4/21/2019 G.R. No. 132774 June 21, 1999 - RODOLFO E. AGUINALDO v.

ALDO v. COMELEC : JUNE 1999 - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRU…

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™

Like 0 Tweet Share

Search

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1999 > June 1999 Decisions > G.R. No. 132774 June 21, 1999 -
RODOLFO E. AGUINALDO v. COMELEC:

Custom Search
Search

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 132774. June 21, 1999.]

RODOLFO E. AGUINALDO, FLORENCIO L. VARGAS, ROMEO I. CALUBAQUIB, AMADO T.

GONZALES, SILVERIO C. SALVANERA, ALBERTA O. QUINTO, and AURORA V. ESTABILLO,
Petitioners, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.

RESOLUTION

QUISUMBING, J.:

Before us is a petition for prohibition under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court, with a prayer for the
issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction and/or a temporary restraining order. cralawnad

Petitioners, at the time of the filing of the petition, were incumbent provincial or municipal officials in
Cagayan. Petitioner Rodolfo E. Aguinaldo was governor; Florencio L. Vargas, vice governor; Romeo I.
Calubaquib, member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan; Amado T. Gonzales, member of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan; Silverio C. Salvanera, member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan; Alberta O. Quinto, mayor
of the municipality of Peñablanca; and Aurora V. Estabillo, mayor of the municipality of Sta. Praxedes.

Petitioners seek to prevent the COMELEC from enforcing during the 1998 elections Section 67 of the
Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881) "in accordance with its own tenor or as modified by paragraph 3 of
Section 11 of Republic Act No. 8436." cralaw virtua1aw library

Section 67 of the Omnibus Election Code reads:

DebtKollect Company, Inc.
jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SECTION 67. Candidates holding elective office. — Any elective official, whether national or local,
running for any office other than the one which he is holding in a permanent capacity, except for
President and Vice-President, shall be considered ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his
certificate of candidacy."
chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

On the other hand, the third paragraph of Section 11 of R.A. No. 8436 reads: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SECTION 11. Official Ballot. —

www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1999junedecisions.php?id=435 1/5
4/21/2019 G.R. No. 132774 June 21, 1999 - RODOLFO E. AGUINALDO v. COMELEC : JUNE 1999 - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRU…
ChanRobles Intellectual Property
Division
June-1999 Jurisprudence
G.R. No. 90419 June 1, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ROMANO VIDAL ET AL.
G.R. No. 124491 June 1, 1999 - ROQUE VICARIO v.
COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 122107 June 2, 1999 - CMP FEDERAL
SECURITY AGENCY v. NLRC, ET AL.
G.R. No. 119359 June 8, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. CELESTINO D. PAYOT
G.R. No. 128899 June 8, 1999 - AMERICAN
EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET
AL.
G.R. Nos. 121462-63 June 9, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. CIPRIANO DE VERA
G.R. No. 127815 June 9, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. STEPHEN SANTILLANA
A.C. No. 4411 June 10, 1999 - JAIME CURIMATMAT
v. FELIPE GOJAR
A.C. - CBD No. 471 June 10, 1999 - LT. LAMBERTO
P. VILLAFLOR v. ALVIN T. SARITA
G.R. No. 115794 June 10, 1999 - ANASTACIO
MANANGAN v. ANGEL DELOS REYES, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 122909-12 June 10, 1999 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHIL. v. VICTOR REÑOLA
G.R. No. 123417 June 10, 1999 - JAIME MORTA, SR.
v. JAIME OCCIDENTAL, ET AL.
G.R. No. 126143 June 10, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ALFONSO BADON, ET AL.
G.R. No. 128181 June 10, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. BONIFACIO RADA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 131692 June 10, 1999 - FELIPE YULIENCO
v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1999junedecisions.php?id=435
. . . Provided, That any elective official whether national or local, running for any office other than the
one he/she is holding in a permanent capacity, except for president and vice-president, shall be deemed
resigned only upon the start of the campaign period corresponding to the position for which he/she is
running; . . ." cralaw virtua1aw library
Petitioners contend that Section 67, of the Omnibus Election Code is violative of the equal protection
clause of the Constitution, as its classification of persons running for office is not a valid classification,
following the guidelines laid down by the Court in People v. Cayat. 1 According to the doctrine laid down
in Cayat, for a classification to be valid, (1) it must be based upon substantial distinctions, (2) it must be
germane to the purpose of the law, (3) it must not be limited to existing conditions only, and (4) it must
apply equally to all members of the same class. chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Petitioners contend that the classification in Section 67 is not based on substantial distinctions and, thus,
violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
According to petitioners, candidates for elective office are classified into the following groups under
Section 67: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"(a) First classification: an incumbent elective official who runs for the same position as his present
incumbency. . . (and) another incumbent elective official running for another position; and
(b) Second Classification: an incumbent elective official who runs for president or vice-president. . . (and)
another incumbent elective [official] running for any other position (i.e., not his incumbency nor for
president or vice president) . . ." 2 chanrobles lawlibrary : rednad
Petitioners argue that, in the first classification, the reelectionist is given an undue advantage since he is
able to use the resources, prestige, and influence of his position. The same is not available to one
seeking an office different from the one he is presently holding. This, according to petitioners, does not
equalize the playing field for all candidates.
As regards the second classification, petitioners argue that there is no basis for giving candidates for
president or vice president the "special privilege" 3 of remaining in office.
Petitioners claim that the classifications result into "absurd or unwanted and difficult situations" 4 and
give the following examples: (1) a mayor who runs for president remains as mayor even though he is
physically absent from his city or municipality because he campaigns nationwide; (2) a councilor or vice
mayor who runs for mayor is considered resigned from his position although he remains physically
present in his locality; (3) a president — a national official — who runs for a lower position is considered
resigned from office, while the mayor — a local official — who runs for president is not.
Petitioners contend that the classifications "could have been made without sufficient study," 5 as the
Omnibus Election Code was passed during the Marcos years, "when no one could honestly believe he
could be elected president or even vice president." 6 Also during that time, members of the Batasang
Pambansa could run for reelection indefinitely so it was not likely for any of them to run for a "lower"
position. Petitioners say that Section 67 was "largely ignored as an innocous (sic) oddity." 7 Their "thesis
therefore is that the provision did not get sufficient attention and analysis that would have brought out its
constitutional infirmities." 8 cralawnad
Petitioners also argue that Section 67 effectively shortens the terms of office of elected officials, in
violation of Article X, Section 8 of the Constitution, which provides: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"SECTION 8. The term of office of elective local officials, except barangay officials, which shall be
determined by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more than three consecutive
terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an
interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected." cralaw virtua1aw library
Petitioners lament that "no relevant discussions" 9 seem to have been made in relation to the "re-
enactment" of Section 67 of the Omnibus Election Code into Section 11 of R.A. No. 8436.
The COMELEC, on the other hand, asserts that the classification embodied in Section 67 is reasonable
and based on substantial distinction. It points out that incumbents running for the same position are not
considered resigned because the intention of the law is to allow them to continue serving their
constituents and avoid a disruption in the delivery of essential services. Those running for different
positions are considered resigned because they are considered to have abandoned their present position
by their act of running for other posts. chanroblesvirtual|awlibrary
For his part, the Solicitor General points out that the issue regarding Section 67 had already been passed
upon by the Court in the case of Dimaporo v. Mitra, Jr. 10
Mohammad Ali Dimaporo was a congressman representing the second legislative district of Lanao del Sur.
On January 15, 1990, he filed a certificate of candidacy for the position of governor of the Autonomous
Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). The COMELEC thereafter informed the House of Representatives of
this matter. Then House Speaker Ramon V. Mitra, Jr. and the Secretary of the House of Representatives
Camilo L. Sabio excluded his name from the roll of members.
Dimaporo lost in the ARMM elections. He wrote Mitra a letter expressing his desire to resume his
functions as a member of the House of Representatives. It appears that this did not materialize; thus,
Dimaporo filed a petition with the Supreme Court praying for his reinstatement.
Dimaporo claimed that his act of filing a certificate of candidacy for another position did not divest him of
his seat as a member of the House of Representatives. He alleged that Section 67 of the Omnibus
Election Code was no longer operative as it is violative of the Constitution. Dimaporo said Section 67
shortens the term of office of a congressman on a ground not provided for under Article XVIII, Section 2
of the Constitution, 11 in relation to Article VI, Section 7. 12 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Dimaporo asserted that, as provided by law, the term of a member of the House of Representatives may
only be shortened through the following: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
(1) Forfeiture of his seat by holding any other office or employment in the government or any
subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof; including government-owned or controlled corporations or
subsidiaries; 13
(2) Expulsion as a disciplinary action for disorderly behavior; 14
(3) Disqualification as determined by resolution of the Electoral Tribunal in all election contest; 15 and
(4) Voluntary renunciation of office. 16 chanrobles law library
The Court proceeded to trace the history and examine the rationale behind Section 67. We then ruled: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
". . . rather than cut short the term of office of elective public officials, this statutory provision seeks to
ensure that such officials serve out their entire term of office by discouraging them from running for
another public office and thereby cutting short their tenure by making it clear that should they fail in
2/5
4/21/2019 G.R. No. 132774 June 21, 1999 - RODOLFO E. AGUINALDO v. COMELEC : JUNE 1999 - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRU…
G.R. No. 118985 June 14, 1999 - COCA COLA
BOTTLERS v. JOSE S. ROQUE, ET AL.
G.R. No. 121739 June 14, 1999 - PNB v. COURT OF
APPEALS
G.R. No. 121930 June 14, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. LOREDO REAL
G.R. No. 137172 June 15, 1999 - UCPB GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. v. MASAGANA TELAMART
G.R. No. 118423 June 16, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. CESARIO SANCHEZ
G.R. No. 120270 June 16, 1999 - MANOLITO
BARLES, ET AL. v. BENEDICTO ERNESTO BITONIO, ET
AL.
G.R. No. 126768 June 16, 1999 - ELISEO FAVILA,
ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.
G.R. No. 103949 June 17, 1999 - DIRECTOR OF
LANDS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 104319 June 17, 1999 - CAROLINA
CASTILLO v. NLRC, ET AL.
G.R. No. 106648 June 17, 1999 - AUDION ELECTRIC
CO. v. NLRC, ET AL.
G.R. No. 122423 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ILDEFONSO PUERTOLLANO
G.R. No. 123109 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. JUAN TACLAN, ET AL.
G.R. No. 124097 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. CARLOS BONGHANOY
G.R. No. 126367 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. DIONISIO S. MONFERO
G.R. No. 127452 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ISAGANI LUARTES
G.R. No. 128222 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. CHUA HO SAN
G.R. No. 128818 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. FELICIANO U. SAGAYSAY
G.R. Nos. 130206-08 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHIL. v. MARIANO PALMA
G.R. No. 130514 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ABUNDIO TOLENTINO
G.R. No. 131104 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. RIZALINO P. REBOSE
G.R. No. 132024 June 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. LEONARDO BIHISON
G.R. No. 124605 June 18, 1999 - ENRIQUITO
SERNA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
A.M. No. MTJ-98-1165 June 21, 1999 - EXEQUIEL P.
DOMINGO v. LUIS ENRIQUEZ REYES, ET AL.
A.M. No. RTJ-99-1445 June 21, 1999 - VENTURA B.
AYO v. LUCIA VIOLAGO-ISNANI, ET AL.
A.M. No. 99-1-16-RTC June 21, 1999 - REQUEST OF
JUDGE IRMA ZITA V. MASAMAYOR
G.R. No. 101439 June 21, 1999 - GSIS v. COURT OF
APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 106060 June 21, 1999 - EMILIE T.
SUMBAD, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 112539 June 21, 1999 - NATIONAL SUGAR
REFINERIES CORP. v. NLRC, ET AL.
G.R. No. 117685 June 21, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ALFONSO R. BAUTISTA
G.R. No. 121646 June 21, 1999 - CLARO L.
MONTECER, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 126116 June 21, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ERLINDO YAM-ID
G.R. No. 128892 June 21, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. PEPITO TEJERO
G.R. No. 128986 June 21, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 130379 June 21, 1999 - GSIS v. ANGELITA
L. GABRIEL
G.R. No. 130640 June 21, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. SHAREFF ALI EL AKHTAR
G.R. No. 130652 June 21, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. NOEL S. DIAZ
G.R. No. 132774 June 21, 1999 - RODOLFO E.
AGUINALDO v. COMELEC
www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1999junedecisions.php?id=435
their candidacy, they cannot go back to their former position. This is consonant with the constitutional
edict that all public officials must serve the people with utmost loyalty and not trifle with the mandate
which they have received from their constituents." 17
Indeed, we have dealt squarely with the issue of the validity of Section 67 of the Omnibus Election Code
in Dimaporo v. Mitra, Jr.
Section 67 was crafted with the intention of giving flesh to the constitutional pronouncement that public
service is a public trust. The following portion of our ruling in Dimaporo is apropos: chanroblesvirtualawlibrary
"Assemblyman Manuel M. Garcia, in answer to the query of Assemblyman Arturo Tolentino on the
constitutionality of Cabinet Bill No. 2,18 said: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"MR. GARCIA (M.M.): chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, on the part of the Committee, we made this proposal based on constitutional grounds. We
did not propose this amendment mainly on the rationale as stated by the Gentlemen from Manila that the
officials running for office other than the ones they are holding will be considered resigned not because of
abuse of facilities of power or the use of office facilities but primarily because under our Constitution we
have this new chapter on accountability of public officers . . .
x x x
. . . This only means that all elective public officials should honor the mandate they have gotten from the
people. . . a Batasan Member who hold (sic) himself out with the people and seek (sic) their support and
mandate should not be allowed to deviate or allow himself to run for any other position unless he
relinquishes or abandons his office. Because his mandate to the people is to serve for 6 years. Now if you
allow a Batasan or a governor or a mayor who was mandated to serve for 6 years to file for an office
other than the one he was elected to, then that clearly shows that he has not (sic) intention to service
the mandate of the people which was placed upon him and therefore he should be considered ipso facto
resigned. I think; more than anything that is the accountability that the Constitution requires of elective
public officials . . ." 19 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary:red
Section 67 is not violative of the Constitution as it does not unduly cut short the term of office of local
officials. The situation that results with the application of Section 67 is covered by the term "voluntary
renunciation" .
"Even then, the concept of voluntary renunciation of office under Section 7, Article VI of the Constitution
is broad enough to include the situation envisioned in Section 67, Article IX of B.P. Blg. 881. As discussed
by the Constitutional Commissioners: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"MR. MAAMBONG: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Could I address the clarificatory question to the Committee? The term ‘voluntary renunciation’ does not
only appear in Section 3; it appears in Section 6.
MR. DAVIDE: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Yes.
MR. MAAMBONG:
chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
It is also a recurring phrase all over the constitution. Could the Committee please enlighten us exactly
what ‘voluntary renunciation’ means? Is this akin to abandonment?
MR. DAVIDE: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Abandonment is voluntary. In other words, he cannot circumvent the restriction by merely resigning at
any given time on the second term. chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary:red
MR. MAAMBONG: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Is the Committee saying that the term voluntary renunciation is more general than abandonment and
resignation?
MR DAVIDE: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
It is more general, more embracing." cralaw virtua1aw library
That the act, contemplated in Section 67, Article IX of B.P. Blg. 881, of filing a certificate of candidacy for
another office constitutes an overt, concrete act of voluntary renunciation of the elective office presently
being held is evident from this exchange between the Members of Parliament Arturo Tolentino and Jose
Roño:
jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"MR. ROÑO: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
My reasonable ground is this: if you will make the person. . . my, shall we say, basis is that in one case
the person is intending to run for an office which is different from his own, and therefore it should be
considered, at least from the legal significance, an intention to relinquish his office.
MR. TOLENTINO: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Yes.
MR. ROÑO:
chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
And in the other, because he is running for the same position, it is otherwise.
chanrobles.com : virtual law library
MR. TOLENTINO: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Yes, but what I cannot see is why are you going to compel a person to quit an office which he is only
intending to leave? A relinquishment of office must be clear, must be definite.
MR. ROÑO: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Yes, sir. That’s precisely, Mr. Speaker, what I’m saying that while I do not disagree with the conclusion
that the intention cannot be enough, but I am saying that the filing of the certificate of candidacy is an
overt act of such intention. It s not just an intention: it’s already there." 20
Our foregoing ruling in Dimaporo is still applicable in this case.
3/5
4/21/2019 G.R. No. 132774 June 21, 1999 - RODOLFO E. AGUINALDO v. COMELEC : JUNE 1999 - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRU…

G.R. No. 132841 June 21, 1999 - CARMEN ALIPAT
v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 134293 June 21, 1999 - KAISER B.
RECABO v. COMELEC, ET AL.
Petitioners further assert that Section 67 "could have been formulated without sufficient study (Emphasis
supplied)." Petitioners? choice of words betray their own uncertainty as to whether or not the implications
of Section 67 were thoroughly analyzed before such section became law. Unfortunately for petitioners,
uncertainties do not justify nullification of a law.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary:red

G.R. Nos. 116196-97 June 23, 1999 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHIL. v. PABLO ADOVISO
G.R. No. 120473 June 23, 1999 - ULTRA VILLA
FOOD HAUS v. RENATO GENISTON, ET AL.
Moreover, it must be pointed out that this present petition is one for prohibition which is a preventive
remedy. The act sought to be enjoined had already been accomplished with the holding of the 1998
elections. Prohibition, as a rule, does not lie to restrain an act that is already a fait accompli. 21
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby dismissed for lack of merit.

G.R. No. 121345 June 23, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE SO ORDERED.

PHIL. v. SY BING YOK
Davide, Jr., C.J., Romero Bellosillo, Melo, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Purisima, Buena, Gonzaga-Reyes and
G.R. No. 129676 June 23, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concur.
PHIL. v. CARLOS BOCO, ET AL.
Puno, J., took no part; on official leave.
A.M. No. P-99-1314 June 25, 1999 - ROSANNA V.
CASALME, ET AL. v. MARVIN S. RIVERA, ET AL.
Panganiban, J., is on leave.
G.R. No. 100812 June 25, 1999 - FRANCISCO
MOTORS CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL. Pardo, J., took no part.

G.R. No. 127105 June 25, 1999 - COMMISSIONER

OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. S.C. JOHNSON AND SON, ET Endnotes:
AL.

G.R. No. 127969 June 25, 1999 - REPUBLIC OF THE

PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
1. 68 Phil. 12 (1939).

G.R. No. 129033 June 25, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE 2. Rollo, p. 10.
PHIL. v. HIPOLITO BERMUDEZ, ET AL.
3. Id. at 12.
G.R. No. 130030 June 25, 1999 - EXPERTRAVEL &
TOURS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL. 4. Ibid.

G.R. No. 130189 June 25, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE 5. Rollo, p. 14.
PHIL. v. DOMINGO R. MULETA
6. Ibid.
G.R. No. 132593 June 25, 1999 - PHIL.
INTERNATIONAL TRADING CORP. v. COMMISSION ON
AUDIT 7. Rollo, p. 15.

G.R. No. 105912 June 28, 1999 - TEOFILO C. 8. Ibid.

VILLARICO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
9. Ibid.
G.R. Nos. 110855-56 June 28, 1999 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHIL. v. DEWING V. CAÑETA, ET AL. 10. 202 SCRA 779 (1991).

G.R. No. 112451 June 28, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE 11. This provision reads, "The Senators, Members of the House of Representatives and the
PHIL. v. JOSE BITOON, ET AL. local officials first elected under this Constitution shall serve until noon of June 30, 1992." cralaw

G.R. No. 124005 June 28, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE

virtua1aw library

PHIL. v. TOMAS ABLOG

12. "The Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of three
G.R. No. 125212 June 28, 1999 - EUGENIO years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of
BALUGO, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL. June next following their election . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library

G.R. No. 130421 June 28, 1999 - AMERICAN HOME 13. CONST., Art VI, Sec. 13.
ASSURANCE CO. v. ANTONIO CHUA
14. Id. at Sec. 16(3).
A.M. No. P-96-1183 June 29, 1999 - LUCINA L.
REGALADO v. LILIA S. BUENA 15. Id. at Sec. 17.
A.M. Nos. RTJ-96-1347 & RTJ-96-1348 June 29, 16. Id. at Sec. 7, par 2.
1999 - LEO C. TABAO v. PEDRO S. ESPINA

G.R. No. 95405 June 29, 1999 - SEMIRARA COAL
CORP. v. SECRETARY OF LABOR, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 121205-09 June 29, 1999 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHIL. v. CESAR LARENA
17. Dimaporo v. Mitra, supra, at 790.
18. This cabinet bill became the basis for Section 67 of the Omnibus Election Code.
19. Dimaporo v. Mitra, Jr., supra, at 788-789.

G.R. Nos. 124449-51 June 29, 1999 - PEOPLE OF 20. Dimaporo v. Mitra, Jr., supra, at 792-793.
THE PHIL. v. MANUEL ALITAGTAG
21. Vergara v. Rugue, 78 SCRA 312 (1977); Perez v. De la Cruz, 27 SCRA 587 (1969);
G.R. No. 125465 June 29, 1999 - AUGUSTO Cabañero v. Torres, 61 Phil. 522 (1935).
HONTIVEROS, ET AL. v. GREGORIO HONTIVEROS, ET
AL.

G.R. No. 125473 June 29, 1999 - CONSTANCIO

ESPIRITU v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

G.R. No. 127356 June 29, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE Back to Home | Back to Main
PHIL. v. DAVID SILVANO

G.R. No. 128315 June 29, 1999 - COMMISSIONER

OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. PASCOR REALTY AND QUICK SEARCH
DEV’T. CORP., ET AL.

G.R. No. 128384 June 29, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE

PHIL. v. REYNALDO SAHOR BAÑAGO 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908

G.R. No. 129449 June 29, 1999 - CISELL A. KIAMCO 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916
v. NLRC, ET AL. 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
G.R. No. 129691 June 29, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932
PHIL. v. JOSE LOMBOY 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940

G.R. No. 130800 June 29, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948
PHIL. v. GUILLERMO NEPOMUCENO 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956
G.R. No. 131109 June 29, 1999 - INTERNATIONAL 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964
SCHOOL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL. 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972

G.R. No. 132369 June 29, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
PHIL. v. REMEGIO RUIZ 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1999junedecisions.php?id=435 4/5
4/21/2019 G.R. No. 132774 June 21, 1999 - RODOLFO E. AGUINALDO v. COMELEC : JUNE 1999 - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRU…
G.R. No. 133317 June 29, 1999 - ANTONIO R. 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
AGRA, ET AL. v. PNB
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
G.R. No. 119974 June 30, 1999 - RUPERTO L. 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
VILORIA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

G.R. No. 124049 June 30, 1999 - RODOLFO P.

VELASQUEZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

Main Indices of the Library ---> Go!

Copyright © 1998 - 2019 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™ RED

www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1999junedecisions.php?id=435 5/5