functions but equally to keep it informed of any change in

his religious status. This information is necessary for the

protection of the public. This is especially so with regard to
the authority to solemnize marriages, the registration of
which is made by the law mandatory (Articles 92-96, New
Civil Code).

[No. L-8014. March 14, 1955]

4. ID.; ELECTION FOR MUNICIPAL MAYOR; IF PERSON
ELECTED is INELIGIBLE, CANDIDATE OCCUPYING
PEDRO V. VILAR, petitioner and appellant, vs. SECOND PLACE CANNOT BE DECLARED BY COURT
GAUDENCIO V. PARAISO, respondent and appellant. ELECTED.·When the person elected is

1. APPEALS; APPELLATE JURISDICTION WHERE BOTH

PARTIES APPEAL AND ONE OF THE APPEALS RAISES 660
ONLY QUESTIONS OF LAW.·Where the petitioner raises
in his brief only questions of law and the respondent, who is
660 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED
also an appellant, raises both questions of law and fact, and
the appeals of both parties are indivisible in that they Vilar vs. Paraiso
pertain to only one case, the Supreme Court, under sections
17 and 31 of the Judiciary Act of 1948, may take cognizance ineligible, the court cannot declare that the candidate
of both appeals. occupying the second place has been elected, even if he were
eligible. (Nuval vs. Guray, 52 Phil., 645; Llamoso vs. Ferrer,
2. ELECTION CONTESTS; MUNICIPAL OFFICE; 47 Off. Gaz., No. 2, p. 727.)
ECCLESIASTIC INELIGIBLE TO HOLD MUNICIPAL
OFFICE; WHO ARE ECCLESIASTICS.·An ecclesiastic is APPEALS from a judgment of the Court of First Instance
ineligible to hold a municipal office under section 2175 of of Nueva Ecija. Nable. J.
the Revised Administrative Code. An Ordained minister of The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
the United Church of Christ in the Philippines registered as Claro M. Recto and Jose Nava for petitioner and
such in the Bureau of Public Libraries with authority to appellant.
solemnize marriages, is an ecclesiastic and ineligible to hold Josefina R. Phodaca and Naomi P. Salvador for
the office of the Municipal Mayor. Resignation as such respondent and appellant.
minister and acceptance thereof by the cabinet of his
church, are but self-serving evidence if the resignation and BAUTISTA ANGELO, J.:
its acceptance are not registered with the Bureau of Public
Libraries. If a candidate to a municipal office is a minister In the general elections held on November 13, 1951, Pedro
of a church with license to solemnize marriages, it is his V. Vilar and Gaudencio V. Paraiso were among the
duty (and not of his church) to secure from the Bureau of candidates registered and voted for the office of mayor of
Public Libraries the cancellation of his resignation as Rizal, Nueva Ecija. After the canvass was made, Vilar
minister and to attach to his certificate of candidacy a copy obtained 1,467 votes while Paraiso garnered 1,509, and as
of such resignation. a result the municipal board of canvassers proclaimed the
latter as the mayor duly elected with a plurality of 41
3. ID.; IMPORTANCE AND PURPOSE OF REGISTRATION votes. However, contending that Paraiso was ineligible to
WITH THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC LIBRARIES.·The hold office as mayor because he was then a minister of the
importance of registration cannot be underestimated. The United Church of Christ in the Philippines and such was
purpose of registration is two-fold: to inform the public not disqualified to be a candidate under section 2175 of the
only of the authority of the minister to discharge religious Revised Administrative Code, Vilar instituted the present
quo warranto proceedings praying that Paraiso be declared respondent was ordained as minister of the Evangelical
ineligible to assume office and that his proclamation as Church of the Philippines in 1944 and as such was given
mayor-elect be declared null and void. He also prayed that license to solemnize marriages by the Bureau of Public
he be declared duly elected mayor of Rizal, Nueva Ecija, in Libraries; that since 1944 up to 1950 he acted as minister
lieu of respondent Paraiso. in the town of Rizal, Nueva Ecija, continuously and without
Respondent in his answer denied his ineligibility and interruption and has been renewing his license to
claimed that he resigned as minister of the United Church solemnize marriages as prescribed by the regulations of the
of Christ in the Philippines on August 21, 1951, that his Bureau of Public Libraries; that on April 19, 1950,
resignation was accepted by the cabinet of his church at a respondent transferred to the United Church of Christ in
special meeting held in Polo, Bulacan on August 27, 1951, the Philip-
and that even if respondent was not eligible to the office,
662
petitioner could not be declared elected to take his place.

661
662 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED
Vilar vs. Paraiso
VOL. 96, MARCH 14, 1955 661
Vilar vs. Paraiso pines, having been assigned to work in the same place and
chapel during the years 1944-1950; that on April 7, 1951,
After due trial, the court found respondent to be ineligible respondent applied for, and was issued, a license to
for the office of mayor, being an ecclesiastic, and, solemnize marriages by the Bureau of Public Libraries as
consequently, it declared his proclamation as mayor null minister of the new church up to the end of April, 1952;
and void, but refrained from declaring petitioner as mayor- that said license has never been cancelled, as neither the
elect for lack of sufficient legal grounds to do so. From this head of the united church nor respondent has requested for
decision both parties have appealed, respondent from that its cancellation; and that respondent has been publicly
portion finding him ineligible, and petitioner from that known as minister of the United Church of Christ, but he
portion holding he cannot be declared elected as mayor for has not attached to his certificate of candidacy a copy of his
lack of sufficient legal grounds to do so. alleged resignation as minister.
The case was originally taken to the Court of Appeals. The evidence for the respondent, on the other hand,
However, as the latter court found that while petitioner tends to show that while he was formerly a minister of the
raises in his brief only questions of law respondent raises United Church of Christ in the Philippines, he, however,
both questions of law and fact, and both appeals are filed his resignation as such minister on August 21, 1951,
indivisible in that they pertain to only one case, that court because of his desire to engage in politics; that said
resolved to certify it to this Court pursuant to the resignation was accepted by the cabinet of his church at a
provisions of sections 17 and 31 of the Judiciary Act of special meeting held in Polo, Bulacan on August 27, 1951;
1948, upon the theory that one of the appeals is exclusively that respondent turned over his chapel and his office to the
cognizable by the Supreme Court. elder members of his religious order on August 21, 1951,
The only issue before us is whether respondent, being an and since then he considered himself separated from his
ecclesiastic, is ineligible to hold office under section 2175 of order and in fact he has refrained ever since from
the Revised Administrative Code, or whether he actually conducting any religious services pertaining to that order.
resigned as minister before the date of the elections, and Which of these versions is correct?
his resignation duly accepted, as claimed, thereby After carefully examining the evidence of record, and
removing his disability. As may be noted, this is a question after weighing its credibility and probative value, we have
of fact the determination of which much depends upon the not 'found any reason for deviating from the finding of the
credibility and weight of the evidence of both parties, trial court that respondent never ceased as minister of the
The evidence for petitioner tends to show that order to which he belonged and that the resignation he
claims to have filed months before the date of the elections _______________
is but a mere scheme to circumvent the prohibition of the
1 Regulations for the enforcement of the Marriage Law issued by the
law regarding ecclesiastics who desire to run for a
Director of Public Libraries and approved by the Secretary of Education
municipal office. Indeed, if respondent really and sincerely
on February 26, 1951, in connection with Article 95, new Civil Code.
intended to resign as minister of the religious organization
to which he belonged for the purpose of 664

663
664 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED
VOL. 96, MARCH 14, 1955 663 Vilar vs. Paraiso
Vilar vs. Paraiso
if we examine the so-called minute book wherein, according
launching his candidacy why did he not resign in due form to witness Jose Agpalo, are entered the minutes of all the
and have the acceptance of his resignation registered with meetings of the church, because upon an examination
1
the Bureau of Public Libraries. The importance of thereof one would at once get the impression that it was
resignation cannot be underestimated. The purpose of prepared haphazardly and not with such seriousness and
registration is two-fold: to inform the public not only of the solemnity that should characterize the religious activities
authority of the minister to discharge religious functions, of a well established religious order. As the trial court aptly
but equally to keep it informed of any change in his remarked "All these lead the court to believe with the
religious status. This information is necessary for the petitioner, that the supposed resignation and acceptance
protection of the public. This is especially so with regard to were made at a later date to cure the ineligibility of the
the authority to solemnized marriages, the registration of respondent." We are therefore constrained to hold that
which is made by the law mandatory (Articles 92-96, new respondent is disqualified to hold the office of mayor as
Civil Code). It is no argument to say that the duty to secure found by the trial court.
the cancellation of the requisite resignation devolves, not As to the question whether, respondent being ineligible,
upon respondent, but upon the head of his organization or petitioner can be declared elected, having obtained second
upon the official in charge of such registration, upon proper place in the elections, our answer is simple: this Court has
showing of the reason for such cancellation, because the already declared that this cannot be done in the absence of
law likewise imposes upon the interested party the duty of an express provision authorizing such declaration. Our law
effecting such cancellation, who in the instant case is the not only does not contain any such provision but
respondent himself. This he failed to do. And what is more, apparently seems to prohibit it. This is what we said in at
he failed to attach to his certificate of candidacy, a copy of least two cases where we laid down a ruling which is
his alleged resignation as minister knowing full well that a decisive of the present case.
minister is disqualified by law to run for a municipal office. "* * *, In the first case when the person elected is ineligible, the
It is true that respondent attempted to substantiate his court cannot declare that the candidate occupying the second place
claim by submitting as evidence certain documents has been elected, even if he were eligible, since the law only
purporting to show the alleged resignation and its authorizes a declaration of election in favor of the person who has
acceptance by the cabinet of his church at a meeting held obtained a plurality of votes, and has presented his certificate of
on August 27, 1951, but, considering said documents in the candidacy." (Nuval vs. Guray, 52 Phil., 645.)
light of the shortcomings we have pointed out above, one "Section 173 of Republic Act No. 180 known as the Revised
cannot help but brand them as self-serving or as documents Election Code, does not provide that if the contestee is declared
merely prepared to serve the political designs of respondent ineligible the contestant will be proclaimed. Indeed it may be
in an attempt to obviate his disqualification under the law. gathered that the law contemplates no such result, because it
And this feeling appears strengthened permits the filing of the contest by any registered candidate
 irrespective of whether the latter occupied the next highest place or
the lowest in the election returns." (Llamoso vs. Ferrer, et al., 84
Phil., 489, 47 Off. Gaz,, [No. 2] p. 727.)

Wherefore, the decision appealed from is affirmed, without

pronouncement as to costs.

665

VOL. 96, MARCH 19, 1955 665

Chua Hiong vs. Deportation Board

Parás, C. J., Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor,

Reyes, A., Jugo, Labrador, Concepción and Reyes, J. B. L.,
JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.

_______________

© Copyright 2020 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.