G.R. No. 135083 - Mercado vs. Manzano

Case Summary (G.R. No. 135083)

Factual Background

In the May 11, 1998 elections private respondent obtained the highest number of votes for vice mayor of Makati, with petitioner placing second. Manzano was born in San Francisco, California, in September 1955 of Filipino parents and was, at birth, a national both of the Philippines and of the United States under competing principles of jus sanguinis and jus soli. At a young age Manzano was brought to the Philippines and, at some point, was registered with the Philippine Bureau of Immigration as an alien and issued an Alien Certificate of Registration. He later registered to vote in the Philippines and voted in the 1992, 1995, and 1998 elections. He filed his certificate of candidacy on March 27, 1998, declaring under oath that he was a natural-born Filipino, a registered voter, not a permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country, and that he would support and defend the Constitution of the Philippines.

Proceedings Before the COMELEC Second Division

A third party filed a petition for disqualification alleging that Manzano was an American citizen and therefore ineligible. On May 7, 1998, the COMELEC Second Division granted the petition and ordered cancellation of Manzano’s certificate of candidacy on the ground that he held dual citizenship and that Section 40(d) of R.A. No. 7160 disqualified persons with dual citizenship from running for elective local office. Manzano filed a motion for reconsideration on May 8, 1998. The motion remained pending through the election, and pursuant to Omnibus Resolution No. 3044 dated May 10, 1998, the Makati board of canvassers tabulated the votes but suspended proclamation.

COMELEC en banc Proceedings and Proclamation

Petitioner sought leave to intervene in the disqualification proceedings on May 19–20, 1998. The COMELEC en banc, voting August 31, 1998 (four to one, one abstention), reversed the Second Division and declared Manzano qualified. The en banc concluded that Manzano had been a dual citizen but that by filing his certificate of candidacy and by voting in Philippine elections he had effectively elected Philippine citizenship and repudiated his U.S. citizenship for purposes of Philippine law. The en banc ordered the Makati board of canvassers to reconvene and proclaim Manzano, which the board did on the evening of August 31, 1998.

Nature of the Petition and Relief Sought

Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari in the Supreme Court seeking to set aside the COMELEC en banc resolution, to declare Manzano disqualified to hold the vice mayoralty, and implicitly to secure petitioner’s vindication as the rightful officeholder. Petitioner contended that the en banc erred in holding that Manzano had renounced U.S. citizenship by voting and by filing his certificate of candidacy, that Manzano was therefore qualified, and that the Second Division’s May 7, 1998 resolution was not final at the time of the election so that petitioner could not be proclaimed even if Manzano were disqualified.

Petitioner’s Contentions and the Solicitor General’s Position

Petitioner invoked dura lex sed lex and argued that Section 40(d) of R.A. No. 7160 plainly disqualified persons with dual citizenship from seeking local elective office and that Manzano’s asserted acts were insufficient to renounce U.S. citizenship. The Solicitor General sided with petitioner. Petitioner also argued that any renunciation must have occurred upon attainment of majority and that the voting cited by the COMELEC en banc could not effectuate loss of foreign nationality.

Threshold Issue: Petitioner's Right to Sue and to Intervene

The Supreme Court addressed first whether petitioner had the legal personality to bring the action, given that he was not an original party to the disqualification petition and that his motion to intervene before the COMELEC remained unresolved. The Court found that petitioner had a sufficient interest to intervene because there had been no proclamation of the winner when he moved to intervene, and a rival candidate is competent to seek disqualification of another candidate under Section 6 of R.A. No. 6646. The Court explained that the rule barring a defeated second placer from being declared winner applies only where the disqualification proceeding has already resulted in the removal of a proclaimed winner. The failure of the COMELEC en banc to resolve petitioner’s motion for intervention was tantamount to denial and justified resort to certiorari; the petition therefore properly raised both procedural and substantive questions.

Legal Question: Dual Citizenship Versus Dual Allegiance

The Court examined the distinction between mere dual citizenship and dual allegiance. It explained that dual citizenship arises from the concurrent application of different states’ nationality laws and may be involuntary, whereas dual allegiance involves a voluntary assertion of loyalty to two states and poses the national-security concerns contemplated by Art. IV, Sec. 5, 1987 Constitution. The Court reviewed the Constitutional Commission debates and legislative history and concluded that the Constitution’s concern was with dual allegiance. Consequently, the Court held that the phrase “those with dual citizenship” in Section 40(d) of R.A. No. 7160 (and parallel provisions such as R.A. No. 7854, Sec. 20(d)) must be read to refer to dual allegiance. Persons who merely possess dual citizenship by reason of birth or passive circumstances do not automatically fall within the disqualification.

Election of Philippine Citizenship by Filing a Certificate of Candidacy

The Court then considered whether Manzano had effectively elected Philippine citizenship and thereby terminated any disqualifying status. It observed that Manzano’s certificate of candidacy contained an oath declaring himself a Filipino, disavowing permanent residency or immigrant status in a foreign country, and promising to support and defend the Constitution of the Philippines. The Court found that such an election of Philippine citizenship, coupled with Manzano’s longstanding residence, education, professional activity, and participation in Philippine elections, sufficed to repudiate foreign allegiance for purposes of Philip

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 135083)

Parties and Procedural Posture

Ernesto S. Mercado was a candidate for vice mayor of Makati City in the May 11, 1998 elections and filed this petition for certiorari.
Eduardo B. Manzano was a rival candidate for vice mayor of Makati City and was proclaimed by the Makati City Board of Canvassers after the COMELEC en banc resolution.
A disqualification petition against Eduardo B. Manzano was filed prior to the election by Ernesto Mamaril alleging foreign citizenship.
The COMELEC Second Division, in a resolution dated May 7, 1998, ordered cancellation of Manzano's certificate of candidacy on the ground of dual citizenship under Section 40(d) of R.A. No. 7160.
Manzano filed a motion for reconsideration which remained pending through the May 11, 1998 election and thereafter.
Pursuant to Omnibus Resolution No. 3044, the Makati board of canvassers tabulated votes but suspended proclamation pending finality of the disqualification proceedings.
Ernesto S. Mercado moved to intervene on May 19, 1998, but the COMELEC did not resolve the motion before the en banc decision.
The COMELEC en banc, by resolution dated August 31, 1998, reversed the Second Division, declared Manzano qualified, and directed proclamation of Manzano as vice mayor.
Ernesto S. Mercado filed the present petition for certiorari to set aside the COMELEC en banc resolution and to declare Manzano disqualified.

Key Factual Allegations

Manzano was born in San Francisco, California on September 14, 1955, to Filipino parents and therefore acquired U.S. citizenship by jus soli and Philippine citizenship by jus sanguinis.
Manzano was registered with the Philippine Bureau of Immigration under Alien Certificate of Registration No. B-31632 and used an American passport for travel as late as April 22, 1997.
Manzano voted in Philippine elections in 1992, 1995, and 1998 and filed his certificate of candidacy on March 27, 1998 containing an oath of allegiance to the Philippines and statements that he was a natural-born Filipino and not a permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country.
The May 11, 1998 vote totals were Manzano 103,853 votes, Mercado 100,894 votes, and Gabriel V. Daza III 54,275 votes.
The COMELEC en banc vote to reverse the Second Division was recorded as four in favor, one against, and one abstention, and the Makati board proclaimed Manzano that same evening.

Issues Presented

Whether Mercado had the legal personality to intervene in the COMELEC disqualification proceedings and to seek certiorari when his motion to intervene remained unresolved.
Whether Eduardo B. Manzano possessed dual citizenship or dual allegiance such that he was disqualified under Section 40(d) of R.A. No. 7160 and the Makati Charter, R.A. No. 7854, Sec. 20(d).
Whether the COMELEC Second Division resolution of May 7, 1998, attained finality prior to the election and thus precluded proclamation of Manzano.
Whether the statements and oath in Manzano's certificate of candidacy effectively constituted an election of Philippine citizenship that terminated his foreign nationality for purposes of eligibility.

Contentions of Parties

Petitioner Mercado contended that the COMELEC en banc erred in holding that Manzano had renounced U.S. citizenship by voting or by filing his certificate of candidacy and that Manzano was disqualified under Section 40(d).
Petitioner Mercado further contended that the May 7, 1998 Second Division resolution was final at the time of the election so that he should be declared the winner if Manzano were disqualified.
Private respondent Manzano contended that he remained a Filipino citizen and that his certificate of candidacy and oath evidenced his elec