digest for tolentino vs comelec GR 148334 january 21 2004 (for article 6 section 9 of the Philippine Constitution)
Digest for ABS CBN v. COMELECFull description
Constitutional Law IFull description
Tecson vs Comelec Digest
Frivaldo v. COMELEC (Digest)Full description
digest
Case DigestFull description
digestFull description
digestFull description
Consti I
ti
case digest for 1-United Transport Koalisyon v. COMELECFull description
Philippine Case re: Party List Representatives in the house of representatives. Guiding rules and principles - note: appeared as a question in the 2014 Philippine Bar Examinations.
aaaaFull description
Local Governments - UP College of LawFull description
Loong v. Comelec DIGESTFull description
digestFull description
Tecson v Comelec DigestFull description
CASE DIGEST Labo v Comelec
176 SCRA 1 – Law on Public Officers – Election Laws – Citizenship of a Public Officer – Dual Citizenship – Labo Doctrine
In 1988, Ramon Labo, Jr. was elected as mayor of Baguio City. His rial, Luis Lardi!abal filed a "etition for #uo warranto against Labo as Lardi!abal asserts t$at Labo is an %ustralian citi!en $ence dis#ualified& t$at $e was naturali!ed as an %ustralian %ustralian after $e married an %ustralian. %ustralian. Labo aers t$at $is marriage wit$ an %ustralian did not ma'e $im an %ustralian& t$at at best $e $as dual citi!ens$i", %ustralian and (ili"ino& t$at een if $e indeed became an %ustralian w$en $e married an %ustralian citi!en, suc$ citi!ens$i" was lost w$en $is marriage wit$ t$e %ustralian was later declared oid for being bigamous. bigamous. Labo furt$er asserts t$at een if $e)s considered as an %ustralian, $is lac' of citi!ens$i" is *ust a mere tec$nicality w$ic$ s$ould not frustrate t$e will of t$e electorate of Baguio w$o oted for $im by a ast ma*ority. ISSUES:
1. +$et$er or not Labo can retain $is "ublic office. . +$et$er or not Lardi!abal, w$o obtained t$e second $ig$est ote in t$e mayoralty race, can re"lace Labo in t$e eent Labo is dis#ualified. HELD-
1. o. Labo did not #uestion t$e aut$enticity of eidence "resented against $im. He was naturali!ed as an
%ustralian in 19/0. It was not $is marriage to an %ustralian %ustralian t$at made $im an %ustralian. %ustralian. It was $is act of subse#uently subse#uently swearing by ta'ing an oat$ of allegiance to t$e goernment of %ustralia. %ustralia. He did not dis"ute t$at $e needed an %ustralian "ass"ort to return to t$e $ili""ines in 1982& and t$at $e was listed as an immigrant $ere. It cannot be said also t$at $e is a dual citi!en. 3ual allegiance of citi!ens is inimical to t$e national interest and s$all be dealt wit$ by law. He lost $is (ili"ino citi!ens$i" w$en $e swore allegiance to %ustralia. He cannot also claim t$at w$en $e lost $is %ustralian citi!ens$i", $e became solely a (ili"ino. 4o restore $is (ili"ino citi!ens$i", $e must be naturali!ed or re"atriated or be declared as a (ili"ino t$roug$ an act of Congress 5 none of t$is $a""ened. Labo, being a foreigner, cannot cannot sere "ublic office. office. His claim t$at $is lac' of citi!ens$i" s$ould not oercome t$e will of t$e electorate is not tenable. 4$e "eo"le of Baguio could not $ae, een unanimously, c$anged t$e re#uirements re#uirements of t$e Local 6oernment Code and t$e Constitution Constitution sim"ly by electing a foreigner foreigner 7curiously, would Baguio $ae oted for Labo $ad t$ey 'nown $e is %ustralian. %ustralian. 4$e electorate $ad no "ower to "ermit a foreigner owing $is total allegiance to t$e ueen of %ustralia, or at least a stateless indiidual owing no allegiance to t$e Re"ublic of t$e $ili""ines, to "reside oer t$em as mayor of t$eir city. :nly citi!ens of t$e $ili""ines $ae t$at "riilege oer t$eir countrymen. . Lardi!abal on t$e ot$er $and cannot assert, t$roug$ t$e #uo warranto "roceeding, t$at $e s$ould be declared t$e mayor by reason of Labo)s dis#ualification because Lardi!abal obtained t$e second $ig$est number of ote. It would be e;tremely re"ugnant to t$e basic conce"t of t$e constitutionally guaranteed rig$t to suffrage if a candidate w$o $as not ac#uired t$e ma*ority or "lurality of otes is "roclaimed a winner and im"osed as t$e re"resentatie of a constituency, t$e ma*ority of w$ic$ $ae "ositiely declared t$roug$ t$eir ballots t$at t$ey do not c$oose $im.
goernment t$at no one can be declared elected and no measure can be declared carried unless $e or it receies a ma*ority or "lurality of t$e legal otes cast in t$e election.