G.R. No. 105111 & G.R. No. 105384 July 3, 1992
RAMON L. LABO, Jr., petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, and ROBERTO ORTEGA, respondents. ( G.R. No. 105111 )

ROBERTO C. ORTEGA, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, and RAMON L. LABO, Jr., respondents. (G.R. No. 105384)

FACTS

Ramon L. Labo, Jr. filed his certificate of candidacy for Mayor of Baguio City on March 23, 1992, stating he is a “natural-born” Filipino citizen. Roberto Ortega, also a candidate for the same office, filed a disqualification case (SPA No. 92-029) with the Commission on Elections (Comelec) on March 26, 1992, seeking to cancel Labo’s certificate on the ground of false material representation regarding his citizenship. The Comelec issued summons to Labo, but he failed to file an Answer. After a motion to declare him in default and a subsequent order for personal service of summons, a hearing was held on May 4, 1992. Ortega presented the Supreme Court’s 1989 decision in “Labo v. Comelec” (176 SCRA 1) which declared Labo not a citizen of the Philippines. Labo, though represented by counsel, presented no evidence at the hearing. He filed his Answer only on May 5, 1992, claiming Filipino citizenship but without offering evidence. On May 9, 1992, the Comelec granted Ortega’s petition, cancelled Labo’s certificate of candidacy, and ordered his name deleted from the list of candidates. The Comelec later ordered that Labo could still be voted for in the May 11, 1992 election, subject to the final outcome if elevated to the Supreme Court, and subsequently resolved to suspend his proclamation if he won. Labo filed G.R. No. 105111 on May 15, 1992, seeking to set aside the Comelec resolution, declare him a Filipino citizen, and direct his proclamation if he won. Ortega filed G.R. No. 105384 on June 1, 1992, a petition for mandamus to compel the Comelec to implement its May 9, 1992 resolution disqualifying Labo.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the Comelec committed grave abuse of discretion in cancelling Ramon L. Labo, Jr.’s certificate of candidacy and declaring him not a Filipino citizen, and in subsequently refusing to implement its disqualification resolution.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed both petitions. It held that the Comelec did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The Court found that Labo was given due process, as he ignored multiple summons and failed to present any evidence before the Comelec to support his claim of reacquiring Philippine citizenship. The Court was bound by its final 1989 declaration in “Labo v. Comelec” that Labo is not a Filipino citizen, and Labo failed to present any proof of reacquisition through a direct act of Congress, naturalization, or repatriation. The Court also ruled that Section 72 of the Omnibus Election Code, cited by Labo, had been repealed by Section 6 of R.A. No. 6646 , which allows the suspension of proclamation of a winning candidate pending a disqualification case when the evidence of guilt is strong. Labo’s claim that Section 72 operated as a special repatriation proceeding was rejected as untenable. Consequently, the Comelec’s resolution disqualifying Labo and cancelling his certificate of candidacy was upheld.