Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

Cordora v COMELEC

FACTS:
Petitioner alleges that private respondent Tambunting is not
eligible to run for public office because he lacked citizenship
requirements and residency requirements necessary for said
office. Petitioner claims that Tambunting is not a Filipino citizen
but a naturalized American citizen. Tambunting on the other
hand says that he is born of a Filipino mother and an American
father therefore making him a dual citizen and not a naturalized
American citizen. Private respondent also stated that he took an
oath of allegiance by virtue of R.A. 9225 (Citizen Retention and
Reacquisition act of 2003) and he resided in the Philippines
since birth.
The COMELEC dismissed the complaint because petitioner
failed to substantiate his claim but commissioner Sarmiento
pointed out that Tambunting can be considered a person with
dual citizenship but he effectively renounced his American
citizenship when he filed the certificate of candidacy in 2001 and
2004 and ran for public office.
ISSUE:
Whether or not private respondent Tambunting is eligible for
public office?
DESICION:
Yes he is eligible for public office.
HELD:
The fact that he had dual citizenship did not disqualify him from
running for public office. In a previous case decided by the
Supreme Court it was held that dual citizenship is not a ground
for disqualification from running for any elective local position. In
cases of dual citizenship, where it is most of the time involuntary

to be one, when they run for public office they just have to elect
their Philippine citizenship to terminate their status as persons
with dual citizenship. The problem posits when it is an issue of
dual allegiance, which may be a ground for disqualification,
because it is a result of ones volition. One simply cannot govern
a place where their allegiance is not fully dedicated to the place
where they ought to serve.

Japzon v COMELEC

No he is not ineligible; he is eligible to be mayor.

FACTS:

HELD:

Japzon filed a petition to the COMELEC to disqualify Ty from


running for public office and the cancellation of the certificate of
candidacy. For the reason that Ty was not able to fulfill the
requirements in running for public office- he was not able to
renounce his foreign citizenship and he did not reside in East
Samar long enough to be able to run for public office. He
contended that private respondent left the Philippines from July
2006-January 2007 while still declaring his American citizenship.
Private respondent (Ty) admitted that he was a natural born
Filipino then went to the USA to work and then became a
naturalized citizen there. Ty contended that he already fulfilled
the necessary requirements to become a Filipino citizen once
again and to be able to run for public office. He was able to
apply for reacquisition of Philippine citizenship in Los Angeles
from the Philippine consulate general office. And on October
2005 he executed an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines in Los Angeles from the Vice Consul of the
Philippine Consulate General. And when he applied for a
Philippine Passport on October 26, 2005, he indicated that his
address was at east samar where he would reside. The
passport was approved and later he paid taxes in the said
address and obtained tax certificate from the said address. He
even became a registered voter in the said address. He then
renounced his citizenship by March 19, 2007. He had
reacquired Filipino Citizenship, renounced his American
citizenship, and lived in east Samar for more than a year prior to
the May 14, 2007 elections.

R.A. 9225 imposes no residency requirement for the


reacquisition or retention of Philippine citizenship on the current
residence of the concerned natural-born Filipino. Tys intent to
establish a new domicile of choice in eastern Samar became
apparent when he applied for a Philippine passport indicating
that his residence or domicile in the Philippines was at Mabini
St., Brgy 6, Poblacion, Gen McArthur, Eastern Samar,
Philippines. The Supreme Court held that the length of
residence shall be determined from the time he made it his
domicile of choice. The court sees no basis for it to require Ty to
never leave the address he stated, the fact that he returned
after his trips proved his intent to stay in the said address.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Ty is ineligible to be mayor of the Municipality of
General McArthur, Eastern Samar?
DECISION: