G.R. No. 178831-32 - Limkaichong vs. Commission on Elections

Multiple consolidated petitions were filed contesting the qualification of Jocelyn D. Sy Limkaichong as the candidate for Representative of the First District of Negros Oriental.
Petitioners included Louis C. Biraogo, Jocelyn Sy Limkaichong, Olivia P. Paras, and Renald F. Villando, each raising issues surrounding her eligibility.
The central contention was that Limkaichong is not a natural-born citizen because her father, Julio Ong Sy, was a Chinese citizen whose naturalization process was allegedly flawed.

The Commission on Elections (COMELEC), through its Second Division, issued a Joint Resolution on May 17, 2007 (SPA Nos. 07-247 and 07-248) disqualifying Limkaichong for failing to meet the citizenship requirements set forth in Section 6, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.
Limkaichong filed a petition for certiorari which led to the April 1, 2009 Decision that reversed the COMELEC’s disqualification resolution.
Despite the ruling, Limkaichong was proclaimed as the winning candidate, took her oath of office, and officially assumed her duties on July 23, 2007.

Subsequent to the April 1, 2009 Decision, Louis C. Biraogo filed a motion for reconsideration with a prayer for oral argument in G.R. No. 179120.
Biraogo argued that the Court should reaffirm justice and constitutionalism by reassessing its earlier Decision, contending that certain aspects of the COMELEC Joint Resolution should have been implemented.
He specifically challenged the separation of the COMELEC resolution into a substantive part disqualifying Limkaichong and an injunctive part directing the suspension of her proclamation.

The disqualification arguments primarily focused on the claim that Limkaichong’s father was not properly naturalized, thereby rendering her ineligible as a natural-born citizen.
It was highlighted that any challenge to the validity of a naturalization certificate must follow the procedural safeguards prescribed in Section 18 of Commonwealth Act No. 473.
The proper initiation of denaturalization proceedings is reserved for designated state officers such as the Solicitor General or the proper provincial fiscal, not for private petitioners.

Once Limkaichong was proclaimed and assumed office, the jurisdiction over election contests and qualification issues automatically shifted from the COMELEC to the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET).
The Court underscored that, per Section 17, Article VI of the Constitution, the HRET is the sole tribunal empowered to decide disputes involving the election, returns, and qualifications of House members.

Whether the disqualification case concerning Limkaichong’s citizenship should be entertained by the COMELEC or if jurisdiction had correctly shifted to the HRET following her proclamation and assumption of office.

Whether the alleged infirmities in the naturalization proceedings of Limkaichong’s father could be raised by private petitioners in an election case instead of being addressed through the statutory denaturalization process initiated by authorized governmental officers.

Whether Biraogo’s motion for reconsideration, including his prayer for oral argument, presented any new or meritorious issues or merely reiterated previously considered arguments that were found lacking.

Whether it was proper for Biraogo to dichotomize the COMELEC Joint Resolution into two parts (substantive and injunctive) and argue that only a partial suspension (pertaining to the substantive part) should be operative.