Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2

LIMKAICHONG v. COMELEC (HENRY) 6.

6. So when she was born, 19 days already passed after her dad took his Oath
April 1, 2009 | Peralta, J. | Natural-born citizens and public office of allegiance and was issued his Certificate of Naturalization
7. The case remained pending when the elections were conducted, and
PETITIONERS: Jocelyn S. Limkaichong Limkaichong emerged as a winner over another candidate, Olivia Paras.
RESPONDENTS: COMELEC, et al. 8. Paras then viled with the COMELEC a Very Urgent Motion for Leave to
Intervene and to Suspend the Proclamation. COMELEC then granted the
SUMMARY: Limkaichong filed her COC for Representative of Negros Oriental petitions in the disqualififcation cases and her proclamation was then
and was attacked by petitions for disqualification (claim is, she’s not a natural- suspended
born citizen because her dad’s naturalization did not push thru when she was 9. COMELEC en banc issued a resolution adopting the policy-guidelines of
born). These petitions were put on hold as the elections were on-going. not suspending the proclamation of winning candidates with pending
Eventually, she won the elections and was proclaimed. She was proclaimed disqualification cases, which shall be without prejudice to the continuation
because there’s apparently a Resolution that states that the Proclamation of a of the hearing.
candidate who won shall not be postponed just because of pending petition for 10. Limkaichong filed with the COMELEC a MR and another motion for the
disqualification. So basically because of this she was proclaimed as a winner. lifting of the directive suspending her proclamation and insisting that she
Now the next problem was who has jurisdiction (since the COMELEC didn’t should be proclaimed.
resolve the issue on her citizenship), and whether the proclamation was valid. 11. PBOC in compliance with the Board Reso proclaimed her as winner and as
member of the House.
SC held that the proclamation was valid, but that the same shall not prejudice the 12. Paras filed a petition to nullify this but was denied. COMELEC ruled it has
decision about to be made on pending cases of disqualification. Having said that, jurisdiction. Limkaichong countered and said that since she was proclaimed
since proclamation is valid and she went on and took her oath, she’s basically a already, it is HoR who has jurisdiction. COMELEC did not resolve this so
member of the HoR which means it’s the HRET who has jurisdiction. While she now files this petition before the SC.
there’s a 10-day period for contests on membership, the same does not apply if
the issue is the citizenship. In this case there’s no petition contesting her ISSUE/s:
citizenship yet so the HoR cannot simply remove her from her office. 1. WoN Limkaichong should be disqualified – NO

DOCTRINE: Note however, that the 10-day prescriptive period of challenging RULING: SC granted the petition.
membership of one in the HoR does not apply to disqualification cases based on
Citizenship. It is a Constitutional mandate that Members of the HoR must be RATIO:
natural-born citizens not only at the time of their election but during their entire 1. As for the validity of the proclamation: SC held that the Resolution was a
tenure. valid exercise of the COMELEC’s constitutionally mandated power to
promulgate its own rules of procedure. In adopting such policy-giudelines,
the COMELEC had the objective of upholding the sovereign will of the
FACTS: people.
1. March 26, 2007, Limkaichong filed her COC for Representative of the First 2. Accordingly, those disqualification cases are still pending shall be
District of Negros Oriental. suspended and so the candidates shoul be proclaimed, but the proclamation
2. 2 petitions for disqualification were filed before the COMELEC. Napioleon should not prejudice the continuation of the hearing and resolution of the
Camero, a registered voter, filed one on the ground that she lacked the cases.
citizenship requirement to be a member of the HoR. 3. Verily, the proclamation is still valid, but it must be remembered that the
3. He alleges that she is not a natural-born Filipino because her parents were COMELEC is yet to decide on the issue on disqualification.
Chinese citizens at the time of her birth 4. As to jurisdiction: any allegation on the invalidity of the proclamation will
4. The other one was from Renald Villando, who filed using the same grounds not prevent HRET from assuming jurisdiction essential to a member’s
and that the proceedigns for the naturalization of her father never attained qualification to sit.
finality due to procedural and substantial defects. 5. Per 1998 HRET Rules, there is a prescriptive period of 10 days where the
5. In her Answer, Limkaichong said that she is a natural-born Filipino since eligibility/ineligibility/qualification/disqualification of the winning
she was born to a naturalized Filipino father and a natural-born Filipino candidate may be assailed by a quo warranto petition or protest. In this case,
mother, who reacquired her status as such due to her husband’s there has been no quo warranto or any petition filed.
naturalization.
6. Note however, that the 10-day period does not apply to disqualification
cases based on Citizenship. It is a Constitutional mandate that Members of
the HoR must be natural-born citizens not only at the time of their election
but during their entire tenure.
7. This is a continuing requirement, the one hwo assails may question the
same beyond the 10 days.
8. However, this must be read together with sec. 18 of the Commonwealth
act, which says that it is the State, through its representiative
designated by the statute, that may question the illegality or invalidity
of the naturalization. (so basically a case must be filed before the HRET
and wala pa nga in this case)
9. So since in this case there is nothing filed before the HRET, the HoR cannot
simply remove Limkaichong without violating due process of law. It os
only after a determination of the HRET pursuant to a final and executory
order that the Member does not have a right to the office, and that the HoR
is directed to exclude her.

You might also like