ROGELIO BATIN CABALLERO, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND JONATHAN ENRIQUE V. NANUD, JR., RESPONDENTS.

Caballero versus Commission on Elections

The Case

This is a petition for certiorari brought by Rogelio Batin Caballero against the Commission on Elections and his rival, Jonathan Enrique Nanud, Junior, asking the Supreme Court to set aside the Commission's cancellation of his certificate of candidacy for mayor of Uyugan, Batanes in the May 2013 elections. The case matters because it settles how two statutes interact: the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003, which lets a natural-born Filipino hold dual citizenship, and the Local Government Code, which demands one year of residence before election day. The Court holds that reacquiring Philippine citizenship does not automatically restore one's domicile, and that residency must still be reckoned from the day the candidate actually reestablished his domicile of choice.

Procedural History

Private respondent Nanud filed with the Commission on Elections a petition to deny due course to or cancel Caballero's certificate of candidacy, alleging a false representation of eligibility and residence. The First Division of the Commission, in a resolution dated May 3, 2013, granted the petition and cancelled the certificate. Caballero moved for reconsideration with the Commission en banc, which denied it in a resolution dated November 6, 2013, affirming the First Division in full. Caballero then came to the Supreme Court by petition for certiorari with a prayer for a temporary restraining order. In the meantime, the Commission issued a writ of execution, and Nanud took his oath of office in December 2013.

Facts

Caballero was born and raised in Uyugan, Batanes, where he studied, worked, voted, and built a house. He later worked abroad, in Nigeria and California, and finally settled in Canada, where he became a Canadian citizen. On September 13, 2012, before the Philippine Consul General in Toronto, he took an Oath of Allegiance to the Republic under the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act, becoming a dual Filipino and Canadian citizen. On October 1, 2012, before a notary public in Batanes, he executed an affidavit renouncing his Canadian citizenship. Two days later, on October 3, 2012, he filed his certificate of candidacy for mayor, declaring that he was a resident of Barangay Imnajbu, Uyugan, for at least one year before the election.

Nanud challenged the certificate, alleging that Caballero falsely claimed eligibility despite being a Canadian citizen and a non-resident. Caballero was not personally served with the petition; he received a copy only at the conference on December 10, 2012, after which he filed a memorandum instead of an answer. He insisted that he never lost his domicile of origin in Uyugan, that he returned there during vacations, and that his nine months of actual stay before the election substantially complied with the residency requirement.

The Commission found a material misrepresentation on residence. It held that his naturalization in Canada resulted in abandonment of his domicile of origin, and that he failed to prove he had reestablished domicile in Uyugan. Elections were held on May 13, 2013, and Caballero won, but his proclamation did not cure the defect in his qualification.

Issues

• Whether or not the Commission on Elections gravely abused its discretion in entertaining the petition despite the private respondent's failure to strictly comply with the rules on service of the petition.
• Whether or not Caballero abandoned his Philippine domicile when he became a Canadian citizen and worked abroad.
• Whether or not his reacquisition of Philippine citizenship nine months before the election substantially complied with the one-year residency requirement.

Applicable Provisions

Section 5, paragraph 2 of the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003 provides:

Those seeking elective public office in the Philippines shall meet the qualifications for holding such public office as required by the Constitution and existing laws and, at the time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy, make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship before any public officer authorized to administer an oath.

This provision shows that renunciation of foreign citizenship is only one requirement; the candidate must still meet the qualifications of existing laws, including residency.

Section 39 of the Local Government Code of 1991 provides:

An elective local official must be a citizen of the Philippines; a registered voter in the barangay, municipality, city or province or, in the case of a member of the sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, or sanggunian bayan, the district where he intends to be elected; a resident therein for at least one year immediately preceding the day of the election; and able to read and write Filipino or any other local language or dialect.

This is the residency standard against which Caballero's certificate of candidacy is measured.

Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code provides:

A verified petition seeking to deny due course or to cancel a certificate of candidacy may be filed by any person exclusively on the ground that any material representation contained therein as required under Section 74 hereof is false. The petition may be filed at any time not later than twenty-five days from the time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy and shall be decided, after due notice and hearing, not later than fifteen days before the election.

This is the ground for cancellation, which requires that the false representation be material.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court ruled that the Commission did not gravely abuse its discretion. The rules of procedure of the Commission are subject to liberal construction, and the Commission may suspend its own rules in the interest of justice. The Court quoted the rule:

In the interest of justice and in order to obtain speedy disposition of all matters pending before the Commission, these rules or any portion thereof may be suspended by the Commission.

Caballero was given a copy of the petition at the conference and was heard, so his right to due process was not impaired. The issue of his qualification was imbued with public interest, which justified relaxing the rules.

On the second issue, the Court held that Caballero abandoned his domicile of origin. Residence in election law means domicile, the place where one has his permanent home and intends to return and remain. Naturalization in a foreign country may result in abandonment of domicile in the Philippines, and his frequent vacations in Uyugan did not amount to a waiver of that abandonment.

On the third issue, the Court held that reacquisition of citizenship under the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act had no automatic effect on residence. Caballero had to prove that after September 13, 2012 he reestablished Uyugan as his new domicile of choice, reckoned from the time he made it so. The period from September 13, 2012 to May 12, 2013 was less than one year. His nine months of stay was not substantial compliance, for no plurality of votes can substitute for a qualification required by law. His false declaration of residence was a material misrepresentation under Section 78.

Doctrine

Reacquisition or retention of Philippine citizenship under the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act is independent of residence; it does not automatically restore the candidate's domicile. A natural-born Filipino who became a citizen of a foreign country may be deemed to have abandoned his domicile of origin, and upon returning he must establish a new domicile of choice, with the one-year residency under Section 39 of the Local Government Code counted from the time he made that place his domicile. Residence means domicile, requiring bodily presence in a fixed place coupled with the intention to remain. A false statement of residence in a certificate of candidacy is a material misrepresentation under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code, and the findings of fact of the Commission on Elections are final absent grave abuse of discretion.

Disposition

The petition was dismissed, and the resolutions of the Commission on Elections cancelling Caballero's certificate of candidacy were affirmed; Nanud prevailed.

Remember This

Memorize this line: reacquiring Philippine citizenship does not automatically restore domicile, and the one-year residency counts only from the day the candidate reestablishes a domicile of choice. Examiners use this case in dual citizenship and residency questions, and in questions on the liberal construction of the Commission on Elections rules.