G.R. No. 93833 - Ramirez vs. Court of Appeals

Case Summary (G.R. No. 93833)

Procedural Posture

Petitioners filed SPA No. 98‑298 before the Comelec seeking disqualification of Emano for failure to meet the one‑year residency requirement, and later filed EPC No. 98‑62 (quo warranto) after Emano was proclaimed mayor. The Comelec First Division denied disqualification (July 14, 1998). The Comelec en banc affirmed that decision (January 18, 1999). Petitioners then filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 with the Supreme Court, challenging the Comelec resolutions as grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.

Facts

Emano served three consecutive terms as governor of Misamis Oriental, having been elected in 1995 and remaining in office until he filed his mayoral COC in March 1998.
He had owned a house in Cagayan de Oro City since 1973 and, together with his family, had actually resided there while discharging gubernatorial duties, the provincial capitol being located in the city.
On June 14, 1997, while still governor, Emano executed a Voter Registration Record in Cagayan de Oro City claiming 20 years of residence and registered as a voter there during general registration.
On March 25, 1998 he filed his Certificate of Candidacy for mayor, declaring residence at 1409 San Jose Street, Capistrano Subdivision, Gusa, Cagayan de Oro City.
Petitioners alleged Emano remained domiciled in Tagoloan, Misamis Oriental, citing prior declarations of residence and his continued exercise of gubernatorial office. Emano was proclaimed mayor and won by a margin of 29,273 votes.

Issues Presented

Whether Emano’s continued service as provincial governor, prior sworn statements claiming residence in Misamis Oriental, and conduct before filing his COC precluded acquisition of a bona fide domicile of choice in Cagayan de Oro City for at least one year prior to the election.
Whether Emano’s possession of a house in Cagayan de Oro, residence there while holding gubernatorial office, securing a residence certificate, and registering as a voter in June 1997 suffice to establish a change of domicile to qualify him for the mayorship.
If Emano were disqualified, whether the second‑placer, Erasmo B. Damasing, should be proclaimed mayor in light of alleged notoriety of the disqualification before the election.

Petitioners’ Contentions

Petitioners argued that Emano’s repeated candidacies and declarations of residence in Tagoloan and his uninterrupted performance of provincial functions demonstrated continuing domicile in Misamis Oriental, preventing a bona fide change of domicile to Cagayan de Oro. They maintained that his acquisition of a residence certificate, voter registration, or physical presence while serving as governor were insufficient to establish the requisite one‑year residency for city mayor.

Respondent’s Contentions and Comelec Findings

Emano asserted actual, continuous physical residence in Cagayan de Oro City during his gubernatorial terms because the provincial seat of government was located there; he emphasized intention to adopt the city as domicile of choice, evidenced by community tax certificate and voter registration in June 1997. The Comelec (First Division and en banc) found that Emano and his family had actually resided in the house he bought in 1973 and that registration and other indicia established residency in the city for the period required by law. The Comelec also held there is no legal prohibition against an elected provincial official residing or registering in a highly urbanized city that is geographically within the province, provided statutory voter and residency requirements are met.

Legal Standard on Residence Qualification

Section 39 of the Local Government Code requires a local elective official to be a registered voter and a resident of the area where elected for at least one year immediately preceding the election. Under the 1987 Constitution and implementing statutes, residency requirements are meant to ensure that candidates are familiar with constituents’ needs and to prevent opportunistic “strangers or newcomers” from exploiting favorable conditions. Residence may be established by actual, physical presence and by domicile of choice, which hinges on both physical presence and intent to remain.

Precedents Relied Upon

The Court considered and applied its prior decisions cited in the record: Romualdez‑Marcos v. Comelec (residence facts decisive), Mamba‑Perez v. Comelec (change of domicile proven by physical presence and corroborating documents; declarations of prior residence do not necessarily control), Frivaldo v. Comelec (loss of qualifications renders title open to challenge), Alberto v. Comelec and other authorities emphasizing liberal construction of election laws to uphold the popular will.

Court’s Analysis Applying Law to Facts

The Supreme Court accepted the Comelec’s factual findings that Emano and his family actually resided in the Cagayan de Oro house, that he lived there while serving as governor because the provincial capitol was located in the city, and that he registered as a voter there in June 1997—satisfying the one‑year residency requirement prior to the May 1998 elections. The Court followed Mamba‑Perez in holding that prior statements of residence in certificates of candidacy do not negate proof of actual residence elsewhere when convincing evidence of change of domicile exists. The Court emphasized that the residence requirement is a practical safeguard—actual, physical, and personal presence sufficient to show intention to fulfill local duties and to allow voters to evaluate fitness for office.

Response to Petitioners’ Arguments on Official Status and Residency

The Court rejected the argument that Emano’s s

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 93833)

Procedural Posture

Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court challenging the Commission on Elections (Comelec) en banc Resolution dated January 18, 1999 in SPA No. 98-298, which affirmed the Comelec First Division Resolution dated July 14, 1998.
The assailed Comelec Resolutions ruled that Vicente Y. Emano possessed the minimum period of residence to be eligible to vote in Cagayan de Oro City and to be voted mayor thereof.
Petitioners filed SPA No. 98-298 (disqualification) on May 15, 1998; after Comelec proclaimed Emano mayor, petitioners filed a quo warranto (docketed EPC No. 98-62) on May 29, 1998 seeking annulment of Emano’s election and the proclamation of the second placer.
The Supreme Court deemed the case submitted for resolution upon receipt of private respondent’s Memorandum on April 26, 2000 and rendered judgment in G.R. No. 137329 on August 9, 2000 (392 Phil. 342, En Banc).

Relevant Factual Background

Vicente Y. Emano ran for and was elected provincial governor of Misamis Oriental in 1995; it was his third consecutive term (1988–1998).
In his Certificate of Candidacy dated March 12, 1995, Emano declared his residence to be in Tagoloan, Misamis Oriental.
On June 14, 1997, while still governor, Emano executed a Voter Registration Record in Cagayan de Oro City (a highly urbanized city geographically located in the Province of Misamis Oriental), claiming 20 years of residence.
On March 25, 1998, Emano filed his Certificate of Candidacy for mayor of Cagayan de Oro City, stating his residence for the preceding two years and five months as 1409 San Jose Street, Capistrano Subdivision, Gusa, Cagayan de Oro City.
Petitioners Rogelio M. Torayno Sr., Generoso Q. Eligan and Jacqueline M. SeriAo are residents of Cagayan de Oro City; among the mayoral candidates was Erasmo B. Damasing, counsel of the petitioners.
Emano owned a house in Cagayan de Oro City purchased in 1973, where his family resided; during his three terms as governor he held office in the provincial capitol located in the city.
Emano secured a Community Tax Certificate in January 1997 at the City Treasurer’s Office stating residence at 1409 San Jose Street and registered as a voter in Gusa, Cagayan de Oro City during the general registration of voters in June 1997.
Emano was proclaimed duly elected city mayor and won by a margin of 29,273 votes (undisputed by petitioners).

Issues Presented by Petitioners

Whether the Comelec gravely abused its discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in issuing the questioned Resolutions.
Whether Emano’s continued service as governor of Misamis Oriental until filing his COC for mayor, his sworn assertions of residency in Misamis Oriental, and his exercise of gubernatorial duties precluded him from acquiring a bona fide domicile of choice in Cagayan de Oro City for at least one year prior to the May 11, 1998 elections.
Whether Emano’s residence certificate in Cagayan de Oro City, holding office in the provincial capitol located in the city, owning and staying in a house there during his governorship, and registering as a voter in June 1997 were legally sufficient to constitute a change of domicile of choice from Tagoloan to Cagayan de Oro City for at least one year prior to the May 11, 1998 elections.
Whether Erasmo Damasing, the second placer, should be declared winner if Emano were disqualified and if Emano’s disqualification had been notorious to voters before the election.

Petitioners’ Principal Contentions

Emano had run and been elected governor for three consecutive terms immediately prior to the 1998 elections, and in prior pleadings had stated he was a resident of Tagoloan, Misamis Oriental.
Emano continued to exercise the powers and prerogatives of governor until he filed his Certificate of Candidacy for mayor, and residence is a continuing qualification for elective office.
Owning a house in a city, residing there while performing duties as governor, securing a residence certificate there, and registering as voter are insufficient, as a matter of law, to effect a bona fide change of domicile for the one-year residence requirement.

Respondent Emano’s Principal Contentions

Emano actually and physically resided in Cagayan de Oro City while serving as provincial governor, since the seat of the provincial government was located in the city.
Choice of domicile is a matter of intention; Emano chose Cagayan de Oro City as his place of residence after the May 1995 elections.
Documentary and registration acts support his city residence: Community Tax Certificate in January 1997; voter registration in June 1997; registration showing he had been a voter of the city for the minimum period required by law.
Transfer of legal resi