LABO, JR.

V COMISSION ON ELECTIONS
Buri, Kenneth Roger R.
FACTS
- This is the second Labo case decided by the Supreme Court; the first one also covered the issue of his
Filipino nationality.
-Ramon Labo, once again, believing that he is a Filipino citizen filed his COC for mayor of Baguio City
(23 May 1992) for the May 11, 1992 elections; his main opponent, Ortega, filed his COC three days after.
-On 26 March 1992, Ortega filed a disqualification proceeding against Labo before the COMELEC on the
ground that Labo is not a Filipino citizen.
- The COMELEC issued a resolution denying Labos COC (9 May 1992) but issued a clarification the
next day that the decision shall only become final and executory after five (5) days from promulgation
pursuant to Rule 18, Section 18, Paragraph (b) of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure.
-Labo, accordingly, may still be voted upon as candidate for Mayor of Baguio.
- COMELEC resolved, motu proprio, to suspend the proclamation of Labo in case he wins the election.
-He then filed on May 15, a petition for review with the Supreme Court praying, among others:
1.) Issuance of TRO to set aside the May 9 resolution of the COMELEC
2.) To declare him as a Filipino Citizen
3.) To direct COMELEC to proceed with his proclamation in the event that he wins the election.
-Ortega contends that COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion when it refused to implement its
May 9 resolution notwithstanding the fact that said resolution had already become final and executory
(since the court did not issue a TRO as to that; Sec 78 of Omnibus Election Code).
-Ortega also contends that as a result of such finality, the candidate receiving the second highest number
of votes should be declared as mayor.
ISSUES
1.) Whether or not Labo, the candidate with the highest number of votes, is qualified to assume the
position of Mayor of Baguio City.
2.) Whether or not the disqualification of Labo entitles Ortega, the candidate with the second highest
number of votes, to be proclaimed as Mayor of Baguio City.
HELD
FIRST ISSUE No! The fact that he was elected by the majority of the electorate is of no moment.
- At the time Labo filed his petition on May 15, the May 9 resolution of the COMELEC cancelling Labos
COC had already become final and executory.
-The resolution attained its finality on May 14, five days after the same was issued and received by Labo
and since no restraining order regarding the same was issued by the court.
- The resolution cancelling Labos COC in the ground that he is not a Filipino citizen constrains the SC to
rule againt his proclamation as Mayor of Baguio City.
- Sec. 39 of the Local Government Code requires the elective official to be a citizen of the Philippines.
Undoubtedly, Labo, not being a Filipino citizen, lacks the fundamental qualification for the contested
office. Philippine citizenship is an indispensable requirement for holding an elective office.
SECOND ISSUE No! The disqualification of Labo does not necessarily entitle Ortega, the candidate
with the next higher number of votes, to proclamation as the Mayor of Baguio City.
-While Ortega may have garnered the second highest number of votes for the office of city mayor, the fact
remains that he was not the choice of the sovereign will.
-Labo was overwhelmingly voted by the electorate for the office of city mayor in the belief that he wazs
then qualified to serve the people of Baguio City and his subsequent disqualification does not make
Ortega the mayor-elect.

-Ortega lost in the election. He was repudiated by the electorate. He was obviously not the choice of the
people of Baguio City.
-Thus, while Ortega originally filed a disqualification case with the COMELEC seeking to deny due
course Labos candidacy, the same did not deter the people of Baguio City from voting for petitioner
Labo, who, by then, was allowed by COMELEC to be voted upon, the resolution for his disqualification
having yet to attain the decree of finality (Sec. 78 of Omnibus Election Code)
Sec. 78 Petition to deny due course or to cancel a certificate of candidacy
a.) The decision, order, or ruling of the Commission shall, after five (5) days from
receipt of a copy thereof by the parties, be final and executor unless stayed by the
Supreme Court.