GR 179851; (April, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 179851 ; April 18, 2008
MAYOR JOSE UGDORACION, JR., petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and EPHRAIM M. TUNGOL, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Jose Ugdoracion, Jr. and private respondent Ephraim Tungol were rival mayoralty candidates in Albuquerque, Bohol, in the May 2007 elections. Tungol filed a petition to deny due course or cancel Ugdoracion’s Certificate of Candidacy (COC), alleging material misrepresentation. Tungol contended that Ugdoracion falsely declared in his COC that he was not a permanent resident or immigrant to a foreign country, when in fact Ugdoracion had been a U.S. “green card” holder since September 2001, with an assigned Alien Number.
Ugadoracion argued he retained his domicile of origin in Albuquerque, Bohol, despite his U.S. permanent residency status. He presented documents like a residence certificate, a voter registration application, and a photocopy of an “Abandonment of Lawful Permanent Resident Status” dated October 2006 to prove his residency and intent. The COMELEC First Division canceled his COC on May 8, 2007, a decision affirmed by the COMELEC En Banc on September 28, 2007. Ugdoracion thus filed this petition, imputing grave abuse of discretion to the COMELEC.
ISSUE
Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in canceling Ugdoracion’s Certificate of Candidacy for material misrepresentation.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The legal logic centers on the mandatory and material nature of the declarations in a COC under Sections 74 and 78 of the Omnibus Election Code. A candidate must state under oath that he is not a permanent resident or immigrant to a foreign country. Ugdoracion’s acquisition of U.S. permanent resident status in 2001 was a fact that directly contradicted his sworn statement. The Court emphasized that domicile and residence, while often conflated in election law for determining the period of residency, are distinct from the specific statutory disqualification attached to being a permanent resident or immigrant of another country.
The Court found Ugdoracion’s subsequent acts, like the alleged abandonment of his status in October 2006, insufficient to rectify the falsehood made at the time of filing his COC. The misrepresentation was material because it pertained to a specific eligibility requirement—not being a permanent resident of a foreign country—which is a condition by law for running for elective office. The fact that Ugdoracion later won the election was deemed irrelevant, as winning cannot cure a material misrepresentation that provided grounds for the COC’s cancellation prior to the election. Therefore, the COMELEC’s factual finding and application of the law were supported by substantial evidence and constituted a valid exercise of its jurisdiction, not a capricious or whimsical act amounting to grave abuse of discretion. The petition was denied.