Reyes v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Regina Ongsiako Reyes filed a Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for Representative of the lone district of Marinduque. Respondent Joseph Socorro Tan filed a petition to deny due course or cancel Reyes' COC, alleging material misrepresentations regarding her marital status, residency, date of birth, permanent residency in another country, and Filipino citizenship. Procedural History: The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) First Division granted Tan's petition and cancelled Reyes' COC, finding she was not a Filipino citizen due to non-compliance with Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003) and lacked the one-year residency requirement. The COMELEC En Banc denied Reyes' motion for reconsideration. Subsequently, Reyes was proclaimed the winner of the elections and took her oath of office. The COMELEC En Banc issued a Certificate of Finality declaring its resolution final and executory. The Petition: Reyes filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Supreme Court, assailing the COMELEC Resolutions and raising issues of COMELEC jurisdiction, grave abuse of discretion in admitting newly discovered evidence, and the COMELEC's findings on her citizenship and residency.
Issue(s)
Whether the COMELEC is without jurisdiction over Petitioner who is a duly proclaimed winner and who has already taken her oath of office. Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in taking cognizance of "newly-discovered evidence" without proper testimonial offer and admission, violating Petitioner's right to due process. Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in declaring that Petitioner is not a Filipino citizen and did not meet the residency requirement. Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion by enforcing R.A. No. 9225, thereby imposing additional qualifications for Members of the House of Representatives beyond those in the Constitution.
Ruling
The petition is DISMISSED. The COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The 14 May 2013 Resolution of the COMELEC En Banc affirming the 27 March 2013 Resolution of the COMELEC First Division is upheld.
Ratio Decidendi
On the COMELEC's jurisdiction: The Supreme Court held that the COMELEC retains jurisdiction over the qualifications of a candidate until the candidate has been proclaimed, taken the oath of office, AND assumed office. Since the term of office for Members of the House of Representatives begins on June 30th, and Reyes had not yet assumed office, the COMELEC's jurisdiction had not yet been transferred to the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET). The Court emphasized that the COMELEC's final resolution on Reyes' qualifications, issued prior to her proclamation, could not be rendered nugatory by a subsequent proclamation. The COMELEC's decision became final and executory because Reyes failed to file a petition before the Supreme Court within the prescribed period. On grave abuse of discretion regarding newly-discovered evidence and due process: The Court found that the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The COMELEC is not strictly bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence in summary proceedings like petitions to cancel a Certificate of Candidacy. The proceedings are to be liberally construed to achieve a just and expeditious determination. Reyes was given ample opportunity to argue her case and adduce evidence for five months, and her contention of denial of due process was dismissed, as procedural due process in administrative proceedings requires only an opportunity to be heard. On citizenship and residency: The Court affirmed the COMELEC's finding that Reyes failed to prove her Filipino citizenship and one-year residency. The COMELEC correctly shifted the burden of proof to Reyes after respondent presented evidence of her US passport. Reyes' claim of dual citizenship and her affidavit of renunciation executed before the COMELEC's resolution were deemed insufficient. Her argument that her oath of office as Provincial Administrator constituted reacquisition of Filipino citizenship was rejected as it was raised for the first time before the Supreme Court and did not comply with the requirements of R.A. No. 9225. Consequently, her claim of residency in Marinduque was also invalidated as she had not re-acquired her domicile in the Philippines. On R.A. No. 9225 imposing additional qualifications: The Court found this contention meritless. The COMELEC did not impose additional qualifications but merely applied the constitutional qualifications for Members of the House of Representatives, namely, being a natural-born Filipino citizen and having one-year residency. The COMELEC's inquiry into Reyes' compliance with R.A. No. 9225 was to determine if she had reacquired her status as a natural-born Filipino citizen, which is a constitutional requirement.
Main Doctrine
The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) retains jurisdiction over a candidate's qualifications, including citizenship and residency, even after proclamation and taking of oath, if the candidate has not yet assumed office, as the term of office for Members of the House of Representatives begins at noon on June 30th following their election. Furthermore, the COMELEC is not strictly bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence in summary proceedings like petitions to cancel a Certificate of Candidacy.