Guerrero v.

COMELEC
G.R. No. 137004
July 26,2000
Quisumbing, J.
FACTS

Guillermo Ruiz sought to perpetually disqualify respondent Rodolfo C. Farias

as a candidate for Congressman of Ilocos Norte.
Ruiz alleged that Farias has been campaigning as a candidate for Congress
in the May 11, 1998 polls despite his failure to file a Certificate of Candidacy
for said office.
Violated Section 73 of the Omnibus Election Code in relation to COMELEC
Resolution No. 2577. Ruiz also asked COMELEC to declare Farias as a
nuisance candidate.
May 8, 1998: Farias filed his COC substituting Chevylle V. Farias who
withdrew her candidacy.
Second Division of COMELEC dismissed the petition of Ruiz for lack of merit.
Arnold V. Guerrero, Liberal Party Cadidate intervened in the case. He
contended that Farias illegally resorted to the remedy of substitution ( under
Section 77, Ominibus Election Code) and should be disqualified.
January 6, 1999: COMELEC en banc dismissed Ruizs motion for
reconsideration and Guerreros petition-in-intervention.

ISSUE:
Should the validity of filing the Certificate of Candidacy under the Omnibus Election
Code be considered as a qualification within the jurisdiction of the HRET?
HELD:
YES. The petitioners contention that the filing of a certificate of candidacy being a
statutory qualification under the Omnibus Election Code is outside the pale of HRET
lacks cogency. Article VI, Section 17 of the Constitution cannot be circumscribed
lexically. The word qualifications cannot be read as qualified by the term
constitutional.
Ubi lex non distinguit noc nos distinguire debemos. As a rule in statcon, where the
law does not distinguish, the courts should not distinguish. There should be no
distinction in the application of a law where none is indicated. The courts could only
distinguish where there are facts or circumstances showing that the law giver
intended a distinction or qualification.