G.R. No. 216637 . March 7, 2017
AGAPITO J. CARDINO, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC and ROSALINA G. JALOSJOS a.k.a. ROSALINA JALOSJOS JOHNSON, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Agapito J. Cardino and private respondent Rosalina G. Jalosjos were candidates for Mayor of Dapitan City in the May 13, 2013 elections. Jalosjos was proclaimed the winner. Cardino filed a petition for quo warranto before the COMELEC, seeking to nullify Jalosjos’ candidacy on the ground of ineligibility. Cardino alleged that Jalosjos, a former natural-born Filipino who became a naturalized American citizen, failed to validly renounce her foreign citizenship as required by Republic Act No. 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act). He presented evidence, including a Bureau of Immigration certification, to prove that Jalosjos was in the United States on July 16, 2012—the date indicated on her Affidavit of Renunciation of American citizenship sworn before a Municipal Trial Court judge in Manukan, Zamboanga del Norte. Cardino argued it was physically impossible for her to have personally appeared before the notarizing officer on that date, rendering the affidavit a falsified document with no legal effect. Consequently, he contended Jalosjos remained a dual citizen disqualified from running for local elective office.
Jalosjos countered that the date “July 16, 2012” on the affidavit was a clerical error. She asserted she personally appeared and subscribed to the affidavit before the judge on July 19, 2012, after her return to the Philippines. To support this, she presented judicial affidavits and the deposition testimony of the administering judge, who confirmed the actual date of execution was July 19, 2012. The COMELEC Second Division and later the En Banc dismissed Cardino’s petition, crediting the judge’s explanation and finding the affidavit valid despite the clerical mistake. Cardino elevated the case to the Supreme Court via certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling that Jalosjos’ Affidavit of Renunciation of Foreign Citizenship was valid and that she complied with the requirements of R.A. No. 9225 , thereby making her eligible for the mayoral position.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the COMELEC resolutions. The Court found no grave abuse of discretion, as the COMELEC’s conclusion was supported by substantial evidence. The legal logic centered on the nature of the defect in the affidavit and the compliance with substantive requirements of R.A. No. 9225 . The Court emphasized that the affidavit’s validity is not automatically voided by a clerical error in the date of execution, especially when the officer who administered the oath credibly testifies to the correct date and the act of personal appearance and subscription. The requirement under Section 5(2) of R.A. No. 9225 is the personal and sworn renunciation of foreign citizenship. This substantive requirement was met, as Jalosjos personally appeared before a competent officer and executed the renunciation. The erroneous date was a mere clerical mistake that did not impugn the document’s authenticity or the act of renunciation itself. The Court also noted the Office of the Court Administrator’s finding in a related administrative case that the error was clerical, not an act of falsification. Therefore, Jalosjos effectively renounced her American citizenship, reacquired her Philippine citizenship, and was qualified to run for and hold the office of Mayor. The COMELEC’s factual findings, being supported by evidence, are generally binding and were not tainted with arbitrar