Xi. How Do We Hold Public Officers Accountable?: Mateo CAASI v. CA and Merito Miguel Facts

XI. HOW DO WE HOLD PUBLIC OFFICERS ACCOUNTABLE?
Miguel’s opponent, Caasi also filed a petition for quo warranto.

Mateo CAASI v. CA and Merito Miguel Miguel filed a Motion to Dismiss which was denied by the RTC.
Facts: CA ordered the RTC to dismiss and desist from further proceeding in
the quo warranto case on the ground that the COMELEC has already
This is a consolidated case on the disqualification under Section 68 ruled on his qualifications.
of the Omnibus Election Code of the private respondent, Merito
Miguel for the position of municipal mayor of Bolinao, Pangasinan, ISSUE:
to which he was elected in the local elections of January 18, 1988, WON Merito Miguel’s green card is a proof to disqualify him from
on the ground that he is a green card holder, hence, a permanent his elected office -YES
resident of the United States of America, not of Bolinao.
RULING:
Merito Miguel won in the 1988 mayoral elections in Bolinao,
Pangasinan. Petitions were filed seeking to disqualify him on the Section 18 article XI: Any officer who seeks to change citizenship
ground that he holds a green card issued to him by the US during the tenure should be dealt by law. This section cannot be
Immigration Service which would mean that he is a permanent used against the respondent since he acquired his green card prior
resident of the United States, and not of Bolinao. to being elected to office.
COMELEC dismissed the petitions on the ground that possession of Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code: Permanent residence of
a green card by Miguel does not sufficiently establish that he has an immigrant shall not be qualified to run unless the status is
abandoned his residence in the Philippines. waived.
On the contrary, despite his green card, he has sufficiently indicated Based from the green card issued by the US, the front clearly and
his intention to continuously reside in Bolinao as shown by his explicitly shows in bold letter the words “RESIDENT ALIEN,” while
having voted in successive elections in said municipality. the back shows his intention to reside permanently in US.
In Commissioner Badoy’s dissent (in the case filed to the COMELEC), This is enough evidence to show that respondent did
a green card holder either means that he is a permanent resident of waive his residency in the Philippines when he acquired his green
or an immigrant of a foreign country. The respondent having card.
admitted that he is a green card holder, it is now incumbent upon
him, under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code, to prove that Therefore, what he should have done was to file his waiver of the
he has waived his status as a permanent resident or immigrant to permanent residence in the US. The mere act of filing certificate of
be qualified to run for elected office, but the respondent didn’t do candidacy for elective office in the Philippine did not constitute as a
such waiver.
waiver of permanent residence in US.
There must be an independent act or act prior to filing of Certificate

of Candidacy. Furthermore, Miguel did not possess the qualification
of residency since he only resided in Pangasisnan 3 months after his
return from the US prior to election.
In banning from elective public office Philippine citizens who are

permanent residents or immigrants of a foreign country, the
Omnibus Election Code has laid down a clear policy of excluding
from the right to hold elective public office those Philippine citizens
who possess dual loyalties and allegiance.
The law has reserved that privilege for its citizens who have cast
their lot with our country "without mental reservations or purpose
of evasion." The assumption is that those who are resident aliens of
a foreign country are incapable of such entire devotion to the
interest and welfare of their homeland for with one eye on their
public duties here, they must keep another eye on their duties
under the laws of the foreign country of their choice in order to
preserve their status as permanent residents thereof.
WHEREFORE, the appealed orders of the COMELEC and CA are

aside. The election of respondent Merito C. Miguel as municipal
mayor of Bolinao, Pangasinan is hereby ANNULED.

Xi. How Do We Hold Public Officers Accountable?: Mateo CAASI v. CA and Merito Miguel Facts

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Xi. How Do We Hold Public Officers Accountable?: Mateo CAASI v. CA and Merito Miguel Facts

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Xi. How Do We Hold Public Officers Accountable?: Mateo CAASI v. CA and Merito Miguel Facts

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

XI. HOW DO WE HOLD PUBLIC OFFICERS ACCOUNTABLE?

Miguel’s opponent, Caasi also filed a petition for quo warranto.

There must be an independent act or act prior to filing of Certificate

In banning from elective public office Philippine citizens who are

WHEREFORE, the appealed orders of the COMELEC and CA are

You might also like