23. Juliet B. Dano v. COMELEC & Marie Karen Joy B. Digal Facts: ● Petitioner is a natural-born Filipino citizen, hailing from the municipality of Sevilla, Bohol. She emigrated to the US to work as a nurse, and eventually acquired American citizenship. ● On 2 February and 30 March 2012, respectively, she obtained a Community Tax Certificate in Sevilla, and took her oath of allegiance at the Philippine Consulate in Los Angeles. ● On 2 May 2012, she registered as a voter in Sevilla, following which she returned to the US, purportedly to wind up her affairs and sell her properties abroad. ● On 30 September 2012, she returned to the Philippines and executed a sworn statement renouncing any and all foreign citizenship. ● On 4 October 2012, she filed her CoC for the mayoralty race of Sevilla, representing herself as having been a resident of Sevilla for 1 year, 11 days prior to the 13 March 2013 elections (or, 2 May 2012) ● One week later, private respondent Mary Karen Joy Digal filed a petition to cancel Dano’s CoC. Diga l is the daughter of Dano’s opposition in the mayoralty race, whom Dano would best by 668 votes. ○ Digal alleged that Dano’s CoC was void for material misrepresentations of fact, as Digal claimed that Dano failed to meet the one (1)
●
●
year residency requirement under Section 39 of the LGC. ○ As evidence, Digal presented documents which showed that Dano had no voting record prior to 30 October 2012, and that she had no real property in Sevilla as of the same date. ○ In her defense, Dano presented documents obtained throughout 2012 such as her Community Tax Certificate (2 Feb 2012), Application Application for Voter Registration (2 May 2012), her Philippine passport (27 April 2012), 2012), Deeds of of Absolute Sale Sale of Land Land in favor of Dano (18 May 2012). Five days before the elections in May of 2013, the COMELEC issued a ruling cancelling Dano’s CoC, for failure to establish domicile under the one-year residence requirement of the LGC. ○ The COMELEC held that the establishment of domicile must be evinced by clear, concrete, and specific acts establishing the choice of the party. This, Dano did not demonstrate. While Dano’s MR was before the COMELEC en banc, she assumed office as the elected mayor of Sevilla, Bohol. In December of 2013, the COMELEC en banc rejected her MR, hence she filed the instant petition for certiorari seeking the reversal of the decision rendered against her by the COMELEC.
W/N Dano indeed failed to comply with the one (1) year residency requirement established by the LGC. Issue:
Held:
●
●
●
●
●
The general rule is that actual physical presence, in addition to animus manendi and animus revertendi , is required to establish domicile. ○ While this is true, the law does not require that such presence be unbroken. The law does not require that the prospective candidate stay and never leave the place for the period required under the LGC. It should be noted that at no point is it controverted that petitioner’s citizenship did not arise at the required time; All that is claimed is that Dano’s absence from Sevilla for a period of roughly four months disqualifies her under the residence rule. The SC held that Dano’s acts of filing for candidacy and residence in the Dano ancestral home beginning early in 2012, in addition to her return to the US for the purpose of disposing of her properties there, evince her intent to reside and remain in Sevilla. COMELEC’s ruling that Dano’s absence of 4 months disqualifies her under the residency requirement of the LGC is erroneous. Therefore, Dano’s petition is granted.