IMELDA ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS, petitioner, An individual does not lose her domicile even if she has lived and maintained
her domicile even if she has lived and maintained residences in different
vs. places. In the case at bench, the evidence adduced by Motejo lacks the degree of persuasiveness as
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and CIRILO ROY MONTEJO,respondents. required to convince the court that an abandonment of domicile of origin in favor of a domicile of
G.R. No. 119976 September 18, 1995 choice indeed incurred. It cannot be correctly argued that Marcos lost her domicile of origin by
KAPUNAN, J.: operation of law as a result of her marriage to the late President Ferdinand E. Marcos.
Facts: It can be concluded that the facts supporting its proposition that petitioner was ineligible to run for the
Petitioner Imelda Romualdez-Marcos filed her Certificate of Candidacy for the position of position of Representative of the First District of Leyte, the COMELEC was obviously referring to
Representative of the First District of Leyte in 1995, providing that her residence in the place was seven petitioner’s various places of (actual) residence, not her domicile.
(7) months.
Having determined that Marcos possessed the necessary residence qualifications to run for a seat in the
On March 23, 1995, Cirilo Roy Montejo, the incumbent Representative of the First District of Leyte House of Representatives in the First District of Leyte, the COMELEC’s questioned resolutions dated
and also a candidate for the same position filed a petition for cancellation and disqualification with the April 24, May 7, May11, and May 25 are set aside. Provincial Board of Canvassers is directed to
COMELEC charging Marcos as she did not comply with the constitutional requirement for residency proclaim Marcos as the duly elected Representative of the First District of Leyte.
as she lacked the Constitution’s one-year residency requirement for candidates for the House of
Representative.
In her Amended Corrected Certificate of Candidacy, the petitioner changed seven months to since
childhood under residency. Thus, the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied. Source:
Marcos v COMELEC, G.R. No. 119976 September 18, 1995 – LawPhil. Retrieved
from: http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1995/sep1995/gr_119976_1995.html.
On May 11, 1995, the COMELEC issued a Resolution allowing petitioner’s proclamation showing that
she obtained the highest number of votes in the congressional elections in the First District of Leyte.
The COMELEC reversed itself and issued a second Resolution directing that the proclamation of
petitioner be suspended in the event that she obtains the highest number of votes. Note: Special case assigned to the class related to Article 50 of the Civil Code.
In a Supplemental Petition dated 25 May 1995, Marcos claimed that she was the overwhelming winner
of the elections based on the canvass completed by the Provincial Board of Canvassers.
Issue:
Whether or not Imelda Marcos was a resident of the First District of Leyte to satisfy the one year
residency requirement to be eligible in running as representative.
Held:
Yes. The court is in favor of a conclusion supporting petitioner’s claim of legal residence or domicile
in the First District of Leyte.
Residence is synonymous with domicile which reveals a tendency or mistake the concept of domicile
for actual residence, a conception not intended for the purpose of determining a candidate’s
qualifications for the election to the House of Representatives as required by the 1987 Constitution.
