from the voters list, which was denied by the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) and affirmed by the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Jalosjos filed his Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for Governor of Zamboanga Sibugay. Erasmo filed a petition to deny due course or cancel the COC, alleging material misrepresentation regarding compliance with R.A. 9225 and the one-year residency requirement under the Local Government Code. The Petition: The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Second Division ruled that while Jalosjos regained Philippine citizenship, he failed to prove the residency requirement, lacking ample proof of a bona fide intention to establish domicile. The COMELEC En Banc affirmed this, stating he was a mere guest. The Supreme Court issued a status quo ante order. Jalosjos won the election and was proclaimed governor.
Issue(s)
Whether the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in ruling that Jalosjos failed to present ample proof of a bona fide intention to establish his domicile in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay; and whether Jalosjos complied with the one-year residency requirement for a provincial governor.
Ruling
The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition and SET ASIDE the Resolutions of the COMELEC Second Division and En Banc that disqualified petitioner Rommel Jalosjos from seeking election as Governor of Zamboanga Sibugay. The Court resolved all doubts in favor of Jalosjos to respect the will of the people.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of domicile and residency requirement: The Court held that the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion. The Local Government Code requires a provincial governor candidate to be a resident for at least one year prior to the election, with residency being synonymous with domicile. Domicile requires both intent to reside and personal presence coupled with conduct indicative of such intention. The Court reiterated the guidelines that every person has a domicile, which remains until a new one is acquired, and a person can have only one domicile at a time. The Court found that Jalosjos met the residency requirement. His domicile of origin was Quezon City, which he effectively changed to Australia when he migrated at age eight and lived there for 26 years, acquiring Australian citizenship. Upon returning to the Philippines in November 2008, his intent to change domicile was evident: he left Australia, renounced his citizenship, and reacquired his Philippine citizenship. He has since lived exclusively in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay. To hold otherwise would violate the maxim that a person must have a domicile somewhere. The COMELEC's conclusion that Jalosjos was merely a guest in his brother's house was insufficient to negate domicile, as a candidate is not required to own a house; living in a rented house or a relative's home is sufficient. Jalosjos presented affidavits from neighbors attesting to his presence, purchased property (residential lot and fishpond), corresponded with political leaders from his residence, and was a registered voter of Ipil by final court judgment. The Court found the COMELEC's misappreciation of evidence palpable, as Jalosjos' evidence sufficiently established Ipil as his domicile. The Court also noted that Jalosjos won the election, and it would respect the people's will, resolving doubts in his favor.
Main Doctrine
The Supreme Court held that the Commission on Elections gravely abused its discretion in ruling that the petitioner failed to present ample proof of a bona fide intention to establish his domicile in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay, considering his reacquisition of Philippine citizenship, renunciation of Australian citizenship, purchase of property, and established physical presence, which collectively satisfy the residency requirement for a gubernatorial candidate.