Case Digest (G.R. No. 257453)
Facts:
Mariz Lindsey Tan Gana-Carait y Villegas v. Commission on Elections, Rommel Mitra Lim, and Dominic P. Nunez, G.R. No. 257453, August 09, 2022, Supreme Court En Banc, Rosario, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Mariz Lindsey Tan Gana-Carait (petitioner) filed her Certificate of Candidacy (CoC) for Member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of the Lone District of Biñan, Laguna on 17 October 2018. On 22 October 2018 respondent Rommel Mitra Lim filed a petition for disqualification alleging that petitioner had acquired United States (US) citizenship and therefore was ineligible because she had not personally and swornly renounced foreign citizenship; respondent Lim relied in part on petitioner’s use of a US passport. On 6 November 2018 respondent Dominic P. Nunez filed a separate petition to deny due course to or cancel petitioner’s CoC alleging false representation of eligibility because petitioner was a dual citizen who did not comply with the requirements of R.A. No. 9225.
After preliminary conference, documentary offers and memoranda, the COMELEC First Division issued a Resolution dated 27 February 2019 denying the disqualification petition but granting the petition to deny due course to or cancel petitioner’s CoC. The First Division found petitioner to be a dual citizen (Filipino by birth and US citizen as shown by a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA) and use of a US passport) but concluded she was a dual citizen by naturalization because documentary submissions to the US consular service constituted a positive act; applying R.A. No. 9225 and Cordora v. COMELEC it held she should have taken the oath of allegiance and personally renounced foreign citizenship before running, and it cancelled her CoC.
Petitioner filed a Motion for Partial Reconsideration (filed 5 March 2019), which the COMELEC En Banc denied in its Resolution dated 23 September 2021. The COMELEC thereafter issued a Certificate of Finality (13 December 2021), an Entry of Judgment (13 December 2021), and a Writ of Execution (31 January 2022). Petitioner timely filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65 of the Rules of Court (with prayer for TRO/status quo ante/preliminary injunction) challenging the COMELEC En Banc’s affirmation of the First Division’s conclusion that she was a dual citizen by naturalization and that she materially misrepresented her eligibility by failing to comply with R.A. No. 9225. Petitioner maintained she acquired US citizensh...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the COMELEC En Banc Resolution final and therefore beyond timely judicial review (i.e., was the petition timely filed)?
- Is the case moot and academic because petitioner’s term of office has expired?
- Does R.A. No. 9225 (Sections 3 and 5(2)) apply to a natural-born Filipino who acquired foreign citizenship by reason of birth, or only to those who became foreign citizens by naturalization?
- Did petitioner commit a false material representation in her CoC such that cancellation of her CoC was proper, or d...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)