COQUILLA v. COMELEC & ALVAREZ G.R. No.

151914
July 31, 2002 J. Mendoza
TOPIC IN SYLLABUS: Qualifications
SUMMARY: Coquilla, a natural born Filipino, became a naturalized US citizen when he joined the US Navy. Upon retirement,
he was repatriated to the Philippines. In Nov. 2000, he applied to be a registered voter of Oras, Eastern Samar. In Feb. 2001,
he filed for candidacy for Mayor of Oras. The incumbent mayor, Alvarez, opposed this saying that Coquilla has not satisfied
the 1 year residency requirement. SC declared that he did not satisfy the residency requirement as his residence should be
counted from the time he was repatriated, Nov. 2000.
DOCTRINE: The residence in Sec. 39(a) LGC is to be understood as domicile or legal residence that is, the place where a
party actually or constructively has his permanent home, where he, no matter where he may be found at any given time,
eventually intends to return or remain (animus manendi). A domicile of origin is acquired by every person at birth. It is usually
the place where the childs parents reside and continues until the same is abandoned by acquisition of new domicile.

FACTS:
Coquilla was born on Feb 17, 1938 of Filipino parents in Oras, Eastern Samar.
He resided there until 1965, when he joined the US Navy.
He was subsequently naturalized as a US citizen.
He thrice visited the Philippines while on leave from the US Navy.
After his retirement in 1985, he remained in the US.
Oct 15, 1998: Coquilla came to the Philippines and took out a residence certificate, although he continued making
several trips to the US.
Nov 7, 2000: Coquillas application for repatriation under RA 8171 was approved.
Nov 10, 2000: He took his oath as a citizen of the Philippines and was issued a Certificate of Repatriation and a Bureau
of Immigration Identification Certificate.
Nov 21, 2000: Coquilla applied for registration as a voter of Butnga, Oras, Eastern Samar, which was
approved on Jan 12, 2001.
Feb 27, 2001: He filed his certificate of candidacy stating that he had been a resident of Oras, Eastern Samar for
2 years.
Mar 5, 2001: Alvarez, who was the incumbent mayor of Oras and who was running for reelection, sought the
cancellation of Coquillas certificate of candidacy on the ground that the latter had made a material
misrepresentation by stating that he had been a resident for 2 years when in truth he had resided therein for only
about 6 months since Nov 10, 2000.
May 17, 2001: Coquilla was proclaimed mayor of Oras and he subsequently took his oath of office.
COMELEC was unable to render judgment on Alvarez case before the elections and Coquilla received the
highest number of votes (6,131 against 5,752).
July 19, 2001: COMELEC Second Division granted Alvarez petition and ordered the cancellation of
Coquillas certificate of candidacy.
It found that Coquillas frequent or regular trips to the Philippines and stay in Oras, Eastern Samar after his
retirement from the US Navy cannot be considered as a waiver of his status as a permanent resident or
immigrant of the US as would qualify him to acquire the status of residency for purposes of compliance with
the one-year residency requirement.
The one-year residency requirement contemplates of the actual residence of a Filipino citizen in the
constituency where he seeks to be elected.
Coquilla received a copy of this resolution on July 28, 2001.
Aug 2, 2001: Coquilla filed an MR to COMELEC en banc, which was denied on Jan 30, 2002.
He received a copy of the order on Feb 6, 2002.
Feb 11, 2002: Coquilla filed a petition for certiorari.

ISSUES:
1. WON the 30-day period for appealing the COMELEC resolution was suspended by the filing of MR YES
2. WON the COMELEC retained jurisdiction to decide the case notwithstanding Coquillas proclamation YES
3. [RELEVANT]: WON Coquilla had been a resident of Oras, Eastern Samar at least one year before the
elections held on May 14, 2011 as he represented in his certificate of candidacy - NO
4. WON COMELEC was justified in ordering the cancellation of Coquillas certificate of candidacy - YES

HELD:
1. Alvarez contends that the petition for certiorari should be dismissed because it was filed late.
SC held that Coquillas MR and the petition for certiorari were filed within the period provided for in Rule 19 of the COMELEC
Rules of Procedure and in Art. IX(A) of the Constitution. The five-day period should be counted from the receipt of the
decision, resolution, order, or ruling of the COMELEC Division.

SOLLANO, JOSE GABRIEL CASE #111

 Coquillas MR was not pro forma and its filing did suspend the period for filing the petition for certiorari. The mere reiteration
in an MR of the issues raised by the parties and passed upon by the court does not make a motion pro forma; otherwise, the
movants remedy would not be a reconsideration of the decision but a new trial or some other remedy.

2. The rule as provided in RA 6646 is that candidates who are disqualified by final judgment before the election shall not be
voted for and the votes cast for them shall not be counted. But those against whom no final judgment of disqualification had
been rendered may be voted for and proclaimed, unless, on motion of the complainant, the COMELEC suspends their
proclamation because the grounds for their disqualification or cancellation of their certificates of candidacy are strong.
Meanwhile, the proceedings for disqualification of candidates or for the cancellation or denial of certificates of candidacy,
which have been begun before the elections, should continue even after such elections and proclamation of the winners.

3. The residence in Sec. 39(a), LGC is to be understood as domicile or legal residence that is, the place
where a party actually or constructively has his permanent home, where he, no matter where he may be
found at any given time, eventually intends to return or remain (animus manendi).
A domicile of origin is acquired by every person at birth. It is usually the place where the childs parents
reside and continues until the same is abandoned by acquisition of new domicile (domicile of choice).
Coquilla lost his domicile of origin in Oras by becoming a US citizen. From then on until when
he reacquired his Philippine citizenship, he was an alien without any right to reside in the
Philippines save as our immigration laws may have allowed him to stay as a visitor or as a resident
alien. Residence in the US is a requirement for naturalization as a US citizen.
Proceedings for denial or cancellation of a certificate of candidacy are summary in nature. The holding of
a formal hearing is not de rigeur (required). Coquilla cannot claim denial of the right to be heard since he
filed a Verified Answer, a Memorandum, and a Manifestation.

Coquillas Arguments Supreme Court

He was compelled to adopt Coquilla was repatriated not under RA 2630, which applies to the repatriation of those
American citizenship only be who lost their Philippine citizenship by accepting commission in the US Armed Forces,
reason of his service in the US but under RA 8171, which provides for the repatriation of, among others, natural-born
Navy. Filipinos who lost their citizenship on account of political or economic necessity.

He reestablished residence in
the country in 1998 by
securing a Community Tax
Certificate and by constantly
declaring to his townmates of
his intention to seek
repatriation and run for
mayor.
The status of being an alien and a non-resident can be waived either separately, when
one acquires the status of a resident alien before acquiring Philippine citizenship, or at
the same time when one acquires Philippine citizenship. As an alien, an individual may
obtain an immigrant visa under the Philippine Immigration Act of 1948 and an
Immigrant Certificate of Residence (ICR) and thus waive his status as a non-resident.
On the other hand, he may acquire Philippine citizenship by naturalization under CA
473 or, if he is a former Philippine national, he may reacquire Philippine citizenship by
repatriation or by an act of Congress, in which case he waives not only his status as an
alien but also his status as a non-resident alien.

When Coquilla entered the country, he did so as a visa-free balikbayan visitor whose
stay as such was valid for one year only. The term balikbayan includes a former
Filipino citizen who had been naturalized in a foreign country and comes or returns to
the Philippines. Coquilla can only be held to have waived his status as an alien and as
a non-resident upon taking his oath as a citizen.

His registration as a voter in Registration as a voter does not bar the filing of a subsequent case questioning a
Butnga, Oras is conclusive of candidates lack of residency.
his residency as a candidate.

4. What is involved is a false statement concerning a candidates qualification for an office for which he filed the certificate of
candidacy. This is a misrepresentation of a material fact justifying the cancellation of his certificate of candidacy. The
cancellation of Coquillas certificate of candidacy is thus fully justified following Sec. 78 of the Omnibus Election Code.

Petition dismissed. COMELEC Second Division resolution and COMELEC en banc order affirmed.

SOLLANO, JOSE GABRIEL CASE #111