GR 209835; (September, 2015) (Digest)
G.R. No. 209835, September 22, 2015
ROGELIO BATIN CABALLERO, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND JONATHAN ENRIQUE V. NANUD, JR., RESPONDENTS.
FACTS
Petitioner Rogelio Batin Caballero and private respondent Jonathan Enrique V. Nanud, Jr. were both candidates for Mayor of Uyugan, Batanes in the May 13, 2013 elections. Private respondent filed a Petition to deny due course to or cancel petitioner’s Certificate of Candidacy (COC), alleging petitioner made a false representation by declaring he was eligible to run for Mayor despite being a Canadian citizen and a non-resident of Uyugan. Petitioner argued that prior to filing his COC on October 3, 2012, he reacquired his Filipino citizenship by taking an Oath of Allegiance under Republic Act No. 9225 on September 13, 2012, and renounced his Canadian citizenship via an Affidavit of Renunciation on October 1, 2012. He claimed he never lost his domicile of origin in Uyugan, Batanes. The COMELEC First Division, in a Resolution dated May 3, 2013, granted the petition and canceled petitioner’s COC, finding he made a material misrepresentation regarding his residency. Petitioner won the election and was proclaimed Mayor on May 14, 2013. The COMELEC En Banc, in a Resolution dated November 6, 2013, affirmed the First Division’s decision. Petitioner then filed the instant petition for certiorari.
ISSUE
Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in canceling petitioner’s Certificate of Candidacy.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding no grave abuse of discretion by the COMELEC. The Court held:
1. On procedural grounds, the COMELEC did not err in suspending its own rules of procedure. While private respondent failed to strictly comply with service requirements under COMELEC rules, the COMELEC has the power to liberally construe or suspend its rules in the interest of justice, especially for matters imbued with public interest like the qualification of a candidate. Petitioner was given a copy of the petition during a conference and filed a Memorandum controverting the allegations.
2. On the substantive issue of residency, the Court affirmed the COMELEC’s finding that petitioner failed to meet the one-year residency requirement. Petitioner’s naturalization as a Canadian citizen resulted in an abandonment of his domicile of origin in Uyugan, Batanes. His reacquisition of Filipino citizenship did not automatically restore his domicile. To re-establish domicile, he must prove actual physical presence and an intention to reside permanently. The evidence showed petitioner only returned to the Philippines in September 2012, less than a year before the May 2013 elections. His claim of maintaining domicile was negated by his prolonged stay abroad, acquisition of Canadian citizenship (which required residency in Canada), and lack of definitive acts showing an intent to permanently return to Uyugan prior to his reacquisition of Philippine citizenship.