G.R. No. 179413 November 28, 2008
PRISCILA R. JUSTIMBASTE, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and RUSTICO B. BALDERIAN, respondents.

FACTS

On April 3, 2007, petitioner Priscila R. Justimbaste filed a petition to disqualify private respondent Rustico B. Balderian as a candidate for mayor of Tabontabon, Leyte in the May 14, 2007 elections. The petition alleged that private respondent committed falsification and misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy by: (a) stating his name as Rustico Besa Balderian when his real name is Chu Teck Siao per a National Statistics Office birth certificate; (b) using the middle name “Besa” while his brother uses “Siao,” confusing the public; and (c) being reportedly a U.S. citizen or permanent resident who had not relinquished such foreign allegiance. Private respondent denied the allegations and asserted he is a Filipino citizen. Petitioner submitted various documents including private respondent’s travel records from the Bureau of Immigration (1998-2006), a photocopy of his Philippine Passport issued in 2002 showing Filipino nationality, NSO certifications for “Rustico S. Balderian” and “Rustico B. Balderian,” a local civil registrar certification on the birth of “Chu Teck Siao,” and a court certification that a petition for change of name was not on record. Private respondent won and was proclaimed mayor. The COMELEC Second Division denied the disqualification petition on May 28, 2007, finding private respondent a qualified Filipino. The COMELEC en banc affirmed this on August 21, 2007.

ISSUE

Whether private respondent committed material misrepresentation and falsification in his certificate of candidacy warranting its denial or cancellation under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition, upholding the COMELEC resolutions. The Court held that for a certificate of candidacy to be denied due course or canceled under Section 78, the false representation must be both material and made with a deliberate intent to deceive the electorate as to one’s qualifications. Material misrepresentation refers to qualifications for elective office, such as citizenship, as required under Section 74 of the Omnibus Election Code and Section 39 of the Local Government Code. Petitioner failed to present clear and convincing evidence that private respondent was not a Filipino citizen or was a permanent resident of a foreign country. Private respondent’s Philippine Passport, issued in 2002 and not disputed as to genuineness, substantiated his Filipino citizenship. Petitioner’s allegations regarding the meaning of immigration record acronyms (“BB” for balikbayan and “RP” for re-entry permit) were speculative and insufficient to prove dual citizenship or permanent resident status under Section 40 of the Local Government Code. Regarding the name discrepancy, the Court found no material misrepresentation, as the use of “Rustico B. Balderian” did not hide a fact affecting eligibility, and evidence suggested private respondent had been using that name publicly. The petition was based on mere conjectures and did not meet the required standard of proof for disqualification.