QUINTO and TOLENTINO, JR., vs.

COMELEC
G.R. No. 189698 December 1, 2009

FACTS:
Before the Court is a petition for prohibition and certiorari, with prayer for the
issuance of a temporary restraining order and a writ of preliminary injunction,
assailing Section 4(a) of Resolution No. 8678 of the Commission on Elections
(COMELEC). They contend that the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion
when it issued the assailed Resolution. They aver that the advance filing of CoCs
for the 2010 elections is intended merely for the purpose of early printing of the
official ballots in order to cope with time limitations. Such advance filing does not
automatically make the person who filed the CoC a candidate at the moment of
filing. Petitioners further posit that the provision considering them as ipso facto
resigned from office upon the filing of their CoCs is discriminatory and violates
the equal protection clause in the Constitution.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Section 13 of RA 9369 violative of the equal protection clause?
 
RULING:

In considering persons holding appointive positions as ipso facto resigned from

their posts upon the filing of their CoCs, but not considering as resigned all other
civil servants, specifically the elective ones, the law unduly discriminates against
the first class. The fact alone that there is substantial distinction between those
who hold appointive positions and those occupying elective posts, does not
justify such differential treatment.

Applying the four requisites to the instant case, the Court finds that the
differential treatment of persons holding appointive offices as opposed to those
holding elective ones is not germane to the purposes of the law. There is thus no
valid justification to treat appointive officials differently from the elective ones.
The classification simply fails to meet the test that it should be germane to the
purposes of the law. The measure encapsulated in the second proviso of the
third paragraph of Section 13 of R.A. No. 9369 and in Section 66 of the OEC
violates the equal protection clause.