Co vs.

Electoral Tribunal
G.R. Nos. 92191-92, July 30, 1991
Facts:
On May 11, 1987, the congressional election of Northern Samar was held.Among the candidate is herein respondent
Jose Ong, Jr. Respondent Ong was proclaimed the duly elected representative of the second district of Northern Samar.
Petitioners questioned the citizenship of respondent Ong since Ong’s father was only a naturalized Filipino citizen and
questioned Ong’s residence qualificationsince Ong does not own any property in Samar.

ISSUE/s:

1.) Whether the decision of HRET is appealable;

2.) Whether respondent is a citizen of the Philippines; and
3.) WhetherOng is a resident of Samar.

RULING:

1.) Yes. The Constitution explicitly provides that the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) and the Senate
Electoral Tribunal (SET) shall be the sole judges of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their
respective members. In the case at bar, the Court finds no improvident use of power, no denial of due process on the
part of the HRET which will necessitate the exercise of the power of judicial review by the Supreme Court.
2.) Yes. On April 28, 1955, Jose OngChuan, respondent’s father, an immigrant from China was declared a Filipino citizen
by the CFI of Samar. At the time Jose OngChuan took his oath, the private respondent then is a minor of nine years, was
finishing his elementary education in the province of Samar. Hence, there is no ground to deny the Filipino citizenship of
respondent Ong. Respondent Ong was also born of a natural-born Filipino mother, thus the issue of citizenship is
immaterial.
3.) Yes. The framers of the Constitution adhered to the earlier definition given to the word residence which regarded it
as having the same meaning as domicile. The domicile of origin of the private respondent, which was the domicile of his
parents, is fixed at Laoang, Samar. Contrary to the petitioners' imputation, Jose Ong, Jr. never abandoned said domicile;
it remained fixed therein even up to the present. Hence, the residency of respondent Ong has sufficiently proved.

WHEREFORE, the petitions are hereby DISMISSED.