marcos and poe

Case Digest of Llamzares v. COMELEC

 (IRISH V. DE RAMA, Ed.D.)

MARY GRACE NATIVIDAD S. POE-LLAMANZARES VS COMELEC et al

(March 8, 2016; G.R. No. 221697)

FACTS:

Grace Poe-Llamanzares wishes to run for the Office of the President of the Republic of the Philippines. However, she's a foundling. Her parents are unknown. Mr. and Mrs. Militar who found the infant Grace in a church gave her to Mr. and Mrs. Poe, her adoptive parents. The child was then named Mary Grace Natividad Contreras Militar. Grace was adopted by celebrity spouses Ronald Allan Kelley Poe (a.k.a. Fenando Poe, Jr.) and Jesusa Sonora Poe (a.k.a. Susan Roces).

 Although there wereannotations placed in the child’s foundling certificate but it was only in 2005 that Susan Roces found out that their lawyer failed to secure a new Certificate of Live Birth with a Poe’s new name as well as the name of the adoptive parents. Roces then submitted an affidavit and in 2006, a Certificate of Live Birth in the name of Mary Grace Poe was released by the Civil Registry of Iloilo. At the age of 18, Poe was registered as a voter of San Juan.Initially, the petitioner was enrolled and pursued a degree in Development Studies at the University of the Philippines but she chose to pursue her studies abroad and left for the United States of America (U.S.) in 1988. Poe graduated in 1991 from Boston College in Chestnuts Hill, Massachusetts where she earned her Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Studies. In 1988, she was issued a Philippine passport. On 27 July 1991, Poe married Teodoro Llamanzares and flew to the US right after the wedding. The petitioner gave birth to her eldest child Brian Daniel (Brian) on 16th day of April year 1992 in the US. In 2001, Poe became a naturalized American Citizen and she obtained a US Passport that same year.

In April 2004, Poe came back to the Philippines in order to support her father’s candidacy. It was at this time that she gave birth to her youngest daughter. Her two daughters Hanna MacKenzie (Hanna) and Jesusa Anika (Anika) were both born in the Philippines on 10 July 1998 and 5 June 2004, respectively. Poe returned to the US in July 2004 with her two daughters. Poe returned in December 2004 after knowing her father’s deteriorating condition. The latter died and Poe stayed until February 2005 to take care of the funeral arrangements. Poe wanted to be with her grieving mother that is why she and her husband decided to move and reside permanently in the Philippines sometime first quarter of 2005.

On October 15, 2015, Poe filed her COC for the Presidency for the May 2016 elections. She declared that she is a natural born and her residence in the Philippine up to the day before election would be 10 years and 11 months counted from May 24, 2005. There were some petitions filed against Poe because there are some issues about her that made her have this case in running for president. Petitions were filed against Poe alleging that (1) she committed material misrepresentation in her COC when she stated that she is a resident of the Philippines for at least 10 years 11 months up to the day before May 9, 2016 Elections, (2) she is not natural born considering that Poe is a foundling and (3) Grace Poe’s candidacy should be denied, rejected,or cancelled for committing material misrepresentations in her Certificate of Candidacy.

Under the Constitution, no person who is not a natural-born citizen shall serve as President of the Philippines.

ISSUE: 1.Is Grace a natural-born citizen or a naturalized citizen or something in between 2: Grace Poe satisfies the 10-year residency requirement. Issue 3: Grace Poe’s candidacy should be denied or cancelled for committing material misrepresentations in her COC.

HELD: Grace is a natural-born citizen. .

First, Yes . there is a very high probability that Grace Poe’s parents are Filipinos. Grace Poe's physical features are typical of Filipinos .Since,she was abandoned as an infant in a municipality where the population of the Philippines is overwhelmingly Filipinos such that there would be more than 99% chance that a child born in such province is a Filipino is also a circumstantial evidence of her parents’ nationality. That high probability and the evidence on which it is based are admissible under Rule 128, Section 4 of the Revised Rules on Evidence. To assume otherwise is to accept the absurd, if not the virtually impossible, as the norm. Second, by votes of 7-5, the Supreme Court pronounced and said that foundlings are as natural-born citizens. This is based on the finding that the deliberations of the 1934 Constitutional Convention manifests that the framers intended foundlings to be covered by the enumeration.

The presumption of natural-born citizenship of foundlings stems from the presumption that their parents are nationals of the Philippines. It is apparent from the enumeration of who are citizens under the present Constitution that there are only two classes of citizens: (1) those who are natural-born and (2) those who are naturalized in accordance with law. A citizen who is not a naturalized Filipino, ie., did not have to undergo the process of naturalization to obtain Philippine citizenship, necessarily is a natural-born Filipino.

Second , Yes. Grace Poe fulfilled the requirements of animus manendi coupled with animus revertendi in acquiring a new domicile. Grace Poe’s domicile had been timely changed as of May 24, 2005, and not on July 18, 2006 when her application under RA 9225 was permitted by the COMELEC’s reliance on cases which decree that an alien’s stay in the country cannot be counted unless she acquires a permanent resident visa or reacquires her Filipino citizenship is without merit. Such cases are different from the circumstances in this case, in which Grace Poe presented an overwhelming and somehow an accurate evidence of her actual stay and intent to abandon permanently her domicile in the US. Coupled with her eventual application to reacquire Philippine citizenship and her family’s actual continuous stay in the Philippines over the years, it is clear that when Grace Poe returned on May 24, 2005, the stay was for good.

Third, No. The COMELEC cannot cancel, deny or reject her Certificate of Candidacy on the ground that she misrepresented facts as to her citizenship and residency because such facts refer to grounds for ineligibility in which the COMELEC has no jurisdiction to decide upon. Only when there is a prior authority finding that a candidate is suffering from a disqualification provided by law or the Constitution that the COMELEC may deny due course or cancel her candidacy on ground of false representations regarding her qualifications. In this case, by authority of the Supreme Court Grace Poe was pronounced qualified as a candidate for the presidency. Hence, there cannot be any false representations in her COC regarding her citizenship and residency.

                                                                          PREPARED BY:

                                                                                              IRISH V. DE RAMA

                                                                                               Law Student

Case Digest:Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC

(IRISH V. DE RAMA, Ed.D.)

ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS vs COMELEC

(September 18, 1995, , G.R. No. 119976)

FACTS:

Imelda, a little over 8 years old, in or about 1938, established her domicile in Tacloban, Leyte where she studied and graduated high school in the Holy Infant Academy from 1938 to 1949.  She then pursued her college degree, education, in St. Paul’s College now Divine Word University also in Tacloban.  Subsequently, she taught in Leyte Chinese School still in Tacloban.  She went to manila during 1952 to work with her cousin, the late speaker Daniel Romualdez in his office in the House of Representatives.  In 1954, she married late President Ferdinand Marcos when he was still a Congressman of Ilocos Norte and was registered there as a voter.  When Pres. Marcos was elected as Senator in 1959, they lived together in San Juan, Rizal where she registered as a voter.  In 1965, when Marcos won presidency, they lived in Malacanang Palace and registered as a voter in San Miguel Manila.  She served as member of the Batasang Pambansa and Governor of Metro Manila during 1978.

Imelda Romualdez-Marcos was running for the position of Representative of the First District of Leyte for the 1995 Elections.  Cirilo Roy Montejo, the incumbent Representative of the First District of Leyte and also a candidate for the same position, filed a “Petition for Cancellation and Disqualification" with the Commission on Elections alleging that petitioner did not meet the constitutional requirement for residency.  The petitioner, in an honest misrepresentation, wrote seven months under residency, which she sought to rectify by adding the words "since childhood" in her Amended/Corrected Certificate of Candidacy filed on March 29, 1995 and that "she has always maintained Tacloban City as her domicile or residence.  She arrived at the seven months residency due to the fact that she became a resident of the Municipality of Tolosa in said months.

ISSUE: Whether petitioner has gratified the 1year residency constraint to be eligible in running as representative of the First District of Leyte. Election

HELD:

Residence is used synonymously with domicile for election purposes.  The court are in favor of a conclusion supporting petitoner’s claim of legal residence or domicile in the First District of Leyte despite her own declaration of 7 months residency in the district for the following reasons:

1.  A minor follows domicile of her parents.  Tacloban became Imelda’s domicile of origin by operation of law when her father brought them to Leyte; 

2.  Domicile of origin is only lost when there is actual removal or change of domicile, a bona fide intention of abandoning the former residence and establishing a new one, and acts which correspond with the purpose.  In the absence and concurrence of all these, domicile of origin should be deemed to continue.  

3.  A wife does not automatically gain the husband’s domicile because the term “residence” in Civil Law does not mean the same thing in Political Law.  When Imelda married late President Marcos in 1954, she kept her domicile of origin and merely gained a new home and not domicilium necessarium.  

4.  Assuming that Imelda gained a new domicile after her marriage and acquired right to choose a new one only after the death of Pres. Marcos, her actions upon returning to the country clearly indicated that she chose Tacloban, her domicile of origin, as her domicile of choice.  To add, petitioner even obtained her residence certificate in 1992 in Tacloban, Leyte while living in her brother’s house, an act, which supports the domiciliary intention clearly manifested.  She even kept close ties by establishing residences in Tacloban, celebrating most of her Important milestones in life.

WHEREFORE, having determined that petitioner possesses the necessary residence qualifications to run for a seat in the House of Representatives in the First District of Leyte, the COMELEC's questioned Resolutions dated April 24, May 7, May 11, and May 25, 1995 are hereby SET ASIDE. Respondent COMELEC is hereby directed to order the Provincial Board of Canvassers to proclaim petitioner as the duly elected Representative of the First District of Leyte.

WHEREFORE, having indomitable personality that petitioner possesses the necessary residence qualifications to run for a seat in the House of Representatives in the First District of Leyte, the COMELEC's questioned Resolutions dated April 24, May 7, May 11, and May 25, 1995 are hereby SET ASIDE. Respondent COMELEC is hereby directed to order the Provincial Board of Canvassers to proclaim petitioner as the duly elected Representative of the First District of Leyte.

                                                                          PREPARED BY:

IRISH V. DE RAMA

                                                                                               Law Student