Election Law Premid Part I

ELECTION LAWS l Atty.
Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

Ibanez
PART I ELECTIVE OFFICIALS

DEFINITION OF ELECTIONS
Q. How do you define election?
It is the means by which the people choose their officials for a
definite and fixed period and to whom they entrust for the
time being, the exercise of the powers of government.
Q. What are the means to choose officials?
Either manual or automated system.
Q. What is the basis for the phrase people choose
their officials?
It is based on the sovereign will or power of the people.
Q. What does the phrase definite and fixed period
mean?
It refers to the term of office, which means a fixed and definite
period of time which the law describes that an officer may
hold an office.
It is the time during which an officer may claim to hold office
as a matter of right, and fixes the interval after which the
several incumbents shall succeed one another.
Q. How is election defined in its ordinary or common
use?
It is voting which includes the act of receiving and casting the
ballots, counting them and making the return.
Q. How is election defined in the context of the
Constitution?
It refers to the conduct of polls including registration,
campaign, casting, counting and canvassing of votes.
Taule v. Santos
Facts:
The Secretary of Local Government nullified the election of
federation officers on ground of irregularity. It was argued that
jurisdiction over election contests involving election of
federation officer belongs to Comelec.
Held:
The jurisdiction of the Comelec is limited to popular election
only, which is the embodiment of the popular will, the
expression of the sovereign power of the people. It involves
the choice or selection of candidates to public office by
popular vote as opposed to election of federation officers. In
Constitutional context, it is the conduct of polls, including
registration, campaign, casting, counting and canvassing of
votes. None of these characterizes the federation election.
Javier v. Comelec
Facts:
Javier challenged the proclamation of Pacificador by the
Comelec Second Division on the ground that it should be done
by the en banc pursuant to the Constitution. Pacificador
argued that at the time the complaint was filed, it was still in
the nature of a pre-proclamation controversy hence may be
resolved by a division in the exercise of its administrative
power to enforce election laws relative to election, return and
qualifications.
Held:
Under the Constitution, the term election should be
interpreted in its totality, that it refers to the conduct of polls,
registration of voters, campaign and the casting and counting
of votes. In making the Comelec the sole judge of all contests
involving the election, returns and qualifications of Members
of Congress, the Constitution intended to give it full authority

to hear and decide these cases from beginning to end and on
all related matters, including those arising before the
proclamation of winners.
PURPOSE OF ELECTIONS AND ELECTION

LAWS
PURPOSE OF ELECTIONS
Lino Luna v. Rodriquez
The purpose of elections in a democratic society is to give the
voters a direct participation in the affairs of their government,
either in determining who shall be their public officials or in
deciding some question of public interest; and for that
purpose all the legal voters should be permitted, unhampered
and unmolested, to cast their ballot.
The proclamation of a mayor was nullified by the lower court on

account that he won through significant badges of fraud like
mismatch of keys to the padlocks, empty ballot boxes, boxes with
election returns, delay in counting due to brownout, absence of
watchers during counting.
Held:
These did not affect the integrity of the ballots. Election
contests involve public interest and technicalities should not
impeded the determination of the true will of the people.
Frivaldo v. Comelec
PURPOSE OF ELECTION LAWS
Facts:
A candidate for governor was disqualified because he did not
reacquire his Filipino citizenship at the time he filed his COC
and at the time of election.
Rulloda v. Comelec
Held:
Facts:
A widow substituted her deceased husband as candidate for
Punong barangay and obtained the highest number of votes.
But it was voided because substitution is allowed in barangay
elections, it being non-partisan. As such, there is no political
party from which a substitute is designated.
Held:
The absence of provision for substitution in barangay
elections does not mean it is prohibited. Such interpretation
ignores the purpose of elections laws which is to give effect
to, rather than frustrate, the will of the voters.
HOW ARE ELECTON LAWS CONSTRUED

Carlos v. Angeles
Facts:
1|UNIVERSITY
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
Citizenship need not be possessed at the time of filing of COC or

election, but must be at the start of the term. In case of doubt,
election laws are liberally and construed in favor of the sovereign
will. In applying election laws, it would be far better to err in favor
of popular sovereignty than to be right in complex but little
understood legalisms.
CLASSIFICATIONS OF ELECTION
Q. What are the kinds of election?
1. Regular elections refers to one provided by law on
such dates at regular intervals for the election of
officers either nationwide or in certain subdivisions.
2. Special elections refers to one held to fill a vacancy
before the expiration of the full term for which the
incumbent was elected. It is also held when there is
failure of election.
ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

Ibanez
Q. Is the Sangguniang Kabataan election regular or

special?
Neither, based on the definition of a regular and special
election.
Paras v. Comelec
Facts:
A Punong barangay was subject of a recall election that was
scheduled within a year prior to the SK election, which also
falls on the second year of the term of office of local elective
officials.
Section 74 of the LGC prohibits recall election within a year
from assumption of office and within a year immediately
preceding the next regular local election.
Held:
If the SK election was a regular election, there would be no
more recall election because it always falls within the second
year of term of office, the only time when a recall election is
allowed. Thus, the next regular must refer to one where the
office of the official sought to be recalled is contested. The SK
election is not a regular election because its members do not
even possess suffrage under the Constitution.
The SK is nothing more than a youth organization. Its elected
officers are not one of those enumerated as elective local officials
under the law.
Q. What are the requisites of special election after

failure of election?
Lucero v. Comelec
Facts:
Two candidates for district representative were separated by a
mere 175 votes. But no election was done in one polling place
with 213 voters due to ballot snatching. But the leading candidate
questioned the authority of the Comelec to call for a special
election after almost two years.
Held:
There are two requisites for holding a special election:
1. There is failure of election
2. Failure affects the results of the election
Since only 175 votes separate them, the 213 votes in the
polling place where election failed could still affect the results
of the election. Hence, it is still statistically probable for the
special election to affect or change the final result of the
election.
The delay is not attributable to the voters of the polling place
where election failed but to the legal maneuvers of parties.
Thus, the holding of the special election almost two years
after the regular election is still
reasonable close to the date of election not held.
SYSTEMS OF ELECTION
Q. What are the systems of election?
1. Manual system of election
2. Automated system of election
Q. Can there be manual count during an automated
election? Loong v. Comelec
Facts:
During the first automated election in ARMM, the counting
machines in the Province of Sulu could not accurately read the
official ballots because the ovals opposite the names of
counting is mandatory. The remedy is not manual count but

replacement of defective counting machines.
Held:
Manual counting during automated election is not prohibited by
law. The
Constitutional grant of the power to enforce and administer all
laws and regulations relative to the conduct of elections is so
broad as to cover all the necessary and incidental powers for it to
achieve the objective of holding a free, orderly, honest, peaceful
and credible elections.
CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR ELECTION

Article 2, Section 1, 1987 Constitution
The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty
resides in the people and all government authority emanate from
them.
ELECTIVE OFFICIALS
Q. Who
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
are elective officials?

President
Vice-President
Senators
House of Representatives
Governors
Vice-Governors
SP Members
ARMM Governors and Vice-Governors
ARMM Assemblymen
Mayors
Vice-Mayors
Q. Is there a Cordillera Autonomous

Region? Ordillo v. Comelec
Facts:
RA 6766 An Act Providing for an Organic Act for the Cordillera
Autonomous Region was enacted and the people of the
provinces of Benguet, Mountain Province, Ifugao, Abra, and
Baguio cast their votes in a plebiscite. Only the Province of
Ifugao approved the creation of the Region, leading to the
creation of the Cordillera Autonomous Region of Ifugao. This
was challenged by the petitioners, alleging that the law
requires that the said Region must be composed of more than
one constituent unit.
Issue:
Whether the province of Ifugao being the only province which
voted favorably for the creation of the Cordillera Autonomous
Region can, alone legally and validly constitute such Region.
candidates were misaligned. In 5 municipalities, the official ballots

were rejected because of incorrect sequence codes. Thus,
Comelec ordered a manual count which was opposed on the
ground that under the automation law, automated
Ruling:
The sole province of Ifugao cannot validly constitute the
Cordillera Autonomous Region. The term region in its ordinary
2|UNIVERSITY
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
sense means two or more provinces. Ifugao is a province by

itself. To become part of a region, it must join other provinces,
cities, municipalities, and geographical areas.

Ibanez
PRESIDENT
HOW ELECTED, TERM OF OFFICE AND TERM
LIMIT
HOW ELECTED, TERM OF OFFICE AND TERM LIMIT
Q. How is the President elected? How long is his term
of office and is there a limit to it?
The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct
vote of the people for a term of six (6) years which shall begin at
noon of the same date six years thereafter. The President shall not
be eligible for any re-election. No person who has succeeded as
President and has served as such for more than four years shall be
qualified for election to the same office at any time. (Article 7,
Section 4 (1) 1987 Constitution)
Take note:
1. By a direct vote
2. For a term of 6 years
3. Not eligible for any re-election
Q. What does the sentence The President shall not be
eligible for any re-election mean?
It means that the Presidency is a once in a lifetime
opportunity. He cannot be re-elected either immediately after
his term of office or after an interval of two or more terms.
Q. But why was Joseph Estrada allowed to run in 2010
after having been elected in 1998?
The Comelec said that the provision applies to incumbent
presidents only. It said the better policy approach is to let the
people decide who the next president is. For on political
questions, this court may err but the sovereign people will
not.
Pormento v. Estrada
Facts:
Joseph Estrada was elected as President in the general elections
on May He sought the Presidency again in 2010. A disqualification
case was filed on the ground of the constitutional provision which
states that The
President shall not be eligible for any re-election, but such

petition was denied by Comelec saying that the provision
applies to incumbent presidents only. It said that the better
policy approach is to let the people decide who the next
president is. For on political questions, this court may err but
the sovereign people will not. Estrada did not win in the said
elections.
Issue:
What is the proper interpretation of the provision The
President shall not be eligible for any re-election?
Ruling:
The issue is now moot and academic. Since Estrada was not
elected
President for the second time, any discussion of his reelection will simply be hypothetical and speculative. It will
serve no useful or practical purpose.
Q. What is the difference of effects of succession on
term limit between the vice president and vice mayor?
Borja v. Comelec
One liner: Succession of the Vice-President to the Presidency
for more than 4 years is counted as one term, whereas
succession of the Vice mayor to the mayorship is not counted
as one term for the purpose of determining term limit.
Facts:
The vice-mayor succeeded the mayor upon the latters death
by operation of law. Consequently, he ran and was elected
mayor for another two terms. On his third attempt to run for
mayor, a disqualification case was filed against him, on the
ground that he already served as mayor for three consecutive
terms, counting as one term that he served by virtue of
succession.
Issues:
1. Whether a vice-mayor who succeeds to the office of
mayor by operation of law and serves the remainder of
the term is considered to have served a term in that
office for the purpose of the three-term limit.
2. How different is the effect of succession on term limit
with the Vice-President.
Ruling:
1. No. If he is not serving a term for which he was elected
because he is simply continuing the service of the official he
succeeds, such official cannot be considered to have fully
served the term. The Constitution provides for succession of
the VP as President in the event of vacancy.
It further provides that No person who has succeeded as
President and has served as such for more than four years
shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time.
The absence of a similar provision on elective local officials
throws in bold relief the difference between two cases. It
underscores the intent to cover only the terms of office to
which one may have been elected for purpose of the threeterm limit on local elective officials, disregarding for this
purpose service by automatic succession.
A fundamental tenet of representative democracy is that the
people should be allowed to choose those whom they please
to govern them.
To bar the election of a local official because he has already
served three terms, although the first as a result of succession
by operation of law rather than election, would therefore be to
violate this principle.
2. The Vice-President is elected primarily to succeed the President
in the event of the latters death, permanent disability, removal or
resignation.
While he may be appointed to the cabinet, his becoming so is

entirely dependent on the good graces of the President. In
running for VP, he may this be said to also seek the President.
For their part, the electors likewise choose as VP the
candidate who they think can fill the Presidency in the event it
becomes vacant. Hence, service in the Presidency for more
than four years may rightly be considered as service for a full
term.
This is not so in the case of the Vice-Mayor. Under the LGC, he is
the presiding officer of the Sanggunian and he appoints all officials
and employees of such local assembly. He has distinct powers and
functions, succession to mayorship in the event of vacancy therein
being only one of them. It cannot be said of him, as much as of
the VP in the event of a vacancy in the Presidency that in running
for Vice-Mayor, he also seeks the mayorship. His assumption of
the mayorship in the event of vacancy is more a matter of chance
than of design. Hence, his service in that office should not be
counted in the application of any term limit.
QUALIFICATIONS
QUALIFICATIONS
Art VII, Sec 2, 1987 Constitution
No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen
of the Philippines, a registered voter, able to read and write, at least
forty years of age on the day of the election, and a resident of the
Philippines for at least ten years
3|UNIVERSITY
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
immediately preceding such election .
ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya Ibanez

TN:
1. Natural-born citizen of the Phils
2. Registered voter
3. Able to read and write
4. At least 40 years old on the day of the election
5. Resident of the Phils for at least 10 years, immediately
preceding the
elections.
Q. Who are citizens of the
Philippines?
1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the
adoption of this
Constitution
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the
Philippines
3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers,
who
elect Philippine Citizenship upon reaching the age of
majority
4. Those who are naturalized in the accordance with
law.
NATURAL-BORN
FILIPINO
Q. Who are natural-born
citizens?
Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines
from
birth without having to
anyact to acquire or perfect their
perform
Philippine citizenshi Thos who elect Philippin citizenshi in
p.
e
e
p
accordanc with
(3), Sectio 1 hereof shall deemed
e
paragraph
n
be
natural-born
citizens.
Q. Natural-born
are those who are citizen of the
citizens
s
Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to
acquire or
thei Philippin citizenship.
this rule
perfect
r
e
Is
absolute
?
No, because it may be done through election. Article VI, Section 2
of the
1987 Constitution provides that those born before January 17,
1973 of
Filipino mothers who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the
age
of majority, shall be deemed natural-born
citizens.
Fornier v.
Comelec
One liner: A natural-born Filipino citizen is one who did not
perform
any act to acquire or perfect his Philippine citizenship, except
those born
before January 17,, 1973 Filipin mothers,
elect Philippine
of
o
who
citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.
Citizenshi is a treasured right conferred on
p
those
who
m
the state
believes are deserving of the privilege. It is a "precious heritage,

as well
as an inestimable acquisition," that cannot be taken lightly by
Since FPJ has first seen light under the 1935 Constitution which
confers
citizenship to all persons whose fathers are Filipino citizens
regardless
of whether such children are legitimate or illegitimate, he is a
naturalborn Filipino because he did not need to perform any act to
acquire or
perfect his Filipino citizenship.
RESIDENCE,
DEFINED
Q. How is residence treated under election
laws?
Residence is synonymous with domicile.
Marcos v. Comelec
One liner:
For
electio purposes,
n
residence
is synonymous
with
domicile, that is, a fixed permanent residence to which, when

absent,
one has the intention of
returning.
Facts:
A candidate for district representative wrote in her COC 7
months as her
period of residence in the constituency where she seeks to be
elected
preceding the election. She was sought to be disqualified for
failure to
comply with the one-year residency requirement because she
briefly
stayed in the constituency and resided and even voted in
different places
for four
decades.
Held:
It is the fact of residence, not a statement in the COC that is
decisive
whether an individual satisfies residence
requirement.
the
Domicile
means the individuals permanent home, a place to which
whenever
absent for business or pleasure, one intends to
return.
An individual does not lose his domicile even if he has
maintained several
residences for difference purposes over a long period of time. If
none of
these purposes point unequivocally to an intention to abandon
her
domicile of origin, she retains it.
Domino v. Comelec
One-liner: "Residence" as used in the law prescribing the
qualifications
for suffrage and for elective office, means the same thing as
"domicile,"
which requires not only such bodily presence in that place but
also a
declared and probable intent to make it one's fixed and
permanent place
of abode, one's home.
Facts:
anyone
either by those who enjoy it or by those who
dispute it.
Facts:
FPG ran for President but he was sought to be disqualified because
he
is not a natural-born Filipino, since his mother was American and
his
father, Spanish. Petitioner said that FPGs father could not be
Filipino
because his grandfather was a Spanish subject. Even if his father
was a
Filipino, he could not have transmitted his Filipino citizenship to his
son
FPG because the latter is an illegitimate
child.
Issue: Whether FPJ is a natural-born Filipino and thus did not
materially
misrepresent his
COC.
Held:
Yes. To trace, FPJs roots FPJs grandpa died in Pangasinan in
1954, it
could have been
residenc before death
he would
his
e
and
have
benefited from the en masse Filipinization of the Philippine Bill in
1902.
Having acquired Filipino citizenship, the grandfather extended it to
his
son, who is the father of
FPJ.
Under Article 4, Section 1 (3) of the 1935 Constitution, the
following are
citizens of the
Philippines:
(3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the
Philippines.
4|UNIVERSITY
OF
SAN
CARLOS
SLG
Domino ran as Representative in Sarangani, with 1 yr and 2

months as
residenc in hi COC. Comelec disqualifie him as his Voter
y
s
d
s
Registration Record negate such. The Constitution required at
least 1
year residency. Domino won, but his proclamation was put on
hold.
Issue: Whether Domino satisfied the residency
requirement.
Held:
No. The principal elements of domicile, physical presence in
the locality
involved and intention to adopt it as a domicile, must concur in
order to
establish a new domicile. Domino lacked the intention to
abandon his
residence in QC as he registered there as a voter (then just
had it
cancelled by a MeTC to effect transfer to Sarangani). While
voting is not
conclusive of residence, it does give rise to a strong
presumption of
residence especially in this case where DOMINO registered in
his former
barangay.
Exercising the right of election franchise is a deliberate public
assertion
of the fact of residence, and is said to have decided
preponderance in a
doubtful case upon the place the elector claims as, or believes
to be, his
residence. While, Domino's intention to establish residence in
Sarangani
can be
from the fact that be bought house sough
gleaned
a
,
t
cancellation of his previous registration in QC and that he
applied for
transfer of registration, DOMINO still falls short of the one year
residency requirement

Ibanez
RATIONALE OF THE RESIDENCE

REQUIREMENT Torayno v. Comelec
One liner: The Constitution and the law requires residence as a
qualification for seeking and holding elective public office, in order
to give candidates the opportunity to be familiar with the needs,
difficulties, aspirations, potentials for growth and all matters vital
to the welfare of their constituencies; likewise, it enables the
electorate to evaluate the seekers' qualifications and fitness for
the job they aspire for.
Facts:
Immediately after being the governor of Misamis Oriental for
the third term, Emano ran as Mayor of CDO, saying in his COC
his residency thereat for 2 yrs and 5 months. Emano asserted
under oath that he was qualified to act as governor until end
of his term and admitted in sworn statements that he was a
resident of Misamis Oriental.
Petitioners: Residence is a continuing qualification that an
elective official must possess throughout his term. Thus,
private respondent could not have changed his residence to
CDO while he was still governor of Misamis Oriental.
Emano: I actually and physically resided in CDO while being
Governor, since the seat of provincial government is in CDO. There
is no law preventing an elective official from transferring residence
while in office.
Issue: Whether Emano acquired a bona fide domicile of choice

for at least 1 year to qualify him to run as Mayor of CDO.
Held:
Yes. The Constitution or the law intends to prevent the
possibility of a stranger or newcomer unacquainted with the
conditions and needs of a community and not identified with
the latter from seeking an elective office to serve that
community. Such provision is aimed at excluding outsiders
from taking advantage of favorable circumstances existing in
that community for electoral gain. Emano could not be said to
be a stranger or newcomer.
PROPERTY QUALIFICATION
Maquerra v. Borra
One liner: The right to vote and be voted for is not dependent
upon the wealth of the individual concerned. Social justice
presupposes equal opportunity for all, rich and poor alike, and
that, no person shall, by reason of poverty, be denied the chance
to be elected to public office.
Facts:
Republic Act No. 4421 requires a candidate to post a surety
bond equivalent to one-year salary of the position to which he
is a candidate, which bond shall be forfeited in favor of the
government, if the candidate, except when declared winner,
fails to obtain at least 10% of the votes cast for the office.
Issue: Whether RA 4421 is constitutional.
Held:
No. Property qualifications are inconsistent with the nature
and essence of the Republican system ordained in our
Constitution and the principle of social justice underlying the
same, for said political system is premised upon the tenet that
sovereignty resides in the people and all government
authority emanates from them. This implies necessarily that
the right to vote and to be voted for shall not be dependent
upon the wealth of the individual concerned, whereas social
justice presupposes equal opportunity for all, rich and poor
alike, and that, accordingly, no person shall, by reason of

poverty, be denied the chance to be elected to public office.
The effect of said Republic Act No. 4421 is to impose property

qualifications in order that a person could run for a public
office, which property qualifications are inconsistent with the
nature and essence of the Republican system ordained in the
Constitution and the principle of social justice underlying the
same. Consequently, Republic Act No. 4421 is unconstitutional
and hence null and void.
1.
2.
To prevent monopoly of power

To enhance the freedom of choice
VICE-PRESIDENT
LIMIT
HOW ELECTED
Article VII, Section 4, 1987 Constitution
The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of
the people for a term of six years which shall begin at noon on the
thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election and shall end
at noon of the same date six years thereafter. The President shall not
be eligible for any reelection. No person who has succeeded as
President and has served as such for more than four years shall be
qualified for election to the same office at any time.
TERM-LIMIT
No Vice-President shall serve for more than two successive
terms. Voluntary resignation of the office for any length of
time shall not be considered as an interruption in the
continuity of the service for the full term for which he was
elected.
QUALIFICATIONS
The Vice-President shall have the same qualifications and
term of office and be elected with and in the same manner as
the President. He may be removed from office in the same
manner as the President.
5|UNIVERSITY
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
Q. How is voluntary renunciation defined in Aldovino v.

Comelec?
It is an act of surrender based on the free will or loss of title to
office by free choice. It is an act of abandonment that emanates
from the author.
Q. Does preventive suspension interruption the term of

office?
NO. Preventive suspension does not involve loss of title to
office hence it cannot interrupt the term of office.
Q. How do you illustrate the sentence No person who
has succeeded as President and has served as such for
more than four years shall be qualified for election to
the same office at any time?
Joseph Estrada assumed the Presidency on June 30, 1998, but
was forced by People Power II to step down on January 2001.
Thus, he served for only 2 years and 6 months, leaving a
balance of 3 years and 6 months from his 6-year term as
president.
Gloria Arroyo succeeded and served for 3 years and 6 months.
Since she did not serve for more than 4 years, she was able to
run and win the Presidency in 2004.
BASIS FOR PROCLMANATION OF THE PRES AND

VP
Article VII, Section 4 (5), 1987 Constitution
The person having the highest number of votes shall be proclaimed
elected, but in case two or more shall have an equal and highest
number of votes, one of them shall forthwith be chosen by the vote of
a majority of all the Members of both Houses of the Congress, voting
separately.
The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, shall be the sole judge of all
contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the
President or Vice-President, and may promulgate its rules for the
purpose.

Ibanez
Q. Who shall be declared winner?

The person having the highest number of votes shall be
proclaimed elected.
Q. How is a tie resolved?
By a vote of a majority of all the Members of both Houses of
the Congress, voting separately.
WINNER DEFINED
Rudolla v. Comelec
One-liner: The winner is the candidate who has obtained a
majority or plurality of valid votes cast in the election.
Facts:
A widow substituted her deceased husband as candidate for
Punong Barangay and obtained the highest number of votes.
But it was voided because substitution is not allowed in
barangay elections, it being non-partisan. As such, there is no
political party from which a substitute is designated.
Issue: Can the widow be proclaimed as the duly elected Brgy
Chairman?
Held:
Yes, as it was she who obtained the plurality of votes in the
contested election. Technicalities and procedural niceties in
election cases should not be made to stand in the way of the
true will of the electorate. Absence of any provision governing
substitution of candidates in barangay elections cannot be
inferred as a prohibition against it. As doing so would ignore
the purpose of election laws which is to give effect to, rather
than frustrate, the will of the voters.
In case of doubt, political laws must be so construed as to
give life and spirit to the popular mandate freely expressed
through the ballot. In all republican forms of government the
basic idea is that, no one can be declared elected and no
measure can be declared carried unless he or it receives a
majority or plurality of the legal votes cast in the election.
PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION IN CASE OF

VACANCY
VACANCY AT THE START OF THE TERM
If the President-elect fails to qualify The Vice-Presidentelect shall act as President until the President-elect shall have
qualified.
If a President shall not have been chosen The Vice-Presidentelect shall act as President until a President shall have been chosen
and qualified.
If at the beginning of the term of the President, the

President-elect shall have died or shall have become
permanently disabled
The Vice-President-elect shall become President.
Where no President and Vice-President shall have been

chosen or shall have qualified, or where both shall have died
or become permanently disabled The President of the Senate
or, in case of his inability, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives shall act as President until a President or a VicePresident shall have been chosen and qualified.
VACANCY ON MID-TERM
In case of death, permanent disability, removal from

office, or resignation of the President The Vice-President
shall become the President to serve the unexpired term.
In case of death, permanent disability, removal from

office, or resignation of both the President and VicePresident The Senate President or, in case of his inability, the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, shall then act as

President until the President or Vice-President shall have been
elected and qualified.
PERMNANENT DISABILITY OF THE PRESIDENT

PERMANANET DISABILITY OF THE PRESIDENT
Whenever the President transmits to the Senate President

and the Speaker of the House his written declaration that he
is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office
Such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice-President as
Acting President.
Whenever a majority of all the Members of the Cabinet

transmit to the Senate President and to the Speaker of
the House their written declaration that the President is
unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office
The Vice-President shall immediately assume the powers and
duties of the office as Acting President.
When President transmits to the Senate President and to

the Speaker of the House his written declaration that no
inability exists He shall reassume the powers and duties of
his office.
If majority of all the Members of the Cabinet transmit

within five days to the Senate President and to the
Speaker of the House their written declaration that the
President is unable to discharge the powers and duties
of his office The Congress shall decide the issue by a vote of
2/3 of both Houses, voting separately.
Estrada v. Desierto
One-liner: The determination of the Presidents inability to
govern is determined by Congress and such is a political
judgment that cannot be subject to judicial review.
Facts:
Estrada was accused to be a jueteng lord that led to his
impeachment case. Edsa Revolution II ensued with people
asking Estradas resignation, and his allies defected (AFP, PNP
6|UNIVERSITY
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
and most of his cabinet members). On the day Arroyo took her
oath as the new President, Estrada wrote Senate President
and Speaker of the House that he is unable to exercise
Presidential powers and duties. However, he claims he did not
resign as President, but merely was on leave on the ground
that he is unable to govern temporarily. Despite receipt of
letter, the House of Reps and Senate passed Resolutions
expressing support to Arroyo as the new President.
Issue:
Whether SC has jurisdiction to review the claim of temporary
inability of Estrada and thereafter revise the decision of both
Houses of Congress recognizing Arroyo as the new President.
Held:
SC does not have jurisdiction. It is Congress that has the
ultimate authority to determine such, and the determination
of Congress is a political judgment which the SC cannot
review. Estradas claim had been put to rest by Congress by
the latter declaring Arroyo as the de jure President. Such
decision made by the Congress, a co-equal branch of
government, cannot be reviewed by SC.
RESIGNATION OF THE PRESIDENT

Estrada v. Desierto
One-liner: Estradas acts and omissions before, during and
after Arroyos oath taking, or taking into account the totality
of prior, contemporaneous and posterior facts and
circumstantial evidence bearing a material relevance on the
issue, implied his resignation from presidency.
Facts:
Estrada claims he did not resign as President, but merely was on

leave on the ground that he is unable to govern temporarily. He
wrote a letter (see above) about it. Further, Estrada relies on RA
No. 3019 (AGACPA) prohibiting his resignation from office. The
circumstances surrounding

Ibanez
the case were based on an Angara Diary, where he said,

Ayoko na, masyado nang masakit. Negotiations involving
Estradas resignation and Arroyos assumption took place.
Issue: Whether Estrada has resigned as President before
Arroyo took her oath as President.
Held:
Yes. Elements of resignation are (1) there must be an intent to
resign and (2) the intent must be coupled by acts of
relinquishment. It is not governed by any formal requirement
it can be oral, written, express or implied. As regards the
letter re: inability to govern, if it was prepared before the
press release of the petitioner clearly showing his resignation
from the presidency, then the resignation must prevail as a
later act. If, however, it was prepared after the press release,
still, it commands scant legal significance.
Petitioner's resignation from the presidency cannot be the subject
of a changing caprice nor of a whimsical will especially if the
resignation is the result of his repudiation by the people. Further,
reliance on RA No. 3019 was misplaced. The intent of the law is to
prevent the act of resignation or retirement from being used by a
public official as a protective shield to stop the investigation of a
pending criminal or administrative case against him and to
prevent his prosecution. But no person can be compelled to render
service if he wants to retire or resign.
VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF THE VP, HOW

FILLED
SECTION 9. Whenever there is a vacancy in the Office of the VicePresident during the term for which he was elected, the President shall
nominate a Vice-President from among the Members of the Senate and
the House of Representatives who shall assume office upon
confirmation by a majority vote of all the Members of both Houses of
the Congress, voting separately.
Q. How is vacancy in the office of the Vice-President

filled?
The President shall nominate a VP from among the Members
of the Congress. Such nomination shall be confirmed by a
majority vote of all the Members of both Houses, voting
separately.
Estrada v. Desierto
One-liner: Upon nomination for VP of the President from
among the Congress members, both Houses of Congress shall
confirm such by voting separately.
Facts:
After assumption into office, Pres. Arroyo nominated Sen.
Guingona as her Vice President. Both the Senate and House of
Reps separately resolved to confirm such nomination.
Thereafter, Guingona took his oath as Vice President.
VACANCY IN BOTH THE P AND VP, HOW

FILLED
The Congress shall, at ten oclock in the morning of the third day after
the vacancy in the offices of the President and Vice-President occurs,
convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call and within
seven days enact a law calling for a special election to elect a
President and a Vice-President to be held not earlier than forty-five
days nor later than sixty days from the time of such call. The bill calling
such special election shall be deemed certified under paragraph 2,
Section 26, Article VI of this Constitution and shall become law upon its
approval on third reading by the Congress.
Appropriations for the special election shall be charged against any
current appropriations and shall be exempt from the requirements of
TN: This presupposes that succession cannot happen since the Senate
President and Speaker of the House are likewise dead.
Q. How are the vacancies occurring midterm in both

the Presidency and Vice-Presidency filled?
TN: If the President, Vice-President, Senate President and House
Speaker die, resign or are permanently disabled at the middle of term.
GR: The Congress shall enact a law calling for a special

election to elect a President and VP, to be held not earlier
than 45 days nor later than 60 days from the time of such all.
XPN: If the vacancy occurred within 18 months before the
date of the next presidential election, no special election shall
be called.
Q. How are the vacancies occurring at the start of the
term in both the Presidency and Vice-Presidency filled?
TN: If the President, Vice-President, Senate President and House
Speaker die, resign or are permanently disabled at the start of term.
Congress legislates the manner in which one who is to act as

President shall be selected.
SENATORS
LIMIT
COMPOSITION AND HOW ELECTED
Q. How many members shall compose the Senate?
24 members. Of the Senators elected in the election of 1992,
the first twelve obtaining the highest number of votes shall
serve for six years and the remaining twelve for three years.
Q. How are senators elected?
They are elected at large by the qualified voters of the
Philippines.
Tolentino v. Comelec
One-liner: Although the Comelec failed to call and give
notice, the special election is still valid as the right and duty
to hold the election emanate from the statute and not from
any call for the election by some authority and the law
charges voters with knowledge of the time and place of the
election (statutory notice).
Facts:
After Arroyos succession to Presidency and Sen. Guingonas
confirmation as the new VP, a seat in Senate was left vacant.
Senate resolved to call on Comelec to fill such vacancy
through a special election to be held simultaneously with the
upcoming regular election, such that the Senatorial candidate
with the 13th highest number of votes shall fill the vacancy.
The Comelec did so.
paragraph 4, Section 25, Article VI of this Constitution. The convening
of the Congress cannot be suspended nor the special election
postponed. No special election shall be called if the vacancy occurs
within eighteen months before the date of the next presidential
election.
Issue: Whether a special election to fill a vacant 3-yr term

Senate seat was validly held.
Held:
Yes. The calling of an election, that is, the giving notice of the
time and place of its occurrence, whether made by the
legislature directly or by the body with the duty to give such
call, is indispensable to the election's validity. In a special
election to fill a vacancy, a statute that expressly provides
that an election to fill a vacancy shall be held at the next
7|UNIVERSITY
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
general elections fixes the date at which the special election

is to be held and operates as the call for that election.
In determining whether there was a failure of election, it
should be determined whether the lack of notice misled a
substantial number of voters to believe that there was no
special election. This did not happen in this case since more
than 10 million voters already cast their votes for the winning
candidate.

Ibanez
TERM OF OFFICE AND TERM LIMIT

Article VI, Section 4, 1987 Constitution
The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall
commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth
day of June next following their election.
No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary
renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered
as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for
which he was elected.
Q. What is the term of office and term limit of

Senators?
The term of office shall be six years and they shall not serve
for more than two consecutive terms.
Q. What is the effect of voluntary renunciation of the
office?
It shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity
of his service for the full term for which he was elected.
QUALIICATIONS
Q. What are the qualifications to be a senator?
1. Natural-born citizen of the Philippines
2. At least thirty-five years of age on the day of the
election
4. A registered voter
5. A resident of the Philippines for not less than two
years immediately preceding the day of the election.
Pimentel v. Comelec
One-liner: The right of a citizen in the democratic process of
election should not be defeated by unwarranted impositions
of a requirement not otherwise specified in the Constitution.
Facts:
Law and Comelec resolution requiring mandatory drug testing
of candidates for public office, etc were questioned as
unconstitutional.
Issue: Can Congress or Comelec expand the qualification
requirements of candidates for senator under the
Constitution?
Held: No. A law or an administrative rule violating any norm of
the Constitution is null and void and has no effect.
MEMEBERS OF THE HOUSE OF

REPRESENTATIVES
NUMBER, HOW ELECTED, TERM OF OFFICE
COMPOSITION AND HOW ELECTED
Article VI, Section 5 (1), (2) & (4), Section 7
(1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than
two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who
shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the
provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with
the number of their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a
uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall
be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional,
and sectoral parties or organizations.
(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of
the total number of representatives including those under the party
list. For three consecutive terms after the ratification of this
Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list
representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or
election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural
communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be
provided by law, except the religious sector.
(4) Within three years following the return of every census, the
Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative districts based on
the standards provided in this section.
Q. How many members compose the HREP?

The House of Reps shall be composed of not more than 250
members, unless otherwise fixed by law.
Q. How are the members of the House of Reps elected?
They shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned
among provinces, cities and the Metropolitan Manila area in
accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants.
TERM OF OFFICE
The Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected
for a term of three years which shall begin, unless otherwise
provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next
following their election. No Member of the House of
Representatives shall serve for more than three consecutive
terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of
time shall not be considered as an interruption in the
continuity of his service for the full term for which he was
elected.
Q. What is the term of office and term limit of the
HREPs?
The Members of the House of Reps shall be elected for a term
of 3 years and shall not serve for more than 3 consecutive
terms.
QUALIICATIONS
Q. What are the qualifications to be a member of the
HREP?
1. A natural-born citizen of the Philippines
2. At least twenty-five years of age on the day of the
election
4. A registered voter in the district in which he shall be
elected (except the party-list representatives)
5. A resident thereof for a period of not less than one
year immediately preceding the day of the election
(except the party-list representatives)
8|UNIVERSITY
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
NUMBER OF PARTY LIST

The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per
centum (20%) of the total number of representatives including
those under the party list.
Veterans Federation Party v. Comelec
One-liner: Having determined that the 20% seat allocation is
merely a ceiling, and having upheld the constitutionality of
the 2% vote threshold and the three-seat limit imposed under
RA 7941, to determine how many party list seats the qualified
parties are entitled to, rank all of the parties and allocate
basing on the votes garnered by the party in first rank.
Facts:
Two Comelec resolutions ordering the proclamation of 38
additional party-list representatives to complete the full
complement of 52 seats in the House of Reps were
challenged.
Issues:
1. Whether the 20% allocation for party-list is
mandatory.
2. Whether the 2% threshold requirement and three-seat
limit is
constitutional.
3. If yes to number 2, how should the additional seats
of a
qualified party be determined?
Held:
1. No, the 20% is just a mere ceiling and the mechanics by
which it is to be filled up has been left to Congress in the
exercise of its prerogative.
2.
Yes. The 2% threshold is constitutional since it is

consistent with the very essence of representation,
because to have a meaningful representation the
elected persons must have the

Ibanez
mandate of a sufficient number of people. Otherwise,

the result might be the proliferation of small groups
which are incapable of contributing significant
legislation, and which might even pose a threat to the
stability of Congress.
Yes. The three-seat limit is likewise constitutional since it
ensures the entry of various interest -representations into
the legislature. Thus, no single group, no matter how large
its membership, would dominate the party-list seats, if not
the entire House.
3. The following rules shall be followed to determine the

additional seats:
TN: Under this, only those already qualified can have additional
seats.
Rank all the parties according to the votes each

obtained
Compute the ratio for each party by dividing its
votes by the total votes cast for the party-list
All those who garnered at least 2% shall have a
guaranteed seat. Only these parties shall be
considered in the computation of additional seats
The party having the highest number of votes is
referred to as the first party
Determine the number of seats the first party is
entitled to, in order to be able to compute that for
the other parties. (4% - additional 1; -6% additional 2)
The number of seats allotted to the other parties
cannot possibly exceed that to which the first party
is entitled to.
Q. What is the formula in determining additional seats

for the first party?
Number of votes of first party / Total votes for party-list
system
If at least 6% = 2 additional seats
If equal to or greater than 4 % but less than 6% = 1
additional seat Less than 4% - no additional seat
Example:
1,178,747 / 16,261369 = 7.2% (2 additional seats)
Q. What is the formula in determining additional seats
for the other qualified parties?
No. of votes of qualified party / No. of votes of first party X No.
of additional seats allocated to first party
Example:
977,476 / 1,178,747 X 2 = 1.65% (1 additional seat)
Q. What are the four parameters to determine the
winners in the party-list election under the Veterans
case?
1. The 20% allocation the combined number of all partylist congressmen shall not exceed 20% of the total
membership of the House of Representatives, including
those elected under the party list.
2. The 2% threshold only those parties garnering a
minimum of 2% of the total valid votes cast for the
party-list system are
qualified to have a seat in the House.
3. The three-seat limit each qualified party, regardless of
the number of votes obtained is entitled to a maximum
of three seats only, one qualifying and two additional

seats.
4. Proportional representation the additional seats which
a qualified party is entitled to shall be computed in
proportion to their total number of votes.
All those who garnered at least 2% shall have a guaranteed

seat.
BANAT v. Comelec
Facts:
Petitioner BANAT party-list, questioned the proclamations of
the Comelec as well as the formula being used. They
questioned Sec. 11 of RA 7941 for being void because its
provision that a party-list, to qualify for a congressional seat,
must garner at least 2% of the votes cast in the party-list
election, is not supported by the Constitution. Further, the 2%
rule creates a mathematical impossibility to meet the 20%
party-list seat prescribed by the Constitution.
Allocation of additional seats

The percentage of votes is multiplied by the remaining
available seats, 38. (55 maximum seats less the 17
guaranteed seats of the two-percenters)
Examples:
7.33% x 38 = 2.79% (2 additional seats)
4.74% x 38 = 1.80% (1 additional seat)
2.12% x 38 = 0.80% (1 additional seat)
THREE-TERM LIMIT
Issue: Whether the 2% threshold is unconstitutional.

Held:
Yes, but only insofar as it is used in the distribution of
additional party-list seats. The allocation of the additional
seats is no longer limited to the two-percenters. Hence, even
those who did not get at least 2% of votes, can still benefit
from the second round of seat allocation.
We therefore strike down the two percent threshold only in
relation to the distribution of the additional seats as found in
the second clause of Section 11 (b) of R.A. No. 7941. The two
percent threshold presents an unwarranted obstacle to the full
implementation of Section 5 (2), Article VI of the Constitution
and prevents the attainment of "the broadest possible
representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the
House of Representatives
The following rules shall be followed to determine the
additional seats:
Allocation of guaranteed seats:
Rank all the parties according to the votes each
obtained
Compute the ratio for each party by dividing its votes
by the total votes cast for the party-list
9|UNIVERSITY
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
PURPOSE OF THE THREE-TERM LIMIT

Borja v. Comelec
One-liner: The purpose of limiting the number of terms
elective local officials may serve is to prevent excessive
accumulation of power by perpetuating themselves in office. It
seeks to protect the people from the evils that a monopoly of
political power may bring about.
Facts:
succession.
Issue:
Whether a vice-mayor who succeeds to the office of mayor by

operation of law and serves the remainder of the term is
considered to have served a term in that office for the purpose of
the three-term limit.

Ibanez
Held:
No. Under the Constitution, the three-term limitation refers to
the term of office for which the local official was elected. The
purpose of this provision is to prevent a circumvention of the
limitation on the number of terms an elective local official
may serve. If he is not serving a term for which he was
elected because he is simply continuing the service of the
official he succeeds, such official cannot be considered to
have fully served the term notwithstanding his voluntary
renunciation of office prior to its expiration. While the people
should be protected from the evils that a monopoly of political
power may bring about, care should be taken that their
freedom of choice is not unduly curtailed.
Latasa v. Comelec
One-liner: The framers of the Constitution included an
exception to the peoples freedom to choose those who will
govern them in order to avoid the evil of a single person
accumulating excessive power over a particular territorial
jurisdiction as a result of a prolonged stay in the same office.
Facts:
Latasa held three consecutive offices as mayor, and on his third
term, the Municipality of Digos was made into the City of Digos.
He does not deny the fact that he has already served for three
consecutive terms as municipal mayor. However, he asserts that
when Digos was converted from a municipality to a city, it
attained a different juridical personality. Therefore, when he filed
his certificate of candidacy for city mayor, he cannot be construed
as vying for the same local government post.
Issue:
Whether Latasa is eligible to run as candidate for the position
of mayor of the newly-created City of Digos immediately after
he served for three consecutive terms as mayor of the
Municipality of Digos.
Held:
No. Although the new city acquired a new corporate existence
separate and distinct from that of the municipality, it does not
mean, that for the purpose of applying the subject
Constitutional provision, the office of the municipal mayor
would now be construed as a different local government post
as that of the office of the city mayor.
The territorial jurisdiction of the City of Digos is the same as that
of the municipality. Consequently, the inhabitants of the
municipality are the same as those in the city. These inhabitants
are the same group of voters who elected petitioner Latasa to be
their municipal mayor for three consecutive terms. These are also
the same inhabitants over whom he held power and authority as
their chief executive for nine year.
The framers of the Constitution included an exception to the

peoples freedom to choose those who will govern them in
order to avoid the evil of a single person accumulating
excessive power over a particular territorial jurisdiction as a
result of a prolonged stay in the same office. To allow
petitioner to vie for the position of city mayor after having
served for three consecutive terms as a municipal mayor
would obviously defeat the very intent of the framers when
they wrote this exception.
Should he be allowed another three consecutive terms as
mayor of the City of Digos, petitioner would then be possibly
holding office as chief executive over the same territorial
jurisdiction and inhabitants for a total of eighteen consecutive
years.
Q. What are the requisites of the three-term limit rule?
For the three-term limit for elective local government officials
to apply, two conditions or requisites must concur, to wit:
1. That the official concerned has been elected for three

consecutive terms in the same local government post
2. That he has fully served three consecutive terms.
EFFECTS OF THE FOLLOWING ON THE CONTINUITY OF

TERM:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Succession
Preventive suspension
Disqualification prior to end of term
Disqualification after end of term
Recall
Conversion of municipality to city
Election protest
Borja v. Comelec
One-liner: If the official is not serving a term for which he was
elected because he is simply continuing the service of the official
he succeeds, such official cannot be considered to have fully
served the term.
Facts:
succession.
Issue:
Whether a vice-mayor who succeeds to the office of mayor by
operation of law and serves the remainder of the term is
considered to have served a term in that office for the purpose of
the three-term limit.
Ruling:
No. If he is not serving a term for which he was elected
because he is simply continuing the service of the official he
succeeds, such official cannot be considered to have fully
served the term.
SAN
Facts:
A disqualification case was filed against a municipal councilor
alleging that he has already served three terms. In his
defense, the councilor said that his second term was
interrupted when he succeeded as vice mayor when the latter
retired. Consequently, he is not disqualified from running for
councilor again.
Issue: Whether respondent is deemed to have fully served his
second term in view of his assumption of office as vicemayor.
SUCCESSION
10 | U N I V E R S I T Y
OF
RLOS
SLG
Montebon v. Comelec
CA
Ruling:
No. Succession in local government offices is by operation of
law. In this case, a permanent vacancy occurred in the office
of the vice mayor due to the retirement of Vice Mayor
Mendoza. Respondent, being the highest ranking municipal
councilor, succeeded him in accordance with law. It is clear
therefore that his assumption of office as vice mayor can in no
way be considered a voluntary renunciation of his office as
municipal mayor.
The legal successor is not given any option under the law on
whether to accept the vacated post or not. Section 44 of the
Local Government Code makes no exception. Only if the
highest-ranking councilor is permanently unable to succeed to
the post does the law speak of alternate succession. Under no
circumstances can simple refusal of the official concerned be
considered as permanent inability within the contemplation of
law. Essentially therefore, the successor cannot refuse to
assume the office that he is mandated to occupy by virtue of
succession. He can only do so if for some reason he is
permanently unable to succeed and occupy the post vacated.
Succession by law to a vacated government office is
involuntary since it involves performance of a public duty, non
-performance of which exposes said official to possible
administrative and criminal charges of

Ibanez
dereliction of duty and neglect in the performance of public

functions. It is therefore more compulsory and obligatory
rather than voluntary.
PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION
Aldovino v. Comelec
One liner: Voluntary renunciation refers only to the elective
official's voluntary relinquishment of office and loss of title to
this office. It does not speak of the temporary "cessation of
the exercise of power or authority" that may occur for various
reasons, with preventive suspension being only one of them.
Facts:
Respondent was elected councilor for three consecutive
terms. During his third term, Sandiganbayan preventively
suspended him which was subsequently lifted. When he ran
again for councilor, a disqualification case was filed on the
ground that he has already served for three terms.
Issue: Whether preventive suspension of an elective official
is an interruption of his term of office for purposes of the
three-term limit rule.
Held:
The interruption of a term exempting an elective official from
the three-term limit rule is one that involves no less than the
involuntary loss of title to office. However, temporary inability
or disqualification to exercise the functions of an elective post,
as in preventive suspension, even if involuntary, should not be
considered as an effective interruption of a term because
suspended official continues to stay in office although barred
from exercising the functions and prerogatives of the office
within the suspension period.
DISQUALIFICATION PRIOR TO END OF TERM
Lonzanida v. Comelec
One liner: A proclamation subsequently declared void is no
proclamation at all and one assuming office on the strength of
a protested proclamation does so as a presumptive winner
and subject to the final outcome of the election protest.
Facts:
Petitioner was duly elected and served two terms as mayor.
He ran for the same office the third time and was proclaimed
winner. He assumed office and discharged his duties until he
was ordered to vacate the post by reason of a Comelec
decision on the election protest filed against him which
declared his opponent as the duly elected mayor. In the next
elections, he ran again for mayor. A disqualification case was
filed against him on the ground that he had served three
consecutive terms in the same post.
Issue:
Whether petitioners assumption of office as mayor may be
considered as service of one full term for the purpose of
applying the three-term limit for elective local government
officials.
Held:
No. First off, petitioner cannot be considered as having been
duly elected to the post in the last election. His assumption of
office as mayor cannot be deemed to have been by reason of
a valid election but by reason of a void proclamation. It has
been repeatedly held by this court that a proclamation
subsequently declared void is no proclamation at all and while
a proclaimed candidate may assume office on the strength of
the proclamation of the Board of Canvassers he is only a
presumptive winner who assumes office subject to the final
outcome of the election protest.
Secondly, he cannot be deemed to have served the third term

because he was ordered to vacate his post before the
expiration of the term. He vacated his post not by voluntary
renunciation but in compliance with the legal process of writ
of execution issued by the COMELEC to that effect. Such
involuntary severance from office is an interruption of
continuity of service and thus, the petitioner did not fully
serve the 1995-1998 mayoral term.
DISQUALIFICATION AFTER END OF TERM
Ong v. Alegre
One-liner: Assumption of office by an elective official and
continuous exercise of the functions thereof from start to
finish of the term, notwithstanding a belated decision by the
court in an election protest case disqualifying said elective
official, should legally be taken as service for a full term in
contemplation of the three-term rule.
Facts:
A disqualification case predicated on the three-consecutive
term limit rule was filed against Francis Ong. During his
second term, the opposing party filed an election protest and
the RTC declared the opposing party as the duly elected
mayor. However, such decision came out only three years
after, when Francis already finished his second term and in
fact already starting with his third term.
Issue:
Whether or not the assumption of office as mayor from July 1,
1998 to June 30, 2001, may be considered as one full term
service in the context of the consecutive three-term limit rule.
Held:
Yes. Such assumption of office constitutes, "service for the full
term", and should be counted as a full term served in
contemplation of the three-term limit.
It is true that the court ruled in the election protest case that
it was
Franciss opponent who was the legally elected mayor.
However, such decision, was without practical and legal use
and value, having been promulgated after the term of the
contested office has expired.
His proclamation by the Municipal Board of Canvassers of San
Vicente as the duly elected mayor in the 1998 mayoralty
election coupled by his assumption of office and his
continuous exercise of the functions thereof from start to
finish of the term, should legally be taken as service for a full
term in contemplation of the three-term rule.
Rivera v. Comelec
Facts:
A petition to cancel the candidates Certificate of Candidacy
on the ground that he was elected and had served three
previous consecutive terms as mayor. Respondent however
countered that he served his second term only as a caretaker
of the office or a de facto officer because he was not validly
elected for the term 1998 to 2001 since the RTC, declared in
its Decision that his proclamation as mayor was void.
Issue:
Whether or not the term 1998 to 2001 should be counted for
purposes of the three-term limit, when his proclamation as
mayor was subsequently declared void.
Ruling:
Yes. He was mayor for the entire period notwithstanding the
decision of the RTC in the electoral protest case ousting him as
mayor. Such circumstance does not constitute an interruption in
serving the full term.
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA

Ibanez
RECALL
Adormeo v. Comelec
Facts:
A petition was filed to disqualify the candidate from running for
Mayor on the ground that the candidate was elected and had
served as city mayor for three (3) consecutive terms. The
candidate was elected mayor in May 1992. He served the full
term. Again, he was re-elected in 1995-1998. In the election of
1998 he lost. In the recall election of May 12, 2000, he again won
and served the unexpired term until June 30, 2001.
Issue: Whether the candidate was elected for 3 consecutive

terms.
Ruling:
No. For nearly two years he was a private citizen. The
continuity of his mayorship was disrupted by his defeat in the
1998 elections. Neither can respondent's victory in the recall
election be deemed a violation of Section 8, Article X of the
Constitution as "voluntary renunciation" for clearly it was not.
Hence, he was not disqualified to run for mayor in the May 14,
2001 elections.
Socrates v. Comelec
One-liner: What the Constitution prohibits is an immediate
re-election for a fourth term following three consecutive
terms. A recall election mid-way in a term following the third
consecutive term is a subsequent election but not an
immediate re-election after the third term.
Facts:
Hagedorn had been elected and served as mayor for three
consecutive terms. Obviously aware of the three-term limit
rule, Hagedorn opted not to vie for the same mayoralty
position in the 2001 elections, in which Socrates ran and
eventually won.
However, due to the loss of confidence, members of the
incumbent barangay officials convened themselves into a
Preparatory Recall Assembly, midway into Socrates term.
Socrates faced recall proceedings and in the recall election
held, Hagedorn ran and eventually won the recall election.
Issue: Whether or not one who has been elected and served for 3
consecutive full terms is qualified to run for mayor in the recall
election.
Held:
Yes. After three consecutive terms, an elective local official cannot

seek immediate re-election for a fourth term. The prohibited
election refers to the next regular election for the same office
following the end of the third consecutive term. Any subsequent
election, like a recall election, is no longer covered by the
prohibition for two reasons. First, a subsequent election like a
recall election is no longer an immediate re-election after three
consecutive terms. Second, the intervening period constitutes an
involuntary interruption in the continuity of service.
CONVERSION OF MUNICIPALITY TO CITY

Latasa v. Comelec
Facts:
Latasa held three consecutive offices as mayor, and on his third
term, the Municipality of Digos was made into the City of Digos.
He does not deny the fact that he has already served for three
consecutive terms as municipal mayor. However, he asserts that
when Digos was converted from a municipality to a city, it
attained a different juridical personality. Therefore, when he filed
his certificate of candidacy for city mayor, he cannot be construed
as vying for the same local government post.
Held:
No. Although the new city acquired a new corporate existence
separate and distinct from that of the municipality, it does not
mean, that for the purpose of applying the subject
Constitutional provision, the office of the municipal mayor
would now be construed as a different local government post
as that of the office of the city mayor.
The territorial jurisdiction of the City of Digos is the same as that
of the municipality. Consequently, the inhabitants of the
municipality are the same as those in the city. These inhabitants
are the same group of voters who elected petitioner Latasa to be
their municipal mayor for three consecutive terms. These are also
the same inhabitants over whom he held power and authority as
their chief executive for nine year.
ELECTION PROTEST
Abundo v. Comelec
Facts:
Abundo vied for the position of mayor of for four consecutive
elections (2001, 2004, 2007, 2010). In both 2001 and 2007,
he was proclaimed the winner and served his terms. However,
in the 2004 elections, Torres was proclaimed as the winner in
the election. Abundo unseated Torres after a successful
election protest. Abundo served the remaining 1 year and 1
month of the term. In the 2010 elections, Abundo and Torres
again opposed each other. Torres filed a petition to disqualify
Abundo based on the three-term limit rule.
Issue: Whether Abundo is deemed to have served 3 consecutive
terms.
Held:
No. The consecutiveness of what otherwise would have been
Abundos three successive, continuous mayorship was
effectively broken during the 2004- 2007 term when he was
initially deprived of title to, and was veritably disallowed to
serve and occupy, an office to which he, after due
proceedings, was eventually declared to have been the
rightful choice of the electorate. The two-year period during
which Torres was serving as mayor should be considered as an
interruption, which effectively removed Abundos case from
the ambit of the three-term limit rule.
VACANCY IN THE SENATE OR HOUSE OF

REPS
HOW FILLED
Article VI, Section 9, 1987 Constitution
In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, a
special election may be called to fill such vacancy in the manner
prescribed by law, but the Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives thus elected shall serve only for the unexpired term.
Q. How is vacancy in the Senate or HREP filled?

Through a special election called for such purpose. However,
the person elected shall serve only for the unexpired term.
Q. Is the rule on special elections absolute in case a
vacancy
occurs
in
the
Senate
or
House
of
Representatives?
Issue: Whether Latasa is eligible to run as candidate for the
position of mayor of the newly-created City of Digos
immediately after he served for three consecutive terms as
mayor of the Municipality of Digos.
NO. The rule will depend on the date when the vacancy
occurred and the House where the vacancy originated. If the
vacancy occurred in the Senate, irrespective of the date it
occurred, the special elections shall be simultaneous with the
next regular elections. If the vacancy occurred in the House of
Representative, the rule will depend on the date when it
occurred:
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
If vacancy falls inside the one year period prior to the

next regular elections no more special elections. It
shall be done simultaneously with the next regular
elections
If vacancy falls outside the one year period prior to the
next regular elections there will be a special election.

Q. When shall the special election be held?
Not earlier than 60 days nor longer than 90 days after the
occurrence
of the vacancy.
PARTY-LIST
2. Whether the party-list system is exclusive to

marginalized and
underrepresented
sectors.
Held
:
1. Yes. They cannot be disqualified from the party-list
elections
merely on the ground that they are political parties.

The
PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVES OR NOMINEES
COMPOSITION
Q. How many party-list representatives shall compose

the
HREP
?
The party-list representatives shall constitute 20% of the total
number
of representatives including those under the party list.
Q. What is the policy of the State?

The State shall promote proportional representation in the
election of
representatives to the House of Representatives through a
party-list
system of registered national, regional and sectoral
parties or
organizations or coalitions thereof, which will enable Filipino
citizens
belonging to marginalized and under-represented sectors,
organizations
and parties, and who lack well-defined political constituencies
but who
could contribute to the formulation and enactment of
appropriate
legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole, to become
members
of the House of Representatives.
Towards this end, the State shall develop and guarantee a full,
free and
open party system in order to attain the broadcast
possible
representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the
House of
Representatives by enhancing their chances to compete for
and win
seats in the legislature, and shall provide the simplest scheme
possible.
QUALIFICATIONS
Q. What are the qualifications of party-list nominees?

1.
Natural-born citizen of the Philippines
2.
Registered voter
3.
Resident of the Philippines for a period of not less than

one (1)
Constitution provides that members provides that

members of the
House may be elected through a party-list system of
registered
national, regional, and sectoral parties or
organizations. The
purpose of the party-list is to open up the system.
Indubitably,
therefore, political parties even the major ones
may
participate in the party-list
elections.
That political parties may participate in the party-list
elections
does not mean, however, that any political party
or any
organization or group for that matter may do so. The
requisite
character of these parties or organizations must be
consistent
with the purpose of the party-list system, as laid down in
the
Constitution and RA 7941. In other words, while they are
not
disqualified merely on the ground that they are political
parties,
they must show, however, that they represent the
interests of the
marginalized and
underrepresented.
2. Yes. Only those Filipinos who are marginalized
and
underrepresented become members of Congress under
the partylist system. Logic shows that the system has been
opened to
those who have never gotten a foothold within it
those who
cannot otherwise win in regular elections and who
therefore need
the "simplest scheme possible" to do so. Conversely, it
would be
illogical to open the system to those who have long
been within
it those privileged sectors that have long
dominated the
congressional district elections. This Court, therefore,
cannot
allow the party-list system to be sullied and prostituted
by those
who are neither marginalized nor
underrepresented.
Q. What is the purpose of the party-list
system?
The party-list system is a social justice tool designed not only
to give
more law to the great masses of our people who have less in
life, but
also to enabl them to become
lawmaker themselve
e
veritable
s
s,
year immediately preceding the day of the election

4.
Able to read and write
5.
Bona fide member of the party or organization which he

seeks
to represent for at least ninety (90) days preceding the
day of
the election
6.
At least twenty-five (25) years of age on the day of the

election
TN: In case of a nominee of the youth sector, he must at least be
25 but
not more than 30 years of age on the day of the election. Any
youth
sectoral representative who attains the age of 30 during his term
shall be
allowed to continue in office until the expiration of his term.
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW v. Comelec

One-liner: The nominees must represent the marginalized
and
underrepresented sectors. They must be Filipino citizens "who
belong to
marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and
parties."
Hence, the interests of the youth cannot be fully represented
by a
retiree; neither can those of the urban poor or the working
class, by an
industrialist. To allow otherwise is to betray the State policy to
give
genuine representation to the marginalized and
underrepresented.
empowered to participate directly in the enactment of laws

designed to
benefit them. It intends
make the
marginalized and
to
the
underrepresente no merel passiv recipients of the State's
d
t
y
e
benevolence, but active participants in the mainstream of
representative
democracy. Thus, allowing all individuals and groups,
including those
which now dominate district elections, to have the same
opportunity to
participate in party-list elections would desecrate this lofty
objective and
mongrelize the social justice mechanism into an atrocious
veneer for
traditional
politics.
Q. May political parties participate under the party-list
system
of elections?
Yes. The Supreme Court laid down 8 parameters before a
political party
may be allowed registration
For a political
to be allowe
.
party
d
participation, it must align itself with sectoral groups. In like
manner that
nominee thereof must also be representing the
underrepresented and
the marginalized sectors.
8 parameters:
1.
The political party must represent the marginalized and

underrepresented
groups
2.
It must comply with the declared statutory policy of enabling

Filipino
citizens belonging to marginalized and underrepresented
sectors
The religious sector may not be represented in the party-list
system
The party must not be disqualified under Sec 6 of
RA 7941
The party must not be an adjunct of or a project organized or an
entity
funded or assisted by the
government.
The party must not only comply with the requirements of the
law, but its
nominees must likewise do so under Sec 9 of RA
7941
Facts:
Petitioners Ang Bagong Bayani and Bayan Muna object to
the
participation of major political parties. They seek the
disqualification of
privat respondents, arguing mainly that the party-list
e
system was
intended to benefit the marginalized and underrepresented;
not the
3.
4.
5.
6.
mainstream political parties, the non-marginalized or

overrepresented
7.
Issues
:
1. Whether political parties may participate in the party-list
stem
OF
SAN
CARLOS
8.
Not only the candidate must represent the marginalized, so also

must its
nominees
The nominees must likewise be able to contribute to the
formulation and
enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as
a whole.
SLG

TN: But this was modified by the subsequent ruling in the case of
Atong
Paglaum v.
Comelec
BANAT v. Comelec and Bayan Muna v. Comelec
One-liner: It is not necessary that the party-list organization's
nominee
"wallow in poverty, destitution and infirmity" as there is no
financial
status required in the law. It is enough that the nominee of the
sectoral
party belongs to the marginalized and underrepresented sectors,
that
is, if the nominee represents the fisherfolk, he or she must
be a
fisherfolk, or if the nominee represents the senior citizens, he or
she
must be a senior citizen.
SECTORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY PARTY-LIST
Q. What organizations may qualify under the party-list

system?
1. Labor
2. Peasant
3. Urban
poor
4. Fisherfolk
5.
Facts:
52 party-list groups assailed the Resolutions issued by Comelec
denying
their petitions for registration under the party-list system.
7.
Youth
8.
Elderly
9. Handicapped
10. Veteran
s
11. Overseas workers
12. Professionals
13. Such other sectors as may be provided by law,
except the
religious sector.
Atong Paglaum v. Comelec

One-liner: It is not necessary that the nominee be a member of
the
marginalized sector which he seeks to represent. It is enough that
he is
an advocate of such sector, that, he has a proven track record for
the
advocating the cause of the organization he seeks to represent.
6.
Indigenous cultural
communities
Women
Q. Describe the process of registration of party-list.

Any organized group of persons may register as a party,
organization or
coalition for purposes of the party-list
system by:
1. Register with Comelec file a verified petition not later
than 90
Issue:
Whether the criteria for participating as party-list system laid
down in
Ang Bagong Bayani and BANAT should be applied by the Comelec
in the
coming May 2013 party-list elections.
2.
Held:
4.
No. Political parties need not align themselves with sectoral groups
or
organizations, and the nominees thereof need not come from that
sector
itself, provided that he can show that he has a proven track record
for
advocating the cause of the organization he seeks to represent.
The recognition that national and regional parties, as well as
sectoral
parties of professionals, the elderly, women and the youth, need
not be
"marginalized and underrepresented" will allow small ideologybased
and cause-oriented parties who lack "well-defined political
constituencies" a chance to win seats in the House of
Representatives.
On the other hand, limiting to the "marginalized and
underrepresented"
the sectoral
for labor, peasant,
folk, urban poor,
parties
fisher
indigenous
communitie handicapped
veterans,
cultural
s,
,
overseas
3.
days before the election, accompanied by its

constitution, bylaws, platform or program of government, list of
officers, etc.
The petition has to be published in 2 newspapers of
general
circulation
It should be acted upon within 15 days, and no later
than 60
days before elections. (There should be a formal
hearing)
Once a party-list is accredited by the Comelec, it must
submit to
the Comelec a list of 5 nominees not later than 45 days
before
the
elections.
CLASSIFICATIONS OF PARTY-LIST
SECTORS
Atong Paglaum v. Comelec
One-liner: Sector
al
parties may
either
be
marginalized
and
underrepresented or lacking in well-defined political

constituencies.
Held:
The party-list system is composed of three different groups: (1)
national
parties or organizations; (2) regional parties or organizations;
and (3)
sectoral parties organizations. National and regional parties
or
or
workers, and other sectors that by their nature are economically at

the
margins of society, will give the "marginalized and
underrepresented"
an opportunity to likewise win seats in the House of
Representatives.
TN: Belonging to the "marginalized and underrepresented" sector does not
mean
one must "wallow in poverty, destitution or infirmity." It is sufficient that
one, or
his or her sector, is below the middle class or those who fall in the low
income
group as classified by the National Statistical Coordination Board.
6 parameters:
1. Three different groups may participate in the party-list system:
The
national, regional and sectoral parties.
2. National parties and regional parties do not need to organize along
the
sectoral lines and do not need to
any marginalized
represent
or
underrepresented sector.
3. Political parties can participate in party-list elections provided
they
register under the party-list system and do not field candidates in
legislative district elections
4. Sectoral parties may either be marginalized and underrepresented
or
lacking in well-defined political
constituencies.
5. A majority of the members of sectoral parties that represent the
marginalized and underrepresented must belong to such sector
which
they represent
6. National, regional and sectoral parties shall not be disqualified if
some of
their nominees are disqualified, provided that they have at least one
nominee who remains qualified.
14 | U N I V E R S I T Y O F S A N C A R L O S S L G
organizatio are different

ns
from
sectoral parties or
organizations.
National and regional parties or organizations need not be

organized
along sectoral lines and need not represent any particular
sector
Section 5 of R.A. No. 7941 states that "the sectors shall
include labor,
peasan fisher
urban
indigenous cultural
t,
folk,
poor,
communities,
elderly, handicapped, women, youth, veterans, overseas
workers, and
professionals." The sectors mentioned in Section 5 are not all
necessarily
"marginalized and underrepresented." For sure,
"professionals" are not
by definition "marginalized and underrepresented," not even
the elderly,
women, and the youth. However, professionals, the elderly,
women, and
the youth may "lack well-defined political constituencies," and
can thus
organiz themselve
into
parties
advocacy of the
e
s
sectoral
in
special
interests and concerns of their respective
sectors.
Lacking well-defined political constituency: Their number in
the district
is not sufficient to earn a seat in Congress but taking into
account that
of the entire nation, it could be
sufficient.
NATURE OF CONSTITUTIONAL & STATUTORY
ENUMERATION
Ang Ladlad v. Comelec
One-liner: The enumeration of marginalized and underrepresented
sectors is not exclusive. The crucial element is not whether a
sector is
specifically enumerated, but whether a particular organization
complies
with the requirements of the Constitution and RA 7941.

Ibanez
Facts:
Ang Ladlad is an organization composed of men and women
who identify themselves as lesbians, gays, bisexuals, or transgendered individuals (LGBTs). They applied for registration for
party-list since the LGBT community is a marginalized and
under-represented sector that is particularly disadvantaged
because of their sexual orientation and gender identity. The
Comelec denied the application on the ground that Ang Ladlad
advocates sexual immorality.
Issue: Whether Ang Ladlad can qualify as a party-list.
Held:
Yes. The enumeration of marginalized and under-represented
sectors is not exclusive. The crucial element is not whether a
sector is specifically enumerated, but whether a particular
organization complies with the requirements of the
Constitution and RA 7941. They can fall on the Such other
sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious
sector.
As such, we hold that moral disapproval, without more, is not
a sufficient governmental interest to justify exclusion of
homosexuals from participation in the party-list system. The
denial of Ang Ladlads registration on purely moral grounds
amounts more to a statement of dislike and disapproval of
homosexuals, rather than a tool to further any substantial
public interest.
NATURE OF LIST OF NOMINEES
BA-RA 7941 v. Comelec
of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of

his service for the full term for which he was elected.
Q. What is the term of office of elective local officials?

Term of office is 3 years and shall not serve for more than 3
consecutive terms. (Except barangay officials their term of
office is determined by law)
Section 43, Local Government Code of 1991
Term of Office.
(a) The term of office of all local elective officials elected after the
effectivity of this Code shall be three (3) years, starting from
noon of June 30, 1992 or such date as may be provided for by
law, except that of elective barangay officials: Provided, That
all local officials first elected during the local elections
immediately following the ratification of the 1987 Constitution
shall serve until noon of June 30, 1992.
(b) No local elective official shall serve for more than three (3)
consecutive terms in the same position. Voluntary renunciation
of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as
an interruption in the continuity of service for the full term for
which the elective official concerned was elected.
(c) The term of office of barangay officials and members of the
Sangguniang Kabataan shall be for three (3) years, which shall
begin after the regular election of barangay officials on the
second Monday of May 1994.
Q. What is the term of office of barangay officials?

David v. Comelec
One-liner: Comelec has a constitutional duty to disclose and release
One-liner: While the term for barangay officials is not

constitutionally
the names of the nominees of the party-list groups. The people have
provided, the intent and design of the legislature to limit their
term to
the right to elect their representatives on the basis of an informed
only 3 years as provided under the Local Government Code
emerges as
judgment. Hence the need for voters to be informed about matters that bright as the sunlight. RA 6679 which provides for a term of
five years
have a bearing on their choice. The ideal cannot be achieved in a
was repealed by RA 7160 reducing it to 3 years. Basic is the
system
principle in
of blind voting.
statutory construction that between two laws with
apparent
irreconcilable conflict, the later law prevails because it is
the later
Facts:
legislative will.
Both petitions seek to compel the Comelec to disclose or publish the
names of the nominees of various party-list groups. Comelec denied
QUALIFICATION
arguing that the party-list elections must not be personality oriented
S
and
that people are to vote for sectoral parties and not for their nominees.
QUALIFICATIONS
Issues: Whether Comelec is mandated by the Constitution to disclose
to
the public the names of said nominees.
Held:
Q. What are the qualifications of elective local officials?

1. A citizen of the Philippines
2. A registered voter in the barangay, municipality, city,
or
province or, in the case of a member of the Sangguniang
Yes. It has been repeatedly said in various contexts that the people
have
the right to elect their representatives on the basis of an informed
Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panlungsod, or Sangguniang
judgment. Hence the need for voters to be informed about matters that
Bayan, the district where he intends to be elected
have a bearing on their choice. The ideal cannot be achieved in a
3. A resident therein for at least 1 year immediately
system
preceding
of blind voting, as veritably advocated in the assailed resolution of the
the day of the election
Comelec. The Court has consistently made it clear that it frowns upon
4. Able to read and write Filipino or any other local language
or
any interpretation of the law or rules that would hinder in any way the
dialect
free and intelligent casting of the votes in an election.
Q. What are the age requirements?
While the vote cast in a party-list elections is a vote for a party, such
vote, in the end, would be a vote for its nominees, who, in appropriate
cases, would eventually sit in the House of Representatives.
21 years old
18 years old
At least 15 but
not more than 21
ELECTIVE LOCAL OFFICIALS

Governor, ViceGovernor, member
of the Provincial
Council, Mayor,
Member of the City
Vice-Mayor, Member or Municipal Council
of the City Council
Article X, Section 8, 1987 Constitution
of highly urbanized
The term of office of elective local officials, except barangay officials, which shall
cities
be determined by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for
more
than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length
Sangguniang
Kabataan
Mayor, Vice-Mayor
Punong barangay,
of independent
component cities or
member of the
Barangay council
municipalitie
s
What are the qualifications of an elective official of the

SK?
1. A Filipino
citizen
2. Qualified voter of the katipunan ng Kabataan
3. Resident of the barangay for at least one (1) year immediately
prior to election
4. At least fifteen (15) years but less than eighteen (18) years of
age on the day of the election
5. Able to read and write Filipino, English, or the local dialect,
6. Must not have been convicted of any crime involving moral
turpitude.
Q. What is the purpose of Philippine citizenship as a
requirement?
Philippine citizenship is an indispensable requirement for holding an
2. At the first opportunity, he returned to the

Philippines and
sought to serve his people once more and the
people of
Sorsogon voted for him three times
3. His demonstrated tenacity and sheer determination
to reassume his nationality of birth despite several legal setbacks
speak more loudly, in spirit, in fact and in truth than
any legal
technicality, of his consuming intention and burning
desire to reembrace his native Philippines even now at the ripe old
age of
81 years.
4. He was stateless as the time he filed his COC as he has
long
given up his US nationality
TN: No filing fee in filing for COC otherwise it becomes a
property
qualification.
Labo v. Comelec
One-liner: Philippine citizenship is not a cheap commodity
that can be
easily recovered after its renunciation. It may be restored only
after the
returning renegade makes a formal act of re-dedication to the
country
he has abjured and he solemnly affirms once again his
total and
exclusive loyalty to the Republic of the Philippines. This may
not be
accomplished by election to public office.
elective public office, and the purpose of the citizenship qualification is

Facts:
none other than to ensure that no alien, i.e., no person owing
allegiance
to another nation, shall govern our people and our country or a unit of Labo was proclaimed mayor-elect of Baguio. A petition for quo
territory thereof.
warranto
was filed against him for being an Australian citizen by virtue
of his
Frivaldo v. Comelec
marriage with an Australian. Right after he divorced, he sought
for the
change of his status from immigrant to returning former Filipino
citizen.
One-liner: The citizenship requirement in the Local Government Code However, he categorically declared that he was an Australian
citizen in
is to be possessed by an elective official at the latest as of the time he a number of sworn statements he voluntarily made and even
sought to
is proclaimed and at the start of the term of office to which he has
avoid the jurisdiction of the barangay court on the ground that
been
he was
elected.
a foreigner.
Facts:
Issue: Whether Labos proclamation was valid.
A disqualification case was filed against Frivaldo when he ran for Held:
Governor of Sorsogon, by reason of his not being a citizen of the
Philippines. Apparently, prior to his filing of COC, he already applied for No. Labo is not now, nor was he on the day of the local
elections, a
repatriation. While his repatriation was not yet approved during
citizen of the Philippines. In fact, he was not even a qualified
voter under
elections, it was however granted at the time of his proclamation,
the Constitution itself because of his alienage. Hence, he was
albeit
therefore
2 hours late.
ineligible as a candidate for mayor of Baguio City. These
qualifications
are continuing requirements; once any of them is lost
during
Issue: Whether Frivaldo can be validly proclaimed as governor.
incumbency, title to the office itself is deemed forfeited. In the
case at
bar, the citizenship and voting requirements were not
subsequently lost
Held:
but were not possessed at all in the first place on the day of the
Yes. The law does not specify any particular date or time when the
election.
The petitioner was disqualified from running as mayor and,
although
elected, is not now qualified to serve as such.
candidate must possess citizenship. In fact, the LGC speaks of

qualifications of elective officials and not of candidates. Hence,
DISQUALIFICATIONS
unless
otherwise expressly stated, such qualification should thus be
possessed
when the elective official begins to govern at the time he is
DISQUALIFICATIONS
proclaimed
and at the start of his term. But to remove all doubts, the Court also
held that the repatriation of Frivaldo retroacted to the date of the filing Local Government Code of 1991, Section 40
of his application.
Q. Is the Frivaldo doctrine controlling?
Disqualifications. - The following persons are disqualified from
running
for any elective local position:
(a) Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense
According to Sir, the Frivaldo doctrine may still hold true in the sense
that no contrary jurisprudence has been laid down by the Supreme
involving
Court.
moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one (1)
year or
more of imprisonment, within two (2) years after
serving
How to answer if confronted with such a question in the exam?
sentence;
If the facts of the case falls on all four with the circumstances of
(b) Those removed from office as a result of an
Frivaldo,
administrative case;
then you can answer in the same way. But make sure that you qualify
(c) Those convicted by final judgment for violating the
oath of
that it can be a ground for disqualification.
allegiance to the Republic;
(d) Those with dual citizenship;
What are the unique circumstances attendant in the case of Frivaldo?
(e) Fugitives from justice in criminal or non-political cases
here or
1. He was forced to give up his Filipino citizenship and political
abroad;
aspiration as his means of escaping the clutches of Marcos
(f) Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who
have
dictatorship
acquired the right to reside abroad and continue to avail
of the
same right after the effectivity of this Code; and
(g) The insane or feeble-minded.
OF
SAN
CARLOS
SLG

Ibanez
DUAL CITIZENSHIP
1987 Constitution, Article IV, Section 5
Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and
shall be dealt with by law.
Valles v. Comelec
One-liner: Dual citizenship as a disqualification refers to
citizens with dual allegiance. Her filing of a certificate of
candidacy, where she declared that she is a Filipino citizen
and that she will support and defend the Philippine
Constitution and will maintain true faith and allegiance
thereto, sufficed to renounce her foreign citizenship,
effectively removing any disqualification as a dual citizen.
Held:
The mere fact that Lopez was a holder of an Australian
passport and had an alien certificate of registration are not
acts constituting an effective renunciation of citizenship and
do not militate against her claim of Filipino citizenship. For
renunciation to effectively result in the loss of citizenship, the
same must be express.
Mercado v. Manzano
One-liner: The provision that persons with dual citizenship
are prohibited from running or seeking public office must be
understood as referring to dual allegiance. The mere filing of
certificate of candidacy therefore has the effect of electing
Philippine
citizenship
and
renouncing
other
foreign
citizenships and/or allegiances.
Held:
Dual allegiance is different from dual citizenship. The former is
a result of the intentional act of an individual by some positive
act to owe loyalty to two or more states, while the latter may
be obtained by reason of the cross applications of the jus soli
and jus sanguinis principles. While dual citizenship is
involuntary, dual allegiance is the result of an individuals
volition.
Labo v. Comelec
One-liner: Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the
national interest and shall be dealt with by law.
Labo claims that his naturalization in Australia made him at
worst only a dual national and did not divest him of his
Philippine citizenship. Such a specious argument cannot stand
against the clear provisions of CA No. 63, which enumerates
the modes by which Philippine citizenship may be lost:
(1) Naturalization in a foreign country
(2) Express renunciation of citizenship
(3) Subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the
Constitution or laws of a foreign country, all of which are
applicable to the petitioner.
It is also worth mentioning in this connection that under
Article IV, Section 5, of the present Constitution, "Dual
allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and
shall be dealt with by law."
and Re-Acquisition Act. He argues that mere filing of COC

constituted as a renunciation of his foreign citizenship.
Issue: Whether De Guzman is disqualified from running.
Held:
Yes. He is disqualified in view of his failure to renounce his
American citizenship. It is true that he re-acquire his Philippine
citizenship after taking the oath of allegiance. However, RA
9225 imposes an additional requirement on those who wish to
seek elective public office, that is, to make a personal and
sworn renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship before
any public office authorized to administer oath. The mere
filing of a COC does not ipso facto amount to renunciation of
his foreign citizenship.
Sobejana-Condon v. Comelec
One-liner: The personal and sworn renunciation of any and
all foreign citizenship before any public office authorized to
administer oath is an additional qualification for elective office
specific only to Filipino citizens who re-acquire their
citizenship under Section 3 of R.A. No. 9225. Failure to
renounce foreign citizenship in accordance with the exact
tenor of Section 5 (2) of RA 9225 renders a dual citizen
ineligible to run for and thus hold any elective public office.
Macquiling v. Comelec
One-liner: Anyone who seeks to run for public office must be
solely and exclusively a Filipino citizen. To allow a former
Filipino who reacquires Philippine citizenship to continue using
a foreign passport which indicates the recognition of a
foreign state of the individual as its national even after the
Filipino has renounced his foreign citizenship, is to allow a
complete disregard of this policy.
Facts:
Arnado is a natural born Filipino citizen and subsequently
acquired American citizenship by naturalization. He
reacquired his Filipino citizenship by taking his Oath of
Allegiance to the Philippines and that he renounced his
American citizenship. However, after renouncing his American
citizenship, he used his U.S. passport at least six times.
Held:
The requirement that the renunciation must be made through
an oath emphasizes the solemn duty of the one making the
oath of renunciation to remain true to what he has sworn to.
Allowing the subsequent use of a foreign passport because it
is convenient for the person to do so is rendering the oath a
hollow act. It devalues the act of taking of an oath, reducing it
to a mere ceremonial formality.
It must be stressed that what is at stake here is the principle
that only those who are exclusively Filipinos are qualified to
run for public office.
If we allow dual citizens who wish to run for public office to

renounce their foreign citizenship and afterwards continue using
their foreign passports, we are creating a special privilege for
these dual citizens, thereby effectively junking the prohibition in
Section 40 (d) of the Local
Government Code.
Roseller de Guzman v. Comelec
FUGITIVES OF JUSTICE
One-liner: One who re-acquires Philippine citizenship under RA

9225,
and wish to seek public office, shall comply with the
additional
requirement of a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all
foreign
citizenship before any public office authorized to administer oath.
Marquez v. Comelec
One-liner: Fugitive from justice includes not only those who
flee after
conviction to avoid punishment but likewise those who, after
being
charged, flee to avoid prosecution. This definition truly finds
Facts:
A disqualification case was filed against De Guzman on the ground
that
he is not a Filipino citizen but an immigrant and resident of the US.
He
admitted that he was a naturalized American, however, argued
that he
applied for dual citizenship under RA 9225 or the Citizenship
Retention
support
from jurisprudence and it may be so conceded as expressing the
general
and ordinary connotation of the term.
Facts:
Marquez filed a petition for quo warranto against the winning
candidate,
respondent Rodriguez, for being a fugitive from respondent.
Allegedly,

Ibanez
at the time respondent filed his COC, a criminal charge

against him for 10 counts of insurance fraud or grand theft of
personal property was still pending before the court of Los
Angeles. A warrant for his arrest was issued but has yet to be
served on account of his alleged flight from that country.
Issue: Whether Rodriguez, who at the time of the filing of his
COC, is said to be facing a criminal charge before a foreign
court and evading a warrant for his arrest comes within the
term "fugitive from justice.
Held:
"Fugitive from justice" includes not only those who flee after
being charged flee to avoid prosecution. However, whether or
not Rodriguez is a "fugitive from justice under the definition
thus given was not passed upon by the Court.
VACANCY IN ELECTIVE LOCAL OFFICES

HOW VACANCY IS FILLED
Q. How is the vacancy caused by a Sangguniang
member not belonging to any political party, filled?
The Local Chief Executive shall appoint a qualified person to
fill the vacancy, upon the recommendation of the sanggunian
concerned.
DATE OF ELECTION
DATE OF ELECTIONS
1. National, District, Local elective officials Second
Monday of May 1992 and every three (3) years
thereafter.
Rodriguez v. Comelec
One-liner: Intent to evade on the part of a candidate must be
established by proof that there has already been a conviction
or at least, a charge has already been filed, at the time of
flight. Not being a "fugitive from justice" under this definition,
Rodriguez cannot be denied the Quezon Province
gubernatorial post.
Facts:
Rodriguez sought a reconsideration for the above ruling.
Held:
"Fugitive from justice" includes not only those who flee after
being charged flee to avoid prosecution. The definition thus
indicates that the intent to evade is the compelling factor that
animates one's flight from a particular jurisdiction. And
obviously, there can only be an intent to evade prosecution or
punishment when there is knowledge by the fleeing subject of
an already instituted indictment, or of a promulgated
judgment of conviction.
Rodriguez' case just cannot fit in this concept. His arrival in the
Philippines from US preceded the filing of the felony complaint in
the Los Angeles Court and of the issuance on even date of the
arrest warrant, by almost 5 months. It was clearly impossible for
Rodriguez to have known about such felony complaint and arrest
warrant at the time he left the US, as there was in fact no
complaint and arrest warrant much less conviction to speak of yet
at such time. What prosecution or punishment then was Rodriguez
deliberately running away from?
PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN FOREIGN COUNTRY

Caasi v. CA
One-liner: Application for immigrant status and permanent
residence in the U.S. and possession of a green card attesting
to such status are conclusive proof of being a permanent
resident of the US.
Held:
To be qualified to run for elective office in the Philippines, the law
requires that the candidate who is a green card holder must have
waived his status as a permanent resident or immigrant of a
foreign country.
Therefore, his act of filing a certificate of candidacy for

elective office in the Philippines, did not of itself constitute a
waiver of his status as a permanent resident or immigrant of
the United States. The waiver of his green card should be
manifested by some act or acts independent of and done prior
to filing his candidacy for elective office in this country.
Without such prior waiver, he was disqualified to run for any
elective office.
2. Regional elective local officials Second Monday of

May 2013 and every three (3) years thereafter.
3. Barangay and SK officials Last Monday of October
2007 and every three (3) years thereafter.
ADJUSTMENT OF PRE-ELECTION
REQUIREMENTS
ADJUSTMENT OF PRE-ELECTION REQUIREMENTS
RA 6646, Section 29
Designation of Other Dates for Certain Pre-elections Acts. - If
it should no longer be reasonably possible to observe the
periods and dates prescribed by law for certain pre-election
acts, the Commission shall fix other periods and dates in order
to ensure accomplishment of the activities so voters shall not
be deprived of their right of suffrage.
Akbayan v. Comelec
One-Liner: The right of suffrage is not at all absolute. It is
subject to existing substantive and procedural requirements
embodied in the Constitution and statute books. The act of
registration is an indispensable precondition to the right of
suffrage, for it is part and parcel of the right to vote and an
indispensable element in the election process.
Facts:
The AKBAYAN-Youth sought the extension of registration of voters
for the May 2001 election since about 4 million youth were not
able to register and are now disenfranchised. The Comelec denied
such petition.
Issue: Whether Comelec was right in denying the petition.

Ruling.
Yes. The right of suffrage, although accorded a prime niche in
the hierarchy of rights embodied in the fundamental law,
ought to be exercised within the proper bounds and
framework of the Constitution and must properly yield to
pertinent laws skilfully enacted by the Legislature.
The Comelec was well within its right to do so pursuant to the
clear provisions of RA 8189 which provides that no voters
registration shall be conducted within 120 days before the
regular election. The right of suffrage is not absolute. It is
regulated by measures like voters registration which is not a
mere statutory requirement. The State, in the exercise of its
inherent police power, may then enact laws to safeguard and
regulate the act of voters registration for the ultimate
purpose of conducting honest, orderly and peaceful election.
The law aids the vigilant and not those who slumber on their
rights.
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA

Ibanez
NATURE OF BARANGAY ELECTIONS

Omnibus Election Code, Section 38
Conduct of elections. - The barangay election shall be nonpartisan and shall be conducted in an expeditious and
inexpensive manner.
Q. What is the nature of the barangay elections?
It is non-partisan and must be conducted in an expeditious
and inexpensive manner. Not supporting, belonging to or
biased in favor of any political party.
Q. What are the specific acts of partisanship?
1. Filing of COC representing or allowing to be
represented as a candidate of any political party or
any other organization.
2. No party, organization intervenes in the nomination
or in the filing of COC
3. Party or organization giving support, directly or
indirectly, material or otherwise favorable to or
against a candidate.
Exceptions:
a. Relatives within the fourth civil degree of
consanguinity or affinity
b. Campaign staff not more than 1 in every 100
registered voters.
Caveat: It should not be in any manner construed to
impair the freedom of individuals to support or oppose
any candidate for any barangay office.
Q. What is the purpose of the nonpartisan character?
Barangay is the basic unit or the base of the pyramid of both
social and political structure. It should be insulated from divisive
and debilitating partisan politics.
Q. What are the functions of barangay officials?
1. Have legislative and consultative powers
2. Act as agents of neutral community action such as
distribution of basic services
3. Instruments in conducting plebiscites and referenda.
4. Settle local disputes
Occena v. Comelec
Facts:
The constitutionality of an old law which had virtually the same
provision on the non-partisan character of barangay elections was
challenged for being violative of the constitutional guarantees on
the right to form associations and societies for purposes not
contrary to law.
Held:
The right to form associations is not absolute. It is subject to
pervasive police power, thus may be constitutionally
regulated to serve important and appropriate public interest.
The right to organize remains intact but certain activities are
restricted. The ban is narrow, not total. It operates only on
concerted or group action of political parties. Acting
individually, party, party members may intervene.
POSTPONEMENT OF ELECTION
GROUNDS FOR POSTPONMENT OF ELECTION
Q. What are the grounds for postponement of election?
1. Violence
2. Terrorism
3. Loss or destruction of election paraphernalia or
records
4. Force majeure
Q. What is the process of postponement of election?

1. Motu proprio by the Comelec or upon a verified
petition by any interested party
2. Due notice and hearing where all parties are afforded
equal opportunity to be heard
Q. What if the ground is not one of those enumerated?
Montesclaros v. Comelec
The Comelec cannot postpone, it merely recommends, as
when it is operationally very difficult to simultaneously hold
the barangay and SK elections, legislative action to amend
the law resetting the election is required.
POSTPONEMENT OF ELECTION, JURISDICTION
Q. Who shall postpone elections?
Benito v. Comelec
The Commission sitting en banc by a majority vote of its
members, motu proprio or upon verified petition by any
interested party, after due notice and hearing where all the
interested parties are afforded equal opportunity to be heard.
Q. Can the election officer postpone elections?
Bashier v. Comelec
The election officer, on the basis of threats of violence and
bloodshed, cannot by herself declare a failure of election and
reset it even with the agreement of the candidates.
DATE OF POSTPONEMENT
Q. When is election postponed?
To a date reasonably close to the date of election not held,
suspended or failed, but not later than 30 days after cessation
of the cause.
Bashier v. Comelec
But it should not be too close as to preclude notice to the
electorate. The announcement made minutes before the
supposed voting is not a notice at all to the electorate who
should be given ample notice of the exact schedule and venue
of the election.
5. Other analogous causes of such a nature that the
holding of a free, orderly and honest election should
become impossible in any political subdivisions.
Hassan v. Comelec
A one day notice is too short. The time for holding it must be
authoritatively designated in advance.
Q. Is the 30-day period mandatory?
Lucero v. Comelec
No. Thus, it cannot be argued that once it lapses, the
authority to postpone transfers to Congress. In fixing the date
of special elections, the Comelec sees to it that it should:
Not be later than 30 days

Reasonably close to the election not held.
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
TN: It always depends on the peculiarity of the

circumstances. The Comelec is given enough leeway to
determine which date is ideal for the special elections
Pangandaman v. Comelec
The holding of elections within the next few months from the
cessation of the cause may still be considered reasonably
close to the date of election not held.
Lucero v. Comelec
The period of 2 years after the failure of election is still
reasonable close to the election not held if the delay is not
attributable to the registered voters but to the legal
maneuvers of the parties.

Ibanez
Hassan v. Comelec
But it should not be unreasonably too close for all voters to be
notified of the changes. For even in highly urbanized areas,
dissemination poses a problem. In the absence of proof of
actual notice to the special elections reached a great number
of voters, the special election is invalid. One day notice is
insufficient.
Less than a days notice of time and transfer of polling places
15 kilometres away deprive the voters of opportunity to
participate in the elections. Even if voting occurred. Where the
difference is only 219 votes and only 328 out of 1,546
registered voters were able to vote, there is failure of
elections.
Take note: It is always a case-to-case basis. The most
important requisite is that there is actual notice to the voters.
FAILURE OF ELECTION
GROUNDS FOR FAILURE OF ELECTION
Q. What are the grounds for declaration of failure of

election?
1. Force majeure
2. Violence
3. Terrorism
4. Fraud
5. Other analogous causes the election in any polling
place was not held:
Q. What are the 3 instances where a failure of election
may be declared?
1. Election in any polling place was not held on the fixed
date on account of force majeure, terrorism, fraud,
violence and other analogous cases.
2. Election in any polling place had been suspended
before the close of voting on account of force majeure,
terrorism, fraud, violence and other analogous cases
3. After voting and during preparation and transmission of
election returns or inter custody of canvass, such
election results in failure to elect on the same grounds.
Illustrative case
Facts:
A mayor was proclaimed winner after obtaining a majority of
24, 000 votes. But the second placer petitioned to declare
failure of election due to fraud, violence, intimidation, threat,
vote-buying and delay in the delivery of election documents
and paraphernalia. He alleges that:
Missing names of registered voters
More than half of the registered voters failed to vote
because others voted for them
He was credited with less votes than he actually
obtained
Control data of election returns were not filled out in some
polling
Held:
These grounds do not warrant failure of election as none of
them fall under the 3 instances where failure of election may
be declared.
Missing names in voters list Remedy is inclusion or
exclusion or annulment of book of voters PRIOR TO
ELECTIONS.
TN: Since a copy of the complete list of voters is published
in the Comelec website and posted in the bulletin of the
Comelec.
More than half failed to vote because others already

voted for them remedy is challenge identity of voter
during voting inside the polling place. (Role of watchers)
Less votes should have been raised before the Board
of Election Inspectors (BEI) that counted the votes.
TN: Manifest error readily seen by the naked eye raise that
before the Board of Election Canvassers that counted the
votes)
Control data of election returns were not filled should

have been raised before the Board of Canvassers that
canvassed the election returns.
Unsecured ballot boxes a mere formal defect that does
not affect their integrity.
Late election returns not a ground for failure.
Q. What are the two requisites for the en banc to act
on a verified petition to declare failure of election?
1. No voting took place in the polling places on the date fixed
by law
2. The votes that were not cast affect the result of

elections
Illustrative case:
Facts:
A Punong barangay lost by 29 votes. He alleged 100 of his
relatives and supporters were not able to vote because the
BEI in 3 polling places discontinued the voting. It was found
out however than out of 316 voters, 220 actually voted.
Held:
There is no failure of election. If indeed voters were prevented
from voting, the remedy is election protests.
Mitmug v. Comelec
Even if less than 25% of the electorate in the questioned
polling places cast their votes, it must still be respected. Low
OF
RLOS
SLG
SAN
CA
turnout does not result in failure of elections. It only means no

interest on the part of the people to vote.
Benito v. Comelec
Even if only 1 out of 177 voted in a polling place, there is still
no failure of election.
Sardea v. Comelec
For as long as there is voting, regardless of number, there is
no failure of election. It only fails if the sovereign will has been
muted and cannot be ascertained. If the will of the people is
determinable, it must be respected.
Ruiz v. Comelec
The power to nullify an election must be exercised with the
greatest care so as not to disenfranchise voters.
Benito v. Comelec
Facts:
Elections is only 3 out of 5 polling places were sought to be
nullified even if disruption of voting was caused by a common
act, firing guns to intimidate voters.
Held:
Petition to declare failure of election should not be selective
as to polling places if they were exposed to the same ground.
Batabor v. Comelec
Facts:
Proclamation of one position was sought to be annulled on the
ground of failure of election.
Held:
Failure of election necessarily affects all elective positions in
the place where elections failed. To hold otherwise is
discriminatory and violates equal protection clause.

Ibanez
Canicosa v. Comelec
Late election returns is not a ground for failure of election.
That the election returns were delivered late and the ballot
boxes brought to the office of the Municipal Treasurer
unsecured, i.e., without padlocks nor self-locking metal seals
cannot impel us to declare failure of election. The late
deliveries did not convert the election held in Calamba into a
mockery or farce to make us conclude that there was indeed a
failure of election.
FAILURE OF ELECTION, JURISDICTION
Q. Who declares failure of election?
Carlos v. Angeles
The RTC, on account that a victory was attended by significant
badges of fraud, cannot declare failure of election in the guise
of voiding the proclamation of the winner despite obtaining
25,000 majority votes during canvass, 27,000 votes by
physical count and 17,000 votes by revision.
Bashier v. Comelec
The election officer, on account of threats of violence and
bloodshed, cannot by herself validly suspend or postpone
elections even with the agreement of the candidates.
Q. When is the date of special elections after failed
elections?
It must not be later than 30 days after cessation of causes like
force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or other analogous
causes.
Q. When is the date of special elections to fill out
permanent vacancy?
A. District representatives not earlier than 60 days nor
longer than 90 days after the office is vacated.
Exception: If it occurs within a year prior to the expiration of
the term. If so, it shall be simultaneous with the next regular
elections.
B. Senators simultaneous with the succeeding regular

election.
SPECIAL ELECTION
SPECIAL ELECTION
1987 Constitution, Article VI, Section 9
In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, a
special election may be called to fill such vacancy in the manner
prescribed by law, but the Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives thus elected shall serve only for the unexpired term.
FIXING DATE OF SPECIAL ELECTION

Pangandaman v. Comelec
The holding of elections within the next few months from the
cessation of the cause may still be considered reasonably
close to the date of election not held.
NOTICE OF SPECIAL ELECTION
Hassan v. Comelec
A one day notice is too short. The time for holding it must be
authoritatively designated in advance.
Tolentino v. Comelec
statute and not from any call for the election by some
authority and the law charges voters with knowledge of the
time and place of the election (statutory notice).
REQUISITES
Lucero v. Comelec
Facts:
Two candidates for district representative were separated by a

mere 175 votes. But no election was done in one polling place
with 213 voters due to ballot snatching. But the leading candidate
questioned the authority of the Comelec to call for a special
election after almost two years.
Held:
There are two requisites for holding a special election:
1. There is failure of election
2. Failure affects the results of the election
Since only 175 votes separate them, the 213 votes in the
polling place where election failed could still affect the results
of the election. Hence, it is still statistically probable for the
special election to affect or change the final result of the
election.
The delay is not attributable to the voters of the polling place
where election failed but to the legal maneuvers of parties.
Thus, the holding of the special election almost two years
after the regular election is still
reasonable close to the date of election not held.
CALLING OF SPECIAL ELECTION, JURISDICTION
Benito v. Comelec
Although the Comelec failed to call and give notice, the

special election is still valid as the right and duty to hold the
election emanate from the
OF
SLG
SAN
CARLOS

Election Law Premid Part I

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Election Law Premid Part I

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ELECTION LAWS l Atty.

Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

PART I ELECTIVE OFFICIALS

of Congress, the Constitution intended to give it full authority

PURPOSE OF ELECTIONS AND ELECTION

The proclamation of a mayor was nullified by the lower court on

PURPOSE OF ELECTION LAWS

HOW ARE ELECTON LAWS CONSTRUED

Citizenship need not be possessed at the time of filing of COC or

ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

Q. Is the Sangguniang Kabataan election regular or

Q. What are the requisites of special election after

counting is mandatory. The remedy is not manual count but

CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR ELECTION

are elective officials?

Q. Is there a Cordillera Autonomous

candidates were misaligned. In 5 municipalities, the official ballots

sense means two or more provinces. Ifugao is a province by

ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

President shall not be eligible for any re-election, but such

While he may be appointed to the cabinet, his becoming so is

immediately preceding such election .

ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya Ibanez

believes are deserving of the privilege. It is a "precious heritage,

domicile, that is, a fixed permanent residence to which, when

Domino ran as Representative in Sarangani, with 1 yr and 2

ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

RATIONALE OF THE RESIDENCE

Issue: Whether Emano acquired a bona fide domicile of choice

alike, and that, accordingly, no person shall, by reason of

The effect of said Republic Act No. 4421 is to impose property

To prevent monopoly of power

Q. How is voluntary renunciation defined in Aldovino v.

Q. Does preventive suspension interruption the term of

BASIS FOR PROCLMANATION OF THE PRES AND

ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

Q. Who shall be declared winner?

PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION IN CASE OF

If at the beginning of the term of the President, the

Where no President and Vice-President shall have been

In case of death, permanent disability, removal from

In case of death, permanent disability, removal from

Speaker of the House of Representatives, shall then act as

PERMNANENT DISABILITY OF THE PRESIDENT

Whenever the President transmits to the Senate President

Whenever a majority of all the Members of the Cabinet

When President transmits to the Senate President and to

If majority of all the Members of the Cabinet transmit

RESIGNATION OF THE PRESIDENT

Estrada claims he did not resign as President, but merely was on

ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

the case were based on an Angara Diary, where he said,

VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF THE VP, HOW

Q. How is vacancy in the office of the Vice-President

VACANCY IN BOTH THE P AND VP, HOW

Q. How are the vacancies occurring midterm in both

GR: The Congress shall enact a law calling for a special

Congress legislates the manner in which one who is to act as

Issue: Whether a special election to fill a vacant 3-yr term

general elections fixes the date at which the special election

ELECTION LAWS l Atty. Ferdinand Gujilde l Notes by Tanya

TERM OF OFFICE AND TERM LIMIT

Q. What is the term of office and term limit of