Romualdez-Marcos vs COMELEC

GR No 119976 18 September 1995
Facts: Imelda Marcos filed her certificate of candidacy for the
1st district of Leyte stating that she has been residing there for seven
months. Incumbent, Cirilo Montejo filed for motion for disqualification
of Marcos for failing the required residency. Marcos amended her
certificate of candidacy to residing in the district since childhood.
COMELEC decided in favour of Montejo. Marcos received the highest
number of votes and her proclamation was suspended, hence the
Issue: Whether or not Marcos failed the constitutional residency
Decision: COMELEC resolution was set aside and directed to proclaim
Marcos as duly elected representative of the 1st district of Leyte. The
essential distinction between residence and domicile in law is that
residence involves the intent to leave when the purpose for which the
resident has taken his abode ends. If a person’s intent be to remain, it
becomes his domicile; if his intent is to leave then as soon as his
purpose is established it is residence.
176 SCRA 1
Facts: Petitioner Ramon Labo, elected mayor of Baguio City was
questioned on his citizenship. He was married in the Philippines to an
Australian citizen. The marriage was declared void in the Australian
Federal Court in Sydney on the ground that the marriage had been
bigamous. According to Australian records, Labo is still an Australian
Issue: Whether or not Petitioner Labo is a citizen of the Philippines.
Held: The petitioner’s contention that his marriage to an Australian
national in 1976 did not automatically divest him of Philippine
citizenship is irrelevant. There is no claim or finding that he

nor does the petitioner claim. However. ISSUE: Whether or not the filing of a certificate of candidacy by a naturalized American effectively recovers his Philippine citizenship. As a condition for such naturalization. FRIVALDO VS. simplified in his case because he was married to an Australian citizen. HELD: No. He became a citizen of Australia because he was naturalized as such through a formal and positive process. COMELEC then again issued another Order declaring Aquino to be disqualified due to the lack of constitutional qualification of residence. Citizenship once lost may be reacquired either by naturalization or repatriation or by direct grant by law (CA 63) which was not invoked by the petitioner. Philippine citizenship previously disowned is not that cheaply recovered. that he has reacquired Philippine citizenship. June 23. Art 7 of the 1987 Consti. Issue: W/N COMELEC erred in deciding that petitioner lacked the constitutional requirements for residence. of Candidacy to run for Rep in the 2nd district of Makati. COMELEC GR # 87193. Petitioner governor contends that his active participation in the elections had divested him of American citizenship under the laws of the US. Bedon then filed an Urgent Motion to Suspend Proclamation of Aquino to which COMELEC agreed by issuing an Order. Mateo Bedon ( Chairman of LAKASNUCD-UMDP) filed a petition to disqualify Aquino on the grounds that he lacked the residence qualification under Sec 6. and restored him of his Philippine citizenship. he formally took the Oath of Allegiance and/or made the Affirmation of Allegiance. Aquino garnered more votes against Agusto Syjuco. renouncing all other allegiance. During the counting of votes. Aquino v COMELEC Facts: Agapito Aquino filed a Cert. 1989 FACTS: Private respondent questioned petitioner governor’s candidacy and election for being null and void ab initio due to his alienage. Hearings were conducted by the COMELEC and dismissed Bedon’s petition to disqualify. It does not appear in the record. .automatically ceased to be a Filipino because of that marriage.

Aquino himself testified that his intention was really for a year because he has other “residences” in Manila or Quezon City. . COMELEC said that the intention not to establish a permanent home in Makati is evident in his leasing a condo unit instead of buying one. it does not engender the kind of permanency required to prove abandonment of one’s domicile.Held: No. Tarlac. While a lease contract may give an indication that he intends to reside in Makati. His domicile of origin was in Concepcion. Aquino failed to prove that he was a resident of the 2nd Legislative District of Makati for a period of one year at the time of election.