2 note the board of canvassers notwithstanding the

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ers on the day of the election wrote Martin de Guzman instead of casting the same in the name of his son, Joel de Guzman. Should the votes be counted in favor of Joel? A: Yes. As a general rule, the same will be considered as stray votes but will not invalidate the whole ballot. Exception is when the substitute carries the same family name. (Sec. 12, R.A 9006) Q: In the 1998 election, Mayor Miranda already served 8 consecutive terms, yet he still filed a CoC. As a result, Abaya filed a disqualification case. COMELEC then disqualified Miranda and cancelled his CoC. The son of Miranda, Joel, upon nomination of their political party, filed a certificate of substitute. Joel Miranda won. Was the substitution valid? A: There was no valid substitution. COMELEC did not only disqualify Miranda but also cancelled his CoC. Therefore, he cannot be validly substituted. A disqualified candidate may only be substituted if he had a valid CoC because if the disqualified candidate did not have a valid and seasonably filed CoC, he is and was not a candidate at all. (Miranda v. Abaya, G.R. No. 136351, July 28, 1999) Q: Since there was no valid substitution, should the candidate who obtained the second highest vote be proclaimed? Who will then assume the position of mayorship? A: No. Under the doctrine on the rejection of second placer, the second placer is just like that— second placer. He was not the choice of the electorate. The wreath of victory cannot be transferred to the repudiated loser. Following the rule on succession, it is the Vice‐Mayor who will assume the position of mayorship. (Cayat v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 163776, Apr. 24, 2010) Q: What is the effect of reacquisition of Philippine citizenship as to the domicile/residence requirement for running as a mayoralty candidate? A: Reacquisition of Philippine citizenship under R.A. 9225 has no automatic impact or effect on a candidate’s residence/domicile. He merely has an option to again establish his domicile in the municipality, which place shall become his new domicile of choice. The length of his residence therein shall be determined from the time he made it his domicile of choice and it shall not retroact to the time of his birth. (Japson v. COMELEC, G.R .No. 180088, Jan. 19,2009) Q: May a second placer be declared elected? A: GR: No. XPN: 1. If the one who obtained the highest n...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/12/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online