Labo v. Commission on Elections
ABANDONMENTFacts
The Antecedents: Ramon L. Labo, Jr. filed his certificate of candidacy for Mayor of Baguio City. Roberto Ortega also filed for the same position. Ortega filed a disqualification proceeding against Labo, alleging false representation in his certificate of candidacy regarding his status as a "natural-born" Filipino citizen. Procedural History: The Commission on Elections (Comelec) issued summons to Labo, who failed to file an Answer. Ortega filed a motion to declare Labo in default. Despite further orders for summons and a set hearing, Labo, though represented by counsel, presented no evidence. He only submitted his Answer on May 5, 1992, claiming reacquisition of Filipino citizenship and asserting that res judicata does not apply to citizenship and that supervening events preclude the application of a prior ruling. The Comelec, on May 9, 1992, cancelled Labo's certificate of candidacy, finding his statement of being a "natural-born" Filipino citizen to be a false material representation, citing a previous Supreme Court decision declaring Labo not a citizen of the Philippines. The Comelec later clarified that its resolution would become final and executory after five days and that Labo could still be voted for, subject to the final outcome. The Comelec also resolved to suspend Labo's proclamation if he won. Labo filed a petition for review, and Ortega filed a petition for mandamus to implement the Comelec's cancellation resolution. The Petition: Labo sought to set aside the Comelec resolution, declare him a Filipino citizen, and direct his proclamation if he won. Ortega prayed for the implementation of the Comelec's resolution and the proclamation of the candidate with the next highest votes.
Issue(s)
Whether the Comelec committed grave abuse of discretion in cancelling Ramon L. Labo, Jr.'s certificate of candidacy, and whether Ramon L. Labo, Jr. has reacquired his Philippine citizenship. Whether the Comelec resolution disqualifying Ramon L. Labo, Jr. had become final and executory. Whether Philippine citizenship is a fundamental qualification for any elective official. Whether the candidate who garnered the next highest number of votes should be proclaimed Mayor of Baguio City following the disqualification of the winning candidate, and how the vacancy should be filled.
Ruling
The petitions are dismissed for lack of merit. Ramon L. Labo, Jr. is declared ineligible for the Office of the City Mayor of Baguio City. The vice-mayor elect of Baguio City is declared Mayor of Baguio City.
Ratio Decidendi
On the Comelec's cancellation of the certificate of candidacy and Labo's citizenship: The Court found no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Comelec. The Comelec was bound by the final declaration in a previous Supreme Court case (Labo v. Commission on Elections, 176 SCRA 1 [1989]) that Ramon L. Labo, Jr. is not a citizen of the Philippines. Labo failed to adduce any evidence before the Comelec or the Supreme Court to prove his reacquisition of Philippine citizenship. His reliance on Vance v. Terrazas was unavailing as it had been previously passed upon. The claim that Section 72 of the Omnibus Election Code operated as a special repatriation proceeding was also dismissed, as this section had been repealed and the Comelec could legally suspend proclamation where evidence of guilt is strong, especially when no evidence of reacquisition of citizenship was presented. The Court reiterated that Labo's status had not changed and that election does not automatically restore citizenship, which is an indispensable requirement for holding public office. On the finality of the Comelec resolution: The Court agreed with Ortega that the Comelec's May 9, 1992 resolution cancelling Labo's certificate of candidacy had become final and executory on May 14, 1992, five days after Labo received a copy thereof, as no restraining order was issued by the Supreme Court. This finality was crucial as Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code and Section 3, Rule 39 of the Comelec Rules of Procedure clearly state that decisions in petitions to cancel certificates of candidacy become final and executory after five days unless stayed by the Supreme Court. On the qualification for elective office: The Court emphasized that Philippine citizenship is a fundamental qualification for any elective official, as provided in Section 39(a) of the Local Government Code. Labo, not being a Filipino citizen, lacked this indispensable requirement. The fact that he was elected by the majority of the electorate does not cure the vice of ineligibility, as the qualifications prescribed by law cannot be erased by the electorate alone, citing Frivaldo v. Commission on Elections. On the proclamation of the candidate with the next highest votes and filling the vacancy: The Court held in the negative, stating that the disqualification of Labo does not automatically entitle Ortega, the candidate with the next highest number of votes, to proclamation. Citing Abella v. Comelec and Geronimo v. Santos, the Court reiterated that a minority or defeated candidate cannot be deemed elected to the office. The electorate's choice, even if later disqualified, should not be disregarded unless the electorate was fully aware of the disqualification and notoriously misapplied their franchise. In this case, Labo was allowed to be voted for, and there was no showing that the electorate was aware of his ineligibility. Therefore, the votes for Labo were not considered stray, and Ortega, having lost the election, was not the choice of the people of Baguio City. As a consequence of Labo's ineligibility, a permanent vacancy occurred in the office of Mayor. The Court ruled that this vacancy should be filled by the vice-mayor elect, in accordance with Section 44 of the Local Government Code, which provides for the succession of the vice-mayor to the office of mayor in case of permanent vacancy.
Main Doctrine
A candidate declared disqualified by final judgment cannot be voted for, and votes cast for him shall not be counted. The ineligibility of a candidate receiving majority votes does not entitle the candidate receiving the next highest number of votes to be declared elected; the vacancy shall be filled by the vice-mayor.