RODRIGUEZ v. COMELEC
Also,
G.R. No. 120099, July 24, 1996
Petitioner: Eduardo Rodriguez
Respondent: COMELEC, Bienvenido Marquez, Jr.
Doctrine:
- “Fugitive from justice” includes not only those who flee after conviction to avoid
punishment but also those who, after being charged, flee to avoid prosecution.
- Intent to evade is a compelling factor.
Facts:
(1) Rodriguez and Marquez were protagonists for the gubernatorial post of Quezon
Province in the May 1992 elections. Rodriguez won and was proclaimed duly-
elected governor.
(2) Marquez challenged Rodriguez’ victory via petition for quo warranto before the
COMELEC and revealed that Rodriguez left the US where as charge is pending
against the latter before the Los Angeles Municipal Court for fraudulent insurance
claims, grand theft and attempted grand theft of personal property. Rodriguez is,
thus, a fugitive from justice which is a ground for disqualification/ineligibity under
Sec. 40(3) of LGC.
(3) COMELEC dismissed Marquez’s quo warranto petition in a resolution on Feb. 1993,
and denied MR. Thus, Marquez filed a petition for certiorari before the SC (GR No.
112889). (This is different from the instant case which is for Marquez’
disqualification, which was filed while the said petition for certiorari was still
pending)
(4) Marquez main contention is that one is a fugitive from justice by the mere fact that
he leaves the jurisdiction where a charge is pending against him, regardless of
whether or not the charge has already been filed at the time of his flight.
Issue: WON Rodriquez is a fugitive from justice as contemplated by Sec. 40(e) of LGC based
on the alleged pendency of a criminal charge against him -> NO.
Held:
DEFINITION: In Marquez Jr. v. COMELEC (GR No. 112889 or “Marquez case”), Court held that
“fugitive from justice” includes not only those who flee after conviction to avoid punishment
but also those who, after being charged, flee to avoid prosecution. In that case, Court did not
rule in WON Rodriguez is a fugitive pursuant to the definition. To support his claim, Marquez
attached a certification from the Commission on Immigration to show that Rodriguez left 5
months prior to the institution of the criminal complaint, however, the MR was denied by SC
in that case.
COMELEC RULING DISCUSSION: After the Marquez Decision, COMELEC promulgated a
Consolidated Resolution for quo warranto case and disqualification case, holding that the
Commission En Banc unanimously agreed that Rodriguez is a “fugitive from justice” pursuant
to the definition. It was based on the documentary evidence 1: authenticated copy of warrant
1 his term without jeopardizing the interests of the public he serves.
These documents were presented ex-parte after Rodriguez walked-out of the hearing when his motion
for postponement was denied. This walk-out was considered as waiver of right to disprove authenticity
of said documents.
of arrest issued by LA Municipal Court and authenticated copy of felony complaint.
COMELEC held that the fact that Rodriguez’ wife was arrested in the US by Fraud Bureau
investigators does not rebut the presumption that he was aware of the charge before leaving
for the Philippines. Thus, COMELEC ordered to immediately vacate his office (as Govern of
Quezon Province) and was disqualified to run in the May 1995 elections.
Despite this, Rodriguez won in the May 1995 elections as Governor and was declared as such
by the Provincial Board of Canvassers. The COMELEC Consolidated Resolution and May 1995
Resolution suspending his proclamation gave rise to the filing of the instant petition for
certiorari (GR No 120099). Marquez filed an “Omnibus Motion to Annul the Proclamation of
Rodriguez, to Proclaim Marque and to Cite the Provincial Board of Canvassers in Contempt”
before COMELEC. This was deferred until final ruling in this instance case.
Marquez, then, filed a motion for TRO or prelim. injunction to restrain Rodriguez from
exercising the powers and functions of the position -> Court issued.
After receiving evidence, COMELEC reversed and declared that Rodriguez is NOT a fugitive
because intent to evade, as a material element, is absent. This is supported by evidence that
he had arrived in PH long before the criminal charge was instituted. COMELEC also held that
pursuant to jurisprudence cited, these facts constitute flight from justice: (a) a person
committed a ‘crime’ or has been charged for the commission thereof; and (b) thereafter,
leaves the jurisdiction of the court where said crime was committed or his usual place of
abode.
- Nevertheless, filing of charges it not always an antecedent requirement. Thus, the
mere fact that there are pending charges in the US and he was in the PH make him
a fugitive from justice.
SC: the aforestated definition from Marquez Decision indicates that intent to evade is the
compelling factor that animates one’s flght from a particular jurisdiction. There is intent
when there is knowledge of an already instituted indictment or of a promulgated judgment
of conviction.
Rodriguez’ case does not fit this concept. He arrived in the PH from US on June 25, 1985 as
per certifications issued by the Bureau of Immigrations (dated April 27 and June 26, 1995)
which preceded the filing of felony complaint in LA on Nov. 12, 1985 and of the issuance of
arrest warrant by almost 5 months. Clearly, it was impossible for him to have known. Court
cited COMELEC findings:
- The evidence of Rodriguez sufficiently proves that his compulsion to return to the
Philippines was due to his desire to join in the political campaigns against former
President Marcos
- When, in good faith, a person leaves the territory of a state not his own, homeward
bound, and learns subsequently of charges filed against him while in the relative
peace and service of his own country, the fact that he does not subject himself to
the jurisdiction of the former state does not qualify him outright as a fugitive from
justice.
- Rodriguez, being a public offer, could not have gone back to the US in the middle of
Sec. 40 (e) of LGC should be understood according to the definition in Marquez Decision.
Intent to evade must be established by proof that he has already been a conviction or at
least, a charge has already been filed, at the time of his flight. Not being a fugitive from
justice under the definition, Rodriguez cannot be denied the Quezon Province gubernatorial
post.

Note: Marquez decision was held to be a law of the case, thus, the SC followed the definition
and decided accordingly.