Jurilla vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 105436 June 2, 1994; Belosillo, J.:
FACTS: Petitioners Eugenio Jurilla, Marciano Medalla, Bernardo Nazal, Rey Medina, Melencio Castelo, Godofredo Liban, and private respondent, Antonio Hernandez were among the candidates in the elections for the six positions of councilor for the Second District of Quezon City. On March 23, 1992, Hernandez filed with COMELEC his certificate of candidacy. In item No. 6 thereof, he gave as his address “B 26, L 1 New Capitol Estates, Quezon City.” However, he did not indicate his Precinct Number and the particular Barangay where he was a registered voter. In other words, his certificate of candidacy did not expressly state that he was a registered voter of Quezon City or that he was a resident of the Second District thereof. Petitioners challenged respondent’s qualification. However, since petitioners only became aware of such after elections, the petition was made in accordance with Rule 25 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure authorizing the filing a petition at any day for filing certificates of candidacy but not later than the date of proclamation. COMELEC denied the petition for being filed outside the reglementary period under Section 5 of RA 6646, which pertains to nuisance candidates. ISSUE: Was the omission sufficient to cause the disqualification of respondent? HELD: NO. It may be gleaned from the provisions of Sec. 39, par. (a), of the Local Government Code of 1991, earlier quoted, that the law does not specifically require that the candidate must state in his certificate of candidacy his Precinct Number and the Barangay where he is registered. Apparently, it is enough that he is actually registered as a voter in the precinct where he intends to vote, which should be within the district where he is running for office. In the case at bench, his failure to so state in his certificate of candidacy his Precinct Number is satisfactorily explained by him in that at the time he filed his certificate he was not yet assigned a particular Precinct Number in the Second District of Quezon City. He was formerly a registered voter of Manila, although for the past two (2) years prior to the elections he was already a resident of "B 26, L 1 New Capitol Estates," admittedly within the Second District of Quezon City.
***Additional Issue: Is respondent a nuisance candidate? The holding of COMELEC that private respondent Hernandez was a "nuisance candidate" is erroneous because, tested against the provisions of Sec. 69, there is no way by which we can categorize him as a "nuisance candidate," hence, the procedure therein provided could not have been properly invoked by petitioners herein. Neither could they apply Rule 25 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure which would require such petition to be filed at any day after the last day for filing certificates of candidacy but not later than the date of proclamation. While COMELEC therefore proceeded on the erroneous premise that private respondent Hernandez should be treated as a "nuisance candidate" as already shown, nevertheless its conclusion to dismiss the petition and give due course to the candidacy of private respondent he being a qualified voter of Precinct No. 233-B, New Capitol Estates, Barangay Batasan Hills, must be sustained.
