G.R. No. 163619-20 - Dumpit-Michelena vs. Boado

Tess Dumpit-Michelena was a candidate for the position of mayor in Agoo, La Union during the 10 May 2004 Synchronized National and Local Elections.
The petition against her candidacy was initiated by Engineer Carlos Boado, Rogelio L. De Vera, Fernando Calonge, Benito Carrera, Salvador Carrera, and Domingo Carrera, collectively referred to as Boado, et al.
The petitioners sought her disqualification on the ground of material misrepresentation under Sections 74 and 78 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881 (Omnibus Election Code).

Boado, et al. alleged that Dumpit-Michelena, despite her statement that she is a resident of San Julian West, Agoo, La Union, is in fact a resident and registered voter of Naguilian, La Union.
Evidence against her included a joint affidavit from the barangay officials of San Julian West stating that she was not a bona fide resident of the barangay.
Dumpit-Michelena, in her defense, presented affidavits and certifications from her neighbors in San Julian West to prove her residence and claimed that she had acquired a new domicile by purchasing a residential lot on 19 April 2003 from her father, Congressman Tomas Dumpit, Sr.

On 9 March 2004, the COMELEC Second Division issued a Resolution cancelling her Certificate of Candidacy on the ground of material misrepresentation.

The resolution determined that evidence presented by Boado, et al. was convincing that Dumpit-Michelena was not a resident of San Julian West.
It was noted that among the neighbors who affixed their affidavits, only one was actually a resident of San Julian West, while others were from different barangays, and some later retracted their statements.

A COMELEC Order indicated that motions for reconsideration could be filed within five days from receipt of the decision if adverse to the client, though Resolution No. 6452 provided a three-day period.
Dumpit-Michelena filed her motion on 15 March 2004, ostensibly following the COMELEC Order due to the fact that 14 March 2004 fell on a Sunday.

On 7 May 2004, the COMELEC En Banc denied her motion for reconsideration, relying on the prescribed period under Resolution No. 6452.

Prior to transferring her voter registration, Dumpit-Michelena was a resident of Ambaracao North, Naguilian, La Union.
She claimed to have acquired a new domicile in San Julian West, substantiated by a deed of sale for a parcel of land and the appointment of a caretaker for her residential house.
However, conflicting evidence such as the Special Power of Attorney and the deed of absolute sale pointed to multiple residences, and property ownership was found insufficient to conclusively prove a change in domicile.
The evidence was further complicated by the retracted affidavits regarding her residence in San Julian West.

Whether Dumpit-Michelena’s motion for reconsideration, filed on 15 March 2004, was timely according to the applicable guidelines.
The conflict between the five-day period indicated in the COMELEC Order and the three-day period stipulated under Resolution No. 6452.

Whether Dumpit-Michelena was denied due process when the COMELEC summarily resolved her disqualification case without providing her a full opportunity to adduce additional evidence.
The adequacy and fairness of the summary procedure adopted under Section 5(A)(6) of Resolution No. 6452 in handling disqualification cases.

Whether Dumpit-Michelena satisfied the residency requirement as mandated by Section 39(a) of the Local Government Code of 1991, which equates residence with domicile for electoral purposes.
Whether the evidence presented established that she had effectively abandoned her former domicile and acquired a new one in San Julian West.