Atty. Julius Gregory Delgado
CAN AN INCUMBENT MAYOR OF ONE PROVINCE RUN AS GOVERNOR IN ANOTHER PROVINCE?
While people are interested and waiting for the ruling of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) on the disqualification cases filed against Presidential frontrunner Ferdinand “Bong-Bong” Marcos, a division of the poll body issued a ruling in the case involving the Gubernatorial race in the province of Sultan Kudarat. As a background, the election contests in the provinces of Maguindanao and Sultan Kudarat are intertwined and are royal battles of Mangudadatu family factions. The incumbent Governor of Sultan Kudarat is Hon. Suharto “Teng” Mangudadatu. The incumbent Governor of Maguindanao is his wife, Governor Bai Mariam Sangki-Mangudadatu. Bai Mariam will be challenged by former Governor and Second District Congressman Esmael “Toto” Mangudadatu. The son of Teng and Mariam, Datu Pax Ali, is the incumbent Mayor of the Municipality of Datu Abdullah Sangki in Maguindanao. He filed his Certificate of Candidacy for Governor of the Province of Sultan Kudarat hoping to succeed his father and is opposed by the wife of Toto, Sharifa Akeel-Mangudadatu.
Sharifa filed a Petition to Cancel the Certificate of Candidacy of Datu Pax Ali on alleged ground of lack of residency. While the case is expected to reach the COMELEC En Banc and eventually the Supreme Court, it appears that the former beauty queen is on her way to become the Governor of the Province of Sultan Kudarat as there is no other candidate vying for the position. In my opinion, it will be an uphill climb for Datu Pax Ali based on the doctrine in Domino vs. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 134015 (19 July 1999). In the said case, Mr. Juan Domino ran for Congressman for the Lone District of Sarangani in the 1998 Elections. His candidacy was challenged on alleged lack of residency requirement. In the said case, the Supreme Court held that a person’s “domicile” once established is considered to continue and will not be deemed lost until a new one is established. In Domino, the Supreme Court held that to successfully effect a change of domicile one must demonstrate an actual removal or an actual change of domicile; a bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a new one and definite acts which correspond with the purpose. In Latin, there should be animus manendi (purpose to remain in or at the domicile of choice for an indefinite period) and animus non revertendi (and intention to permanently abandon the old domicile).
In Domino, the Supreme Court held that Mr. Domino did not meet the criteria as he only leased a residence in his supposed new domicile of choice, i.e., Alabel, Saranggani Province. The Court also held that hid did not intend to abandon his former residence in Quezon City as he registered as voter in one of the precincts therein:
“Further, Domino’s lack of intention to abandon his residence in Quezon City is further strengthened by his act of registering as voter in one of the precincts in Quezon City. While voting is not conclusive of residence, it does give rise to a strong presumption of residence especially in this case where DOMINO registered in his former barangay. Exercising the right of election franchise is a deliberate public assertion of the fact of residence, and is said to have decided preponderance in a doubtful case upon the place the elector claims as, or believes to be, his residence. The fact that a party continuously voted in a particular locality is a strong factor in assisting to determine the status of his domicile.”
While Datu Pax Ali may easily establish animus manendi arguing he intends to permanently reside Sultan Kudarat arguing that his father is the incumbent Governor therein (unlike Domino who merely rented a house in Alabel), he may have a problem in terms of establishing animus non revertendi by the fact that he did not resign and continues to serve as Mayor of Datu Abdullah Sangki in Maguindanao Province. If in Domino, the Supreme Court took it against Mr. Domino that he still registered as voter in his former domicile of choice, Quezon City, what more in the case of Datu Pax Ali who continues to serve as Mayor of Datu Abdullah Sangki in Maguindanao. It will be difficult to convince the Supreme Court to suddenly change the prevailing doctrine on domicile as this may become a precedent, unless of course a pro hac vice (for this case only) ruling may be issued.