Lucagbo, Maranatha Shekinah C.

Legal Writing September 23, 2021

DIMAPORO VS MITRA

202 SCRA 779

FACTS:

Mohammad Ali Dimaporo was elected as representative of the second legislative

district of Lanao del Sur in the 1987 Congressional elections. In 1990, he filed his
certificate of candidacy for the position of Regional Governor of the Autonomous Region
in Muslim Mindanao.

Upon learning about this development, the speaker and secretary of the house of
representative excluded the Dimaporo’s name from the roll of Members of the House of
Representative pursuant to Sec 67, Article IX of the omnibus election code.

When Dimaporo lost the election, he sent a letter to Speaker Mitra expressing his
intention to resume performing his duties and functions as elected member of congress.
However, he was not able to regain his seat in the congress.

The petitioner claims that Sec 67, Article IX of the omnibus election code is not
operative under the present constitution which provides specific grounds by which the
term of members of the house are shortened.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Dimaporo is still entitled to his seat in Congress even after he has filed
his candidacy for another Government Position (Regional Governor of ARMM)

RULING:

NO. According to the Court, Dimaporo failed to discern that rather than to cut short the
term of the 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 their candidacy, they cannot go back to their former position. This is
consonant with the constitutional mandate that all public officials must serve the people
with utmost loyalty and not trifle with the mandate which they have received from their
constituents.
In the case at bar, “term” and “tenure” were differentiated. The term of office prescribed
by the Constitution may not be extended or shortened by the legislature. However, the
period during which an officer actually holds the office (tenure) may be affected by
circumstances within or beyond the power of said officer. Tenure may be shorter than
the term or it may not even exist at all.

Under the questioned provision, when an elective official files a certificate of candidacy
for another office, he is deemed to have voluntarily cut short his tenure, NOT his term.
The term remains and his successor, if any, is allowed to serve its unexpired portion.