CAYAT V. COMELEC G.R. No. 163776 April 24, 2007 FACTS: Fr.

Nardo Cayat and Thomas Palileng are the only mayoralty candidates for the May 2004 elections in Buguias Benguet. Palileng filed a petition for cancellation of the COC of Cayat on the ground of misrepresentation. Palileng argues that Cayat misrepresents himself when he declared in his COC that he is eligible to run as mayor when in fact he is not because he is serving probation after being convicted for the offense of acts of lasciviousness. Comelec, granted the petition of Palileng and Cayat filed a motion for reconsideration. Such, MR was denied because Cayat failed to pay the filing fee and hence, it was declared final and executory. Despite this decision, Cayat was still proclaimed as the winner and Palileng filed a petition for annulment of proclamation. Comelec declared Palileng as the duly elected mayor and Feliseo Bayacsan as the duly elected vice mayor. Bayacsan argues that he should be declared as mayor because of the doctrine of rejection of second placer. ISSUE: WON the rejection of second placer doctrine is applicable. HELD: The doctrine cannot be applied in this case because the disqualification of Cayat became final and executory before the elections and hence, there is only one candidate to speak of. The law expressly declares that a candidate disqualified by final judgment before an election cannot be voted for, and votes cast for him shall not be counted. As such, Palileng is the only candidate and the duly elected mayor. The doctrine will apply in Bayacsan’s favor, regardless of his intervention in the present case, if two conditions concur: (1) the decision on Cayat’s disqualification remained pending on election day, 10 May 2004, resulting in the presence of two mayoralty candidates for Buguias, Benguet in the elections; and (2) the decision on Cayat’s disqualification became final only after the elections.

RIVERA III V. COMELEC G.R. No. 167591 May 9, 2007 FACTS: A petition for cancelation of the Certificate of Candidacy of Marino Morales as mayoralty candidate in Mabalacat, Pampanga for the May 2004 mayoralty was filed on the ground the he already served three consecutive terms in the office he seeks to run. Morales argues that this is not so because although he really served in 1995-1998 (1st term) and 2004-2007 (3rd term), he was merely a caretaker or de facto mayor in 1998-2001(2nd term) because his election was declared void by the RTC due to an election protest. Comelec ruled that Morales already served his third term and after an MR was filed, declared it final and executory on May 14, 2004. ISSUE: WON Morales had already served his 3 consecutive terms and if so, who should take his position. HELD: 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 (3) consecutive terms in the same local government post, and (2) that he has fully served three (3) consecutive terms. Here, Morales was elected for the term July 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001. He assumed the position. He served as mayor until June 30, 2001. He was mayor for the entire period notwithstanding the Decision of the RTC in the electoral protest case filed by petitioner Dee ousting him (respondent) as mayor. Such circumstance does not constitute an interruption in serving the full term. Whether as "caretaker" or "de facto" officer, he exercises the powers and enjoys the prerequisites of the office which enables him "to stay on indefinitely". With regard to the person who will replace Morales, it is a rule that the ineligibility of a candidate receiving majority votes does not entitle the eligible candidate receiving the next highest number of votes to be declared elected. A minority or defeated candidate cannot be deemed elected to the office. Since his disqualification became final and executory after the elections, the candidate having the second highest number of votes cannot assume the position. Hence, it is the petitioner, the elected Vice Mayor Anthony Dee who should be declared as the mayor.

DELA TORRE V. COMELEC G.R. No. 121592 July 5, 1996 FACTS: Petitioner Rolando dela Torre was disqualified from running as mayor of Cavinti Laguna on the ground that he was convicted of violation the Anti-Fencing Law. He argues that he should not be disqualified because he is serving probation of his sentence and hence, the execution of his judgment was suspended together with all its legal consequences. ISSUE: WON Dela Torre is disqualified to run for public office. HELD: Sec.40 of LGC provides: Disqualifications. The following persons are disqualified from running for any elective local position: (a) Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one (1) year or more of imprisonment within two (2) years after serving sentence; Moral turopitude is considered as an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private duties which a man owes his fellow men, or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and woman or conduct contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals. In this case of fencing, actual knowledge by the "fence" of the fact that property received is stolen displays the same degree of malicious deprivation of one's rightful property as that which animated the robbery or theft which, by their very nature, are crimes of moral turpitude. Hence Dela Torre is disqualified from seeking public office. With regard to his argument that he is under probation, the court ruled that the legal effect of probation is only to suspend the execution of the sentence. Dela Torre's conviction subsists and remains totally unaffected notwithstanding the grant of probation. In fact, a judgment of conviction in a criminal case ipso facto attains finality when the accused applies for probation, although it is not executory pending resolution of the application for probation.

chrism

Page 1

2002 FACTS: Petitioner Teodulo Coquilla is a Filipino citizen who was naturalized as an American Citizen after joining the US Navy. Petitioner Cirilo Valles filed a petition for disqualification against Lopez on the ground that she is an Australian Citizen. that he is not a permanent resident or immigrant of another country. Eastern Samar where he stated that he has been residing in the place for two years.2001. No. the mere election of Philippine Citizenship upon filing of the COC is sufficient to terminate the previous status. that he will defend and support the Constitution of the Philippines and bear true faith and allegiance thereto and that he does so without mental reservation. If Australia follows the principle of jus soli. HRET that upon repatriation. As such. private respondent can also claim Australian citizenship resulting to her possession of dual citizenship.40 of the LGC provides that persons with dual citizenship are disqualified from running any elective position. On Feb. By declaring in his COC that he is a Filipino citizen. COMELEC G. 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. ran for governor of Davao Oriental. Coquilla cannot invoke the ruling in Bengzon v. ISSUE: WON Coquilla complied with the residency requirement. 137000. HELD: Although Coquilla was born and grew-up in Oras. (5) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law. COMELEC G. as far as the laws of this country are concerned. he filed his COC to run as a mayor of Oras. having been born to a Filipino father. COQUILLA V. her father is considered as Spanish subject and a Filipino citizen. Hence. he is considered as resident of the place for a few months and not two years as he stated therein. The principle of jus sangguinis has been adopted also by the 1973 and 1987 Constitution. ISSUE: WON Manzano is eligible to be Makati VP even if he is a dual citizen. HELD: Under the Philippine Bill of 1902 and the Jones Law. then at most. the COC of Manzano was cancelled by Comelec on the ground that he is a dual citizen. (4) Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and. she is also a Filipino Citizen. This is because the issue here is his false statement in his COC. (2) Those born in the Philippine Islands of foreign parents who. Also. before the adoption of this Constitution had been elected to public office in the Philippine Islands. 135083 May 26. Lopez is a Filipino citizen. jus sanguinis) while the latter arises out of a positive act of a person who simultaneously owes loyalty to different countries. The former arises when different laws of citizenship of different countries are applied to a person without any voluntary act (jus soli. As such. his application was approved and he took his oath as a citizen of the Philippines. his disqualification is valid on the ground of misrepresentation.2000. Another candidate Neil Alvarez filed a petition for cancellation of the COC of Coquilla but the Comelec failed to resolve the issue so the petitioner later on was declared the winner.R. 2000 FACTS: Rosalind Ybasco Lopez who was born on May 16. it must conform with the strict processes of law while in dual citizenship. he is deemed to have reacquired his original status. The signing into law of the 1935 Philippine Constitution has established the principle of jus sanguinis as basis for the acquisition of Philippine citizenship. However. No. upon petition of a certain Ernesto Mamaril. 151914 July 31. However.2000.R. the same must be express.40 must be understood as dual allegiance. private respondent has. 1999 FACTS: Respondent Edu Manzano won as vice mayor of Makati City in the May 1998 elections. the court ruled that dual citizenship under Sec. (3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines.MERCADO V. chrism Page 2 . the laws effective at the time of birth of Lopez before the 1935 Constitution. Alvarez argues that Coquilla has not complied with the residency requirement for the position of mayor. upon reaching the age of majority. The fact of her being born in Australia is not tantamount to her losing her Philippine citizenship. To terminate the status of dual allegiance. Eastern Samar. to wit: (1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of this Constitution. August 9. No. He is only deemed to have acquired his citizenship and residence until his reacquisition of his Philippine citizenship when he took oath on Nov. HELD: Sec. For renunciation to effectively result in the loss of citizenship. he is deemed to have lost his residence together with his citizenship when he was naturalized as American citizen. ISSUE: WON Lopez is eligible to run as governor. MANZANO G. elect Philippine citizenship. 1934 in Australia to a Filipino father and an Australian mother. when he filed his COC. He then applied for repatriation and on Nov. Hence.R. effectively repudiated his American citizenship and anything which he may have said before as a dual citizen. VALLES V.

civil status. if for Member of the Batasang Pambansa. the political party to which he belongs. Comelec argued that under the OEC Sec. when the electorate voted for him as mayor. Ceriola filed a petition for disqualification against Moll on the ground that he was previouslt sentenced by final judgment to suffer the penalty of 6 months to 1 year and 9 months for the crime of usurpation of authority or official functions. it did not stay the implementation of the judgment. that he is not a permanent resident or immigrant to a foreign country. COMELEC G. contested it on the ground that he had already served the three-consecutive term allowed by law. Moll won the May 2001 election but on March 2003." There was also no intent to deceive the electorate as to private respondent’s identity.R. 133495 September 3. the first term of Carpo cannot be included in the computation because he was not elected in that instance but rather only served the remaining term of the deceased mayor by virtue of operation of law. 74. his date of birth. his post office address for all election purposes. There is no presumption that they agreed to the subsequent invalidation of their votes as stray votes.JUSTIMBASTE V. on May 14. As such. “any vote cast in favor of a candidate who has been disqualified by final judgment shall be considered as stray and shall not be counted but it shall not invalidate the ballot. Comelec denied the disqualification case and Balderian won the election. 2004 FACTS: Salvador Moll and Avelino Ceriola are candidates for mayor in Malinao. On the issue of who should be the mayor. the province.24. The court said that it is clear that it was only on March 19. HELD: Moll argues that his judgment is not yet final but since he was not able to seasonably file his MR. chrism Page 3 . COMELEC G. No. 2001. they were under the belief that he was qualified. HELD: The petition is without merit because SEC. ISSUE: WON Carpo has already served three consecutive terms. was disqualified when he was convicted by final judgment long before the election and so Ceriola is the lone candidate in the election. The use of a name other than that stated in the certificate of birth is not a material misrepresentation. Thus. Carpo ran and elected as mayor and in 1998 he again filed his COC for reelection but petitioner Benjamin Borja Jr. nor that by using his Filipino name the voting public was thereby deceived. She argues that she is the rightful successor the the position of mayor. it is not enough that an individual has served three consecutive terms but he must also be elected in the to the same position in the same number of times before the disqualification can apply." Moll. in case of permanent vacancy. In this case. No. BORJA V. The court however disagrees. HELD: The contention of Borja is unmeritorious. residence. highly urbanized city or district or sector which he seeks to represent. Consequently. without mental reservation or purpose of evasion. 2008 FACTS: Petitioner Pricila Justimbaste filed a disqualification case against Rustico Balderian. as "material misrepresentation" under Sec. 179413 November 28. in case of his disqualification. ISSUE: WON Balderian committed misrepresentation in his COC. according to Comelec. Albay. 1998 FACTS: Respondent Jose Carpo is the vice-mayor of Pateros for a term ending June 1992. – The certificate of candidacy shall state that the person filing it is announcing his candidacy for the office stated therein and that he is eligible for said office. that is on March 2003.R.R. In 1992. legal orders. The three term limit of local officials must be taken to the right to be elected and the right to serve the same elective position. 2003. this petition for certiorari. that the obligation assumed by his oath is assumed voluntarily. KARE V. Comelec issued a resolution disqualifying him from office and declared Ceriola to be the mayor. 78 of the Omnibus Election Code provides that cancellation of COC is allowed only if any material representation contained therein as required under Section 74 hereof is false Although the birth name of the respondent is CHU TECK SIAO. BALDERIAN G. Petitioner argues that Balderian’s real name is CHU TECK SIAO but it was not the name reflected in his COC. ISSUE: WON the proclaimation of Ceriola is valid. there is already a decision of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court (JDRC) granting his change of name to Rustico Balderian. a mayoralty candidate in Tabobtabob Leyte on the ground of material misrepresentation in his COC and that he is not a Filipino citizen. the court ruled that Comelec was wrong in proclaiming Ceriola because the resolution disqualifying Moll took effect after the election. To allow the defeated and repudiated candidate to take over the mayoralty despite his rejection by the electorate is to disenfranchise them through no fault on their part.78 refers to "qualifications for elective office. Contents of certificate of candidacy. that he will obey the laws. Carpo became the mayor by operation of law. the elected vice mayor should be proclaimed as the mayor. 157526 April 28. Hence. SEC. that the Comelec en banc issued Resolution to disqualify Moll from running as a mayoral candidate. and decrees promulgated by the duly constituted authorities. his profession or occupation. and to undermine the importance and the meaning of democracy and the right of the people to elect officials of their choice. The vice-mayor Emiliana Kare filed a petition to against the resolution on the part of the proclamation of Cariola. No. including its component cities. When the mayor Cesar Borja died. that he will support and defend the Constitution of the Philippines and will maintain true faith and allegiance thereto. and that the facts stated in the certificate of candidacy are true to the best of his knowledge.

147927 February 4. 154829 December 10. LATASA V. 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. he must also have been elected to the same position for the same number of times before the disqualification can apply. ADORMEO V. stepped down from office. To recapitulate. Consequently. a Constitutional Commission member. Eufemio Muli filed a disqualification case on the ground that he has already served his three-term limit. Lonzanida still functioned as the mayor for almost the entire term. In September 2000. In his reelection bid in 1998. The comment of Fr. In 1995. 2003 FACTS: Arsenio Latasa was the mayor of the Municipality of Digos. however. that for the purpose of applying the subject Constitutional provision. Zambales for two consecutive terms. The three-term limitation provided by the Constitution and the LCG provides that “The term of office of elective local officials. He argues that although he has already served three consecutive term in municipal mayor. 2002 FACTS: Raymundo Adormeo filed a petition for disqualification against the incumbent mayor of Lucena City. after an election protest has been filed by his opponent Juan Alves. No. the three consecutive term is completed. This does not mean. No. his term cannot be considered as consecutive although he merely served the unexpired term of Tagarao after the recall polls.R. Lonzanida acceded to the resolution and Aves took over the position. the charter of the new city provides that Latasa will stay in position in a hold-over capacity until the next election. the second placer Sunga. he ran again for his third term and won. The Court believes that Latasa did involuntarily relinquish his office as municipal mayor since the said office has been deemed abolished due to the conversion. Joaquin Bernas. After two years as a private citizen. no matter how short. However. These are also the same inhabitants over whom he held power and authority as their chief executive for nine years. Muli contends that even though Aves has been declared as the winner in the 1995 polls. from his re-election bid for the 2001 polls on the ground that he has already served three consecutive terms. Ramon Talaga Jr. In this case. however. Latasa again filed a COC to run as mayor. ISSUE: WON Tagala already served for three consecutive terms. the Comelec declared a failure of election and the position vacant but Lonzanida still continued to function as such. it is not enough that an individual has served three consecutive terms in an elective local office. Davao del Sur in 1992. The Comelec first denied the petition of Adormeo but granted it after a motion for reconsideration has been filed. will be considered one term for the purpose of computing the number of successive terms allowed” is only applicable to members of Congress where there is no recall election provided. COMELEC G. 1995 and 1998. the territorial jurisdiction of the City of Digos is the same as that of the municipality. Comelec granted the petition. stating that in interpreting said provision that “if one is elected representative to serve the unexpired term of another. he ran again in the recall election and won. cannot assume the position but the vice mayor.R. which shall be determined by law shall be three years and no such officials shall serve for more than three consecutive terms. ISSUE: WON Lonzanida has already served his three-term limit. The continuity of his mayorship was disrupted by his defeat in the 1998 elections. Latasa filed a MR that was not acted upon until the day of election and hence. Since Latasa was proclaimed but later on disqualified. In the May 1998 elections. HELD: The new city acquired a new corporate existence separate and distinct from that of the municipality. No. ISSUE: WON Latasa can still run as mayor of Digos City after serving three terms as mayor of municipality of Digos. chrism Page 4 . Comelec declared Aves as the winner of the election and issued a resolution for such in February 1998. a few months after the next election. there was no interruption in the holding of office and hence. where petitioner for even just a short period of time. HELD: Talaga served two consecutive term at most and then lost.R. HELD: The argument of Muli is without merit. 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 inhabitants of the municipality are the same as those in the city. Talaga run against Tagarao and won and he served the unexpired term of the latter. Consequently. In a recall election in 2000. a plebiscite was conducted to convert the municipality to City of Digos. First. he won and proclaimed as the mayor. However. he also assumed office as city mayor unlike in Lonzanida case. the petitioner did not fully serve the 1995-1998 mayoral term by reason of involuntary relinquishment of office. As such. the petitioner cannot be considered as having been duly elected to the post in the May 1995 elections. This marked the end of the term of Latasa as mayor of the municipality. COMELEC G. Lonzanida again filed his COC to run as mayor of the place but his opponent this time.LOZANIDA V. this is his first bid as a city mayor. he lost to Bernard Tagarao. After the recounting of votes.” In the present case the assumption in office of Lonzanida in 1995 cannot be considered as part of the three-term limit because of the absence of two requisites. Talaga was the mayor of the place in 19921995 and again on 1995-1998. that unexpired. COMELEC G. the very instant he vacated his office as municipal mayor. These inhabitants are the same group of voters who elected petitioner Latasa to be their municipal mayor for three consecutive terms. 135150 July 28. In 2001 elections. the term limit for elective local officials must be taken to refer to the right to be elected as well as the right to serve in the same elective position. except barangay officials. and second. As stated earlier. 1999 FACTS: Romeo Lonzanida was the mayor of San Antonio. His opponent in the election Romeo Sunga filed a disqualification case against Latasa in the Comelec on the ground of violation of the three-term rule. However..

appointed Antonio as temporary member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the Province of Catanduanes. 1994 FACTS: Jaime Panis was employed as Administrative Officer of the Cebu City Medical Center (CCMC) formerly. and (c) an acceptance by the proper authority. the office of the Vice-Governor was left vacant when the duly elected ViceGovernor Petilla was appointed Acting Governor. The LCG is silent on the mode of succession in the event of a temporary vacancy in the Office of the Vice-Governor. it was created under Ordinance 1216 when the hospital changed its name.PANIS V. 102948 February 2. the President. No. while private respondent Bella Veloso was Administrative Officer of the City Health Department detailed at the said hospital.1988. What the Civil Service Law and the Administrative Code of 1987 provide is that if a vacancy is filled up by the promotion. Assuming nonetheless that a vacancy actually occurred that can be filled up only by promotion. the concept of "next in rank" does not impose any mandatory or peremptory requirement to appoint the person occupying the next lower position in the occupational group of the office. show that Antonio had abandoned the contested office. In this case. Antonio’s failure to promptly assert his alleged right implies his loss of interest in the position. MENZON V. His overt acts plainly show that he really meant his resignation and understood its effects. Antonio was elected bgy captain of Sapang Palay. invalidate the decision of the DILG with regard to the election of the FABC president and also the appointment of Antonio as member of SP. 1998 FACTS: Augusto T. DILG Sec. the Secretary of DILG. Later SC. The most senior member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan Aurelio Menzon was also designated by Santos to be acting Vice-Governor. A sensu contrario. there is no effective resignation because there is no evidence that the resignation was accepted by any government functionary or office. one who is "next in rank" to a vacancy is given preferential consideration for promotion to the vacant position. but it does nor necessarily follow that he alone and no one else can be appointed. As such. The SP issued a resolution declaring the appointment of Menzon invalid on the ground the law does not provide in cases of succession in the Office of the ViceGovernor in case of a temporary vacancy and the appointment is not necessary since the Vice-Governor who is temporarily performing the functions of the Governor. silence. Being president of ABC. involves a new office and a position created in the course of a valid reorganization. In view of the foregoing. the DILG Sec. 1991 FACTS: On Feb. HELD: The issues should be resolved in the affirmative. ISSUE: WON Veloso has the right to be appointed to the disputed position. he was appointed by the President as member of the Sangguniang Bayan of the Municipality of San Andres and was later elected president of the Association of Barangay Councils (ABC). In this case. No. 118883 January 16.R.R. Under the law. in order to obviate the dilemma resulting from an interregnum created by the vacancy. Meanwhile. Antonio wrote a letter to SB to reassume his position but it was denied on the ground that he has already resigned. However. PETILLA G. HELD: Antonio cannot assume his previous position because although there was no effective resignation. However. Luis Santos designated Vice-Gov. but not necessarily in this order. express an intention to resume his office as member of the SB. The law on Public Officers is clear on the matter. chrism Page 5 . San Andres. however. Nenito Aquino was appointed as member of SB in replacement of Antonio. Antonio tendered his resignation as member of SB. There is no vacancy whenever the office is occupied by a legally qualified incumbent. ISSUE: WON there is an effective resignation of abandonment of office. In that capacity. when Aquino succeeded him to his original position. there was an abandonment of office. and appointment of outsiders who have appropriate civil service eligibility. In other words. It is the equivalent of Office of the hospital administrator. The instant controversy. To constitute a complete and operative resignation from public office. under the circumstances. SB of San Andres Catanduanes v. the office to which he was elected was left barren of a legally qualified person to exercise the duties of the office of the Vice-Governor. may remedy the situation. there is a vacancy when there is no person lawfully authorized to assume and exercise at present the duties of the office. The provincial treasurer allowed the payment of the salary and emoluments for Menzon as active vice-governor but Larrazabal later asked to pay it back. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION G. Cebu City Hospita. Antonio has effectively relinquished his membership in the Sangguniang Bayan due to his voluntary abandonment of said post. With regard to the screening process. Leopoldo Petilla as active governor of Leyte because no governor has yet been proclaimed in the province. there must be: (a) an intention to relinquish a part of the term. HELD: On the issue of the legality of the position. Panis questioned the appointment of Veloso on the grounds that the position was not legally created. acting through her alter ego. Panis and Veloso are both candidate for the position of Assistant Chief of Hospital for Administration of CCMC but the city mayor appointed the latter. a vacancy not filled by promotion may be filled by transfer of present employees in the government service. There is no vested right granted the next in rank nor a ministerial duty imposed on the appointing authority to promote the holder to the vacant position. CA G. the Court rules that. at that time. could concurrently assume the functions of both offices. by reinstatement. His overt acts. This is clear when he did not simultaneously discharge the duties and obligations of both positions. the election for the president of Federation of the Association of Barangay Councils (FABC) was declared void by the DILG for lack of quorum and the reorganization in the provincial council became necessary. On the issue of the next-in-rank. the petitioner's right to be paid the salary attached to the Office of the Vice Governor is indubitable. No. (b) an act of relinquishment. inaction and acquiescence. by reemployment of those separated from the service. ISSUE: WON there was vacancy and WON Menzon is entitled to the emoluments. the person holding the position next in rank thereto "shall be considered for promotion. the court ruled that the "next in rank" rule specifically applies only in cases of promotion. 90762 May 20. Neither did he. Panis did not attend the screening process scheduled by the Personnel Selection Board even after due notice. The VP of ABC. Menzon questioned the said resolution but it was dismissed by the court and in the meantime the issue on the governorship of Leyte was settled and Adelina Larrazabal was proclaimed the Governor. there was no screening process made and that the next in rank rule was not applied.R. In the eyes of the law.

7160. whenever the evidence of guilt is strong. punishment.000. in addition to absolute perpetual disqualification from any public office. subdivisions. OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 1972. 2002 AN ACT INSTITUTING THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002. AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Section 4. including government-owned or –controlled corporations. instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment including the proceeds or properties obtained from the unlawful acts as provided for in this Act. the following persons are disqualified to run in a special election called to fill the vacancy in an elective office.00). coerces. Prohibited acts. or actually causing. and intermediaries. intimidates or actually causes. controlled precursors and essential chemicals. Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. – The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500.00) to Ten million pesos (P10. threatens. damage. Misapplication or Failure to Account for the Confiscated. Violations of this provision shall be prosecuted and penalized in accordance with the provision of Sec.Republic Act No. his honor or property that is meant to eliminate all other potential candidate. shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee who misappropriates. its divisions. punishment. 6425. bribery.s 12 and 68 of the Omnibus Election Code and Sec. if those found guilty of such unlawful acts are government officials and employees. Disqualification. harasses. Any elective local or national official found to have benefited from the proceeds of the trafficking of dangerous drugs as prescribed in this Act. Criminal Liability of a Public Officer or Employee for Misappropriation. inflicting or producing violence. 9165 June 7. PROVIDING FUNDS THEREFOR. terrorism.000. – The maximum penalties of the unlawful acts provided for in this Act shall be imposed. election offenses and penalties. AS AMENDED. threat. bribes. REPEALING REPUBLIC ACT NO. seized or surrendered dangerous drugs. harassment. Criminal Liability of Government Officials and Employees. 8295 June 6. to wit: a) Any elective official who has resigned from his office by accepting an appointive office or for whatever reason which he previously occupied but has caused to become vacant due to his resignation. loss or disadvantage to any person or persons aspiring to become a candidate or that of the immediate member of his family. loss or disadvantage to discourage any other person or persons from filing a certificate of candidacy in order to eliminate all other potential candidate from running in a special election shall constitute as an election offense. 1997 AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE PROCLAMATION OF A LONE CANDIDATE FOR ANY ELECTIVE OFFICE IN A SPECIAL ELECTION.000. in addition to absolute perpetual disqualification from any public office. – Any act of coercion. or have received any financial or material contributions or donations from natural or juridical persons found guilty of trafficking dangerous drugs as prescribed in this Act. and b) Any person who. 40 of Republic Act No. AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Section 27. Section 28. directly or indirectly. otherwise known as the Local Government Code. 264 of the Omnibus Election Code. Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs. torture. Seized and/or Surrendered Dangerous Drugs. – In addition to the disqualifications mentioned in Sec. . Section 5. misapplies or fails to account for confiscated. torture. injury. injury. intimidation. Instruments/Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment Including the Proceeds or Properties Obtained from the Unlawful Act Committed. plant sources of dangerous drugs. inflicts or produces any violence. REPUBLIC ACT NO. shall be removed from office and perpetually disqualified from holding any elective or appointive positions in the government. damage.

illegitimate or adopted. 1987 CONSTITUTION (ART. (3) Those appointed to any public office shall subscribe and swear to an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and its duly constituted authorities prior to their assumption of office: Provided. Section 4. rules and regulations inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. whether legitimate. 9189. 2003 AN ACT MAKING THE CITIZENSHIP OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENS WHO ACQUIRE FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP PERMANENT." Natural born citizens of the Philippines who. AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE COMMONWEALTH ACT. Declaration of Policy .It is hereby declared the policy of the State that all Philippine citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of this Act. below eighteen (18) years of age. after the effectivity of this Act. NO. 9225 August 29." Section 2. (4) Those intending to practice their profession in the Philippines shall apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such practice.Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding. Section 3. and that I imposed this obligation upon myself voluntarily without mental reservation or purpose of evasion. Republic Act No.8) .Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine citizenship under this Act shall enjoy full civil and political rights and be subject to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines and the following conditions: (1) Those intending to exercise their right of surffrage must Meet the requirements under Section 1. decrees.If any section or provision of this Act is held unconstitutional or invalid. Section 5. Repealing Clause . and (5) That right to vote or be elected or appointed to any public office in the Philippines cannot be exercised by. and I hereby declare that I recognize and accept the supreme authority of the Philippines and will maintain true faith and allegiance thereto. Section 8. Retention of Philippine Citizenship . (2) Those seeking elective public in the Philippines shall meet the qualification for holding such public office as required by the Constitution and existing laws and. natural-born citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country are hereby deemed to have re-acquired Philippine citizenship upon taking the following oath of allegiance to the Republic: "I _____________________. Separability Clause .Republic Act No. Derivative Citizenship . orders. X SEC. Civil and Political Rights and Liabilities . Section 6. or extended to. of those who reacquire Philippine citizenship upon effectivity of this Act shall be deemed citizenship of the Philippines. at the time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy. Effectivity Clause – This Act shall take effect after fifteen (15) days following its publication in the Official Gazette or two (2) newspaper of general circulation. That they renounce their oath of allegiance to the country where they took that oath. and/or (b) are in active service as commissioned or non-commissioned officers in the armed forces of the country which they are naturalized citizens. any other section or provision not affected thereby shall remain valid and effective. those who: (a) are candidates for or are occupying any public office in the country of which they are naturalized citizens. Article V of the Constitution. Short Title – this act shall be known as the "Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003. become citizens of a foreign country shall retain their Philippine citizenship upon taking the aforesaid oath. 63. solemny swear (or affrim) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines and obey the laws and legal orders promulgated by the duly constituted authorities of the Philippines.The unmarried child.All laws. otherwise known as "The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003" and other existing laws. make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship before any public officer authorized to administer an oath. Section 7. AS AMENDED AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled : Section 1.

shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more than three consecutive terms. which shall be determined by law. except barangay officials. The term of office of elective local officials.Section 8. . 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.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful