G.R. No. 105111 - Labo, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections

Case Summary (G.R. No. 105111)

Factual Background

Ramon L. Labo, Jr. believed himself a Filipino and filed a certificate of candidacy for Mayor of Baguio City on March 23, 1992. Roberto C. Ortega filed his certificate for the same office on March 25, 1992. Ortega filed a disqualification proceeding against Labo on March 26, 1992, docketed SPA No. 92-029, alleging that Labo falsely represented himself as a natural-born Filipino in his certificate of candidacy.

Proceedings Before the Comelec

The Commission on Elections issued summons to Labo on March 27, 1992, followed by a telegram on April 1, 1992, requiring an answer within three non-extendible days; Labo failed to answer within that period. Ortega moved to declare Labo in default on April 15, 1992. The Comelec personally ordered the Acting City Election Registrar to serve summons on April 24, 1992. The case was set for reception of evidence on May 4, 1992.

Hearing and Comelec Resolution

At the May 4, 1992 hearing, Ortega presented as evidence Labo’s certificate of candidacy and the decision of this Court in Labo v. Commission on Elections (176 SCRA 1 [1989]) declaring Labo not a Filipino citizen. Labo, although represented, did not present evidence at that hearing and filed a verified Answer only on May 5, 1992. On May 9, 1992 the Comelec issued a resolution granting Ortega’s petition, denying due course to and cancelling Labo’s certificate of candidacy on the ground that Labo was not a Filipino citizen.

Interim Orders and Postponement of Implementation

On May 10, 1992 the Comelec clarified that its May 9 resolution would become final and executory only after five days pursuant to Rule 18, Sec. 13(b) of the Comelec Rules, and therefore Labo could still be voted upon on May 11, 1992 pending final disposition. On May 13, 1992 the Comelec resolved motu proprio to suspend the proclamation of Labo in the event he won. Ortega moved for immediate implementation; the Comelec denied the motion on May 26, 1992 in view of Labo’s pending petition before the Supreme Court.

Petitions to the Supreme Court

On May 15, 1992 Ramon L. Labo, Jr. filed GR No. 105111 seeking to set aside the May 9 Comelec resolution, to have himself declared Filipino, and to compel proclamation if he won. On June 1, 1992 Roberto C. Ortega filed GR No. 105384 seeking mandamus to enforce the Comelec May 9 resolution. The Court resolved on June 16, 1992 to consider the cases submitted for decision.

Issues Presented

The principal issues were whether the Comelec gravely abused its discretion in cancelling Labo’s certificate of candidacy and whether Ortega, as the candidate with the next highest votes, was entitled to proclamation as Mayor of Baguio City after Labo’s disqualification. Ancillary issues concerned whether Labo had reacquired Philippine citizenship and the legal effect of Comelec’s orders regarding proclamation pending finality.

Petitioner Labo’s Contentions

Ramon L. Labo, Jr. contended that he remained a Filipino citizen and that the prior Labo v. Comelec decision did not afford him full opportunity to be heard. He invoked the United States decision Vance v. Terrazas (444 U.S. 252) to argue that expatriation requires proof of both expatriating acts and intent by a preponderance of evidence. He further argued that Sec. 72 of the Omnibus Election Code afforded him a legislatively mandated repatriation process that would permit proclamation despite a nonfinal disqualification.

Respondent Comelec and Ortega’s Contentions

The Commission on Elections maintained that its May 9, 1992 resolution followed from the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling that Labo was not a citizen and that Labo offered no evidence of reacquisition before the Comelec or the Court. Roberto C. Ortega argued that the Comelec committed grave abuse by refusing immediate implementation of its May 9 resolution, which he asserted had become final and executory, and that he should be proclaimed Mayor as the next highest vote-getter.

Supreme Court’s Analysis on Evidence of Reacquisition

The Court observed that Ramon L. Labo, Jr. offered no evidence in the present proceedings to prove reacquisition of Philippine citizenship. The Court noted Labo had previously invoked Vance v. Terrazas in his motion for reconsideration in the earlier Labo case, but in the instant matters he submitted no proof of intent or other evidence required to establish reacquisition. The Court held that in the absence of any judicial decree, statute, or administrative action effecting reacquisition under applicable law, there was no basis to overturn the Comelec’s reliance on the prior Supreme Court declaration of alienage.

Effect of Repeal of Sec. 72 and Suspension of Proclamation

The Court rejected Labo’s reliance on Sec. 72 of the Omnibus Election Code, noting that the provision had been repealed by Sec. 6 of R.A. No. 6646. The Court construed Sec. 6 of R.A. No. 6646 to permit the Comelec or the courts, during the pendency of a disqualification action not finally resolved before an election, to order suspension of proclamation where the evidence of disqualification is strong. Accordingly, the Court sustained the Comelec’s authority to suspend proclamation while the matter remained pending and observed that Labo had not presented evidence to overcome the earlier judgment declaring him not a citizen.

Finality of Comelec Decision and Impact on Proclamation

The Court found that the Comelec resolution cancelling Labo’s certificate became final and executory five days after receipt under Omnibus Election Code Sec. 78 and Comelec Rules, Rule 39, Sec. 3. The Court determined that the May 9 resolution attained finality on May 14, 1992, since no restraining order issued from the Supreme Court within the five-day period. Because Philippine citizenship is an indispensable qualification for elective office, the Court held that Labo’s disqualification as noncitizen prevented his proclamation and assumption of the mayoralty.

Whether Ortega Was Entitled to Proclamation

The Court held that the disqualification of a candidate who obtained the highest number of votes does not automatically entitle the candidate with the next highest number of votes to proclamation. Relying on its prior decisions, including Abella v. Comelec (201 SCRA 253 [1991]) and Geronimo v. Santos (136 SCRA 435 [1985]), the Court explained that votes cast in the honest belief that the highest vote-getter was qualified should not be treated as stray or void, and that proclaiming the second placer would disenfranchise the electorate. The Court emphasiz

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 105111)

Parties and Posture

Ramon L. Labo, Jr. was petitioner in G.R. No. 105111 seeking review of the Commission on Elections' resolution cancelling his certificate of candidacy for Mayor of Baguio City.
Roberto C. Ortega was petitioner in G.R. No. 105384 seeking mandamus to compel implementation of the same Comelec resolution.
Commission on Elections was respondent in both petitions and issued the May 9, 1992 resolution disqualifying Labo and cancelling his certificate of candidacy.
The Court resolved both petitions together and considered the cases submitted for decision on June 16, 1992.

Key Facts

Labo filed his certificate of candidacy for Mayor of Baguio City on March 23, 1992 declaring himself a "natural-born" Filipino.
Ortega filed his certificate of candidacy on March 25, 1992 and instituted a disqualification proceeding (SPA No. 92-029) against Labo on March 26, 1992.
The Comelec served summons on Labo, who failed to timely file an Answer and was later represented by counsel but adduced no evidence at the May 4, 1992 reception of evidence.
Ortega presented this Court's earlier decision in Labo v. Comelec (176 SCRA 1 [1989]) declaring Labo not a Filipino citizen as proof of noncitizenship.
The Comelec issued its May 9, 1992 resolution denying due course to and cancelling Labo's certificate of candidacy and later issued orders limiting execution and suspending proclamation pending finality.
The May 11, 1992 elections proceeded, with Labo receiving the highest number of votes and Ortega the second highest number.

Procedural History

Ortega filed the disqualification petition before the Comelec as SPA No. 92-029 and presented evidence on May 4, 1992.
The Comelec promulgated its resolution cancelling Labo's certificate on May 9, 1992 and clarified on May 10, 1992 that the decision would become final and executory five days after promulgation.
Labo filed a petition for review in this Court on May 15, 1992 (G.R. No. 105111) seeking, among other reliefs, cancellation of the Comelec resolution and declaration of Filipino citizenship.
Ortega filed a petition for mandamus in this Court on June 1, 1992 (G.R. No. 105384) seeking implementation of the Comelec resolution.
The Court resolved the matters on July 3, 1992 and dismissed both petitions for lack of merit.

Issues Presented

Whether Labo retained or reacquired Philippine citizenship so as to be qualified for election to the office of Mayor of Baguio City.
Whether the Comelec committed grave abuse of discretion in cancelling Labo's certificate of candidacy in light of the prior Labo v. Comelec decision.
Whether the finality of the Comelec resolution entitled Ortega, as second placard, to proclamation as Mayor.
Whether the vacancy created by Labo's disqualification should be filled by proclamation of the second placer or by succession under the Local Government Code.

Parties' Contentions

Labo contended that he was a Filipino citizen, that prior proceedings denied him full opportunity to be heard, and that he could prove reacquisition of citizenship especially under the standard in Vance v. Terrazas (444 U.S. 252).
Labo further asserted that Section 72 of the Omnibus Election Code operated as a legislatively mandated repatriation proceeding and that non-finality of the Comelec resolution permitted his proclamation.
Ortega contended that the Comelec resolution became final and executory and that the Commission abused its discretion by refusing immediate implementation of the May 9, 1992 resolution.
Ortega further prayed that, upon