Title
Latasa vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 154829
Decision Date
Dec 10, 2003
Arsenio Latasa, after serving three terms as municipal mayor, sought re-election as city mayor post-Digos’ conversion. The Supreme Court ruled his candidacy invalid, upholding the three-term limit despite the municipality-to-city transition.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 154829)

Key Dates

  • 1992, 1995, 1998: Latasa elected municipal mayor
  • September 8, 2000: Plebiscite ratifying RA 8798
  • February 28, 2001: Latasa filed certificate of candidacy for city mayor
  • March 1, 2001: Sunga filed petition to cancel Latasa’s candidacy
  • April 27, 2001: COMELEC First Division cancelled Latasa’s certificate of candidacy
  • May 14, 2001: Elections held
  • May 17, 2001: Latasa proclaimed winner
  • August 27, 2002: COMELEC en banc denied reconsideration
  • December 10, 2003: Supreme Court decision

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution, Article X, Section 8 (three-term limit for local elective officials)
  • Local Government Code of 1991, Sections 7 (creation and conversion) and 450 (requisites for cityhood)
  • Republic Act No. 8798 (Charter of the City of Digos), Sections 2 and 53
  • Rule 65, Rules of Court (certiorari)

Facts

Latasa served three consecutive terms (1992–2001) as municipal mayor. Upon conversion to city, Section 53 of the City Charter placed him in a hold-over capacity as city mayor. He filed for election as city mayor for the first time on February 28, 2001, disclosing his three terms as municipal mayor. Sunga challenged Latasa’s eligibility before COMELEC, alleging violation of the constitutional three-term limit. The First Division cancelled Latasa’s certificate of candidacy; his motion for reconsideration remained pending until after the elections. Despite COMELEC’s resolution, Latasa was proclaimed winner. Sunga pursued further motions, but the COMELEC en banc ultimately denied relief, prompting Latasa’s petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court.

Issue

Whether Latasa, having served three consecutive terms as municipal mayor, was barred under the 1987 Constitution from running immediately for city mayor of the same territorial jurisdiction.

Court’s Analysis

  1. Three-Term Rule and Framers’ Intent
    – Article X, Section 8 prohibits more than three consecutive terms in the same local office to prevent concentration of power.
    – Constitutional Commission debates rejected lifetime bans and opted for a one-term interruption after three terms.

  2. Juridical Personality vs. Territorial Continuity
    – Although a municipality and a city have distinct corporate personalities, the City of Digos retained the identical territory, electorate, and boundaries of the former municipality.
    – Latasa continued to exercise chief-executive functions over the same inhabitants without interruption.

  3. Precedents Distinction
    – Borja Jr. v. COMELEC: service by succession for an unexpired term does not count as full term.
    – Lonzanida v. COMELEC: involuntary vacancy interrupted service.
    – Adormeo v. COMELEC

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.