Silverio Tagolino v HRET (G.R. No.
202202, March 19, 2013) HRET ruling:
FACTS:
Richard Gomez filed his Certificate of Candidacy seeking the
Congressional office of the House of Representatives for the 4th
District of Leyte.
In his CoC, he indicated that he resided in 910 Carlota Hills, Can-
adieng Ormoc City.
Bueneventura Juntilla, one of the opposing candidates, questioned the
residence indicated in the CoC before the COMELEC.
Juntilla argued that, Richard is a resident of Colgate St, East
Greenhills, San Juan City, Metro Manila and not of Can-adieng
Ormoc City
COMELEC 1st division ruling:
It granted Juntilla's petition without any qualification. And in its
dispositive portion it stated, "Richard Gomez is DISQUALIFIED as
a candidate for the Office of Congresssman, Fourt District of Leyte,
for lack of residency requirement"
Lucy Torres-Gomez then filed her CoC together with a Certificate of
Nomination and Acceptance from the Liberal Party endorsing her as the
partys official substitute candidate of her husband Richard wherein the
COMELEC En Banc approved such substitution.
COMELEC En Banc's ruling:
It held that the disqualification does not automatically cancel one's
CoC and the political party is still allowed to substitute the candidate
whose candidacy was declared disqualified.
Juntilla filed a motion for reconsideration from the ruling of the COMELEC
En Banc. Pending the resolution of the motion, the elections were held and
the name of Richard Gomez remained in the ballots which garnered majority
of the votes. Due to the approved substitution by the COMELEC, votes for
Richard were credited in favor of Lucy and she was proclaimed the
Representative of the 4th District of Leyte
Juntilla opposed and filed a Petition for quo warranto before the HRET
arguing that, Lucy did not validly substitute Richard because his CoC was
void ab initio.
It dismissed Juntilla's petition and declared the substitution as valid
It also said that the COMELEC 1st Division's resolution spoke of
disqualification and not the cancellation of the CoC
Juntilla filed for Certiorari and Prohibition before the Supreme Court
ISSUE:
Was there a valid substitution? And as a consequence of such
substitution, was Lucy Torres-Gomez validly elected as a
representative of the 4th District of Leyte? NO
HELD:
A valid CoC as a condition sine que non for the substitution of candidate
Section 77 of the Omnibus Election Code provides that, if an official
candidate of a registered or accredited political party dies,
withdraws or is disqualified for any cause, a person belonging to and
certified by the same political party may file a certificate of
candidacy to replace the candidate who died, withdrew or was
disqualified
Evidently, Section 77 requires that there be an official candidate
before candidate substitution proceeds.
As defined under Section 79(a) of the OEC, the term candidate
refers to any person aspiring for or seeking an elective public office
who has filed a certificate of candidacy by himself or through an
accredited political party, aggroupment, or coalition of parties.
Clearly, the law requires that one must have validly filed a CoC in
order to be considered a candidate.
Effect of Sec 68 and Sec 78 on candidate substitution under Sec 77
Sec 68 1 speaks of a disqualification of the candidate based on the
1
Sec. 68. Disqualifications. - Any candidate who, in an action or protest in which he is a party is declared
by final decision of a competent court guilty of, or found by the Commission of having (a) given money or
other material consideration to influence, induce or corrupt the voters or public officials performing
electoral functions; (b) committed acts of terrorism to enhance his candidacy; (c) spent in his election
campaign an amount in excess of that allowed by this Code; (d) solicited, received or made any
contribution prohibited under Sections 89, 95, 96, 97 and 104; or (e) violated any of Sections 80, 83, 85,
86 and 261, paragraphs d, e, k, v, and cc, subparagraph 6, shall be disqualified from continuing as a
candidate, or if he has been elected, from holding the office. Any person who is a permanent resident of or
an immigrant to a foreign country shall not be qualified to run for any elective office under this Code,
 election offenses enumerated therein while Sec 78 speaks of due
course to and/or cancellation of a CoC based on a persons
misrepresentation of any of the material qualifications required for
the elective office aspired for. It is not enough there was lack of
qualification but there was also a false representation in the CoC.

And under Sec 68, a person disqualified can be validly substituted

pursuant to Sec 77 because he remains a candidate but is ordered to
discontinue such candidacy as a form of penal sanction by the
commission of the election offenses enumerated in Sec 68.
But a person whose CoC has been denied due course to and/or
cancelled under Sec 78 cannot be substituted because he is not
considered a candidate. Hence, being a cancelled CoC it is
considered void ab initio and thus cannot give rise to a valid
candidacy and valid votes.

In this case, there was confusion as to the word "disqualified" in the

resolution of the COMELEC 1st division, which was also adopted by
the COMELEC En Banc and HRET.
But it must be noted that Richard's "disqualification" was due to his
failure to comply with the residency requirement and
misrepresenting his residence which is a ground for denial due
course to and/or cancellation of CoC under Sec 78.
Hence, there was no valid substitution and Lucy Torres Gomez was
not a bona fide candidate for the position when she ran for office,
which means she could not have been elected.

unless said person has waived his status as permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country in
accordance with the residence requirement provided for in the election laws.