4/12/24, 3:52 PM [ G.R. No. 88831.
November 08, 1990 ]
269 Phil. 237
EN BANC
[ G.R. No. 88831. November 08, 1990 ]
MATEO CAASI, PETITIONER, VS. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS
AND MERITO C. MIGUEL, RESPONDENTS.
[G.R. NO. 84508. NOVEMBER 8, 1990]
ANECITO CASCANTE, PETITIONER, VS. THE COMMISSION ON
ELECTIONS AND MERITO C. MIGUEL, RESPONDENTS.
DECISION
GRINO-AQUINO, J.:
These two cases were consolidated because they have the same objective: the disqualification
under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code of the private respondent, Merito Miguel, for
the position of municipal mayor of Bolinao, Pangasinan, to which he was elected in the local
elections of January 18, 1988, on the ground that he is a green card holder, hence: a permanent
resident of the United States of America, not of Bolinao.
G.R. No. 84508 is a petition for review on certiorari of the decision dated January 13, 1988 of
the COMELEC First Division, dismissing the three (3) petitions of Anecito Cascante (SPC No.
87-551), Cederico Catabay (SPC No. 87-595) and Josefino C. Celeste (SPC No. 87-604), for the
disqualification of Merito C. Miguel, filed prior to the local elections on January 18, 1988.
G.R. No. 88831, Mateo Caasi vs. Court of Appeals, et al., is a petition for review of the decision
dated June 21, 1989, of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 14531 dismissing the petition
for quo warranto filed by Mateo Caasi, a rival candidate for the position of municipal mayor of
Bolinao, Pangasinan, also to disqualify Merito Miguel on account of his being a green card
holder.
In his answer to both petitions, Miguel admitted that he holds a green card issued to him by the
US Immigration Service, but he denied that he is a permanent resident of the United States. He
allegedly obtained the green card for convenience in order that he may freely enter the United
States for his periodic medical examination and to visit his children there. He alleged that he is
a permanent resident of Bolinao, Pangasinan, that he voted in all previous elections, including
the plebiscite on February 2, 1987 for the ratification of the 1987 Constitution, and the
congressional elections on May 18, 1987.
After hearing the consolidated petitions before it, the COMELEC, with the exception of
Commissioner Anacleto Badoy, Jr., dismissed the petitions on the ground that:
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/search 1/5
4/12/24, 3:52 PM [ G.R. No. 88831. November 08, 1990 ]
"The possession of a green card by the respondent (Miguel) does not sufficiently establish that
he has abandoned his residence in the Philippines. On the contrary, inspite (sic) of his green
card. Respondent has sufficiently indicated his intention to continuously reside in Bolinao as
shown by his having voted in successive elections in said municipality. As the respondent meets
the basic requirements of citizenship and residence for candidates to elective local officials (sic)
as provided for in Section 42 of the Local Government Code, there is no legal obstacle to his
candidacy for mayor of Bolinao, Pangasinan." (p. 12, Rollo, G.R. No. 84508.)
In his dissenting opinion, Commissioner Badoy, Jr. opined that:
"A green card holder being a permanent resident of or an immigrant of a foreign country and
respondent having admitted that he is a green card holder, it is incumbent upon him, under
Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code, to prove that he was ‘has waived his status as a
permanent resident or immigrant’ to be qualified to run for elected office. This respondent has
not done." (p. 13, Rollo, G.R. No. 84508.)
In G.R. No. 88831, "Mateo Caasi, petitioner vs. Court of Appeals and Merito Miguel,
respondents," the petitioner prays for a review of the decision dated June 21, 1989 of the Court
of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 14531 "Merito C. Miguel, petitioner vs. Hon. Artemio R.
Corpus, etc., respondents," reversing the decision of the Regional Trial Court which denied
Miguel's motion to dismiss the petition for quo warranto filed by Caasi. The Court of Appeals
ordered the regional trial court to dismiss and desist from further proceeding in the quo warranto
case. The Court of Appeals held:
"x x x it is pointless for the Regional Trial Court to hear the case questioning the qualification of
the petitioner as resident of the Philippines, after the COMELEC has ruled that the petitioner
meets the very basic requirements of citizenship and residence for candidates to elective local
officials (sic) and that there is no legal obstacles (sic) for the candidacy of the petitioner,
considering that decisions of the Regional Trial Courts on quo warranto cases under the Election
Code are appealable to the COMELEC." (p. 22, Rollo, G.R. No. 88831.)
These two cases pose the twin issues of: (1) whether or not a green card is proof that the holder
is a permanent resident of the United States, and (2) whether respondent Miguel had waived his
status as a permanent resident of or immigrant to the U.S.A. prior to the local elections on
January 18, 1988.
Section 18, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution provides:
“Sec. 18. Public officers and employees owe the State and this Constitution allegiance at all
times, and any public officer or employee who seeks to change his citizenship or acquire the
status of an immigrant of another country during his tenure shall be dealt with by law.”
In the same vein, but not quite, Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines
(B.P. Blg. 881) provides:
"SEC. 68. Disqualifications. x x x. Any person who is a permanent resident of or an immigrant
to a foreign country shall not be qualified to run for any elective office under this Code, unless
said person has waived his status as permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country in
accordance with the residence requirement provided for in the election laws. (Sec. 25, 1971,
EC)."
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/search 2/5
4/12/24, 3:52 PM [ G.R. No. 88831. November 08, 1990 ]
In view of current rumor that a good number of elective and appointive public officials in the
present administration of President Corazon C. Aquino are holders of green cards in foreign
countries, their effect on the holders’ right to hold elective public office in the Philippines is a
question that excites much interest in the outcome of this case.
In the case of Merito Miguel, the Court deems it significant that in the "Application for
Immigrant Visa and Alien Registration" (Optional Form No. 230, Department of State) which
Miguel filled up in his own handwriting and submitted to the US Embassy in Manila before his
departure for the United States in 1984, Miguel's answer to Question No. 21 therein regarding
his “Length of intended stay (if permanently, so state).” Miguel's answer was: "Permanently."
On its face, the green card that was subsequently issued by the United States Department of
Justice and Immigration and Registration Service to the respondent Merito C. Miguel identifies
him in clear bold letters as a RESIDENT ALIEN. On the back of the card, the upper portion the
following information is printed:
"Alien Registration Receipt Card.
“Person identified by this card is entitled to reside permanently and work in the
United States.” (Annex A, pp. 189-190, Rollo of G.R. No. 84508.)
Despite his vigorous disclaimer, Miguel's immigration to the United States in 1984 constituted
an abandonment of his domicile and residence in the Philippines. For he did not go to the
United States merely to visit his children or his doctor there: he entered the United States with
the intention to live there permanently as evidenced by his application for an immigrant’s (not a
visitor's or tourist's) visa. Based on that application of his, he was issued by the U.S.
Government the requisite green card or authority to reside there permanently.
"Immigration is the removing into one place from another: the act of immigrating; the entering
into a country with the intention of residing in it.
"An immigrant is a person who removes into a country for the purpose of permanent residence.
As shown infra 84, however, statutes sometimes give a broader meaning to the term
‘immigrant.’" (3 CJS 674.)
As a resident alien in the U.S., Miguel owes temporary and local allegiance to the U.S., the
country in which he resides (3 CJS 527). This is in return for the protection given to him during
the period of his residence therein.
“Aliens residing in the United States, while they are permitted to remain, are in general entitled
to the protection of the laws with regard to their rights of person and property and to their civil
and criminal responsibility.
“In general, aliens residing in the United States, while they are permitted to remain, are entitled
to the safeguards of the constitution with regard to their rights of person and property and to
their civil and criminal responsibility. Thus resident alien friends are entitled to the benefit of
the provision of the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal constitution that no state shall deprive
‘any person’ of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or deny to 'any person' the
equal protection of the law, and the protection of this amendment extends to the right to earn a
livelihood by following the ordinary occupations of life. So an alien is entitled to the protection
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/search 3/5
4/12/24, 3:52 PM [ G.R. No. 88831. November 08, 1990 ]
of the provision of the Fifth Amendment to the federal constitution that no person shall be
deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” (3 CJS 529-530.)
Section 18, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution which provides that "any public officer or
employee who seeks to change his citizenship or acquire the status of an immigrant of another
country during his tenure shall be dealt with by law" is not applicable to Merito Miguel for he
acquired the status of an immigrant of the United States before he was elected to public office,
not "during his tenure" as mayor of Bolinao, Pangasinan.
The law applicable to him is Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881), which
provides:
"xxx xxx xxx
"Any person who is a permanent resident of or an immigrant to a foreign country shall not be
qualified to run for any elective office under this Code unless such person has waived his status
as permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country in accordance with the residence
requirement provided for in the election laws."
Did Miguel, by returning to the Philippines in November 1987 and presenting himself as a
candidate for mayor of Bolinao in the January 18, 1988 local elections, waive his status as a
permanent resident or immigrant of the United States?
To be "qualified to run for elective office" in the Philippines, the law requires that the candidate
who is a green card holder must have "waived his status as a permanent resident or immigrant of
a foreign country." Therefore, his act of filing a certificate of candidacy for elective office in the
Philippines, did not of itself constitute a waiver of his status as a permanent resident or
immigrant of the United States. The waiver of his green card should be manifested by some act
or acts independent of and done prior to filing his candidacy for elective office in this country.
Without such prior waiver, he was "disqualified to run for any elective office" (Sec. 68,
Omnibus Election Code).
Respondent Merito Miguel admits that he holds a green card, which proves that he is a
permanent resident or immigrant of the United States, but the records of this case are starkly
bare of proof that he had waived his status as such before he ran for election as municipal mayor
of Bolinao on January 18, 1988. We, therefore, hold that he was disqualified to become a
candidate for that office.
The reason for Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code is not hard to find. Residence in the
municipality where he intends to run for elective office for at least one (1) year at the time of
filing his certificate of candidacy, is one of the qualifications that a candidate for elective public
office must possess (Sec. 42, Chap. 1, Title 2, Local Government Code). Miguel did not possess
that qualification because he was a permanent resident of the United States and he resided in
Bolinao for a period of only three (3) months (not one year) after his return to the Philippines in
November 1987 and before he ran for mayor of that municipality on January 18, 1988.
In banning from elective public office Philippine citizens who are permanent residents or
immigrants of a foreign country, the Omnibus Election Code has laid down a clear policy of
excluding from the right to hold elective public office those Philippine citizens who possess
dual loyalties and allegiance. The law has reserved that privilege for its citizens who have cast
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/search 4/5
4/12/24, 3:52 PM [ G.R. No. 88831. November 08, 1990 ]
their lot with our country "without mental reservations or purpose of evasion." The assumption
is that those who are resident aliens of a foreign country are incapable of such entire devotion to
the interest and welfare of their homeland for with one eye on their public duties here, they must
keep another eye on their duties under the laws of the foreign country of their choice in order to
preserve their status as permanent residents thereof.
Miguel insists that even though he applied for immigration and permanent residence in the
United States, he never really intended to live there permanently, for all that he wanted was a
green card to enable him to come and go to the U.S. with ease. In other words, he would have
this Court believe that he applied for immigration to the U.S. under false pretenses; that all this
time he only had one foot in the United States but kept his other foot in the Philippines. Even if
that were true, this Court will not allow itself to be a party to his duplicity by permitting him to
benefit from it, and giving him the best of both worlds so to speak.
Miguel's application for immigrant status and permanent residence in the U.S. and his
possession of a green card attesting to such status are conclusive proof that he is a permanent
resident of the U.S. despite his occasional visits to the Philippines. The waiver of such
immigrant status should be as indubitable as his application for it. Absent clear evidence that he
made an irrevocable waiver of that status or that he surrendered his green card to the appropriate
U.S. authorities before he ran for mayor of Bolinao in the local elections on January 18, 1988,
our conclusion is that he was disqualified to run for said public office, hence, his election thereto
was null and void.
WHEREFORE, the appealed orders of the COMELEC and the Court of Appeals in SPC Nos.
87-551, 87-595 and 87-604, and CA-G.R. SP No. 14531 respectively, are hereby set aside. The
election of respondent Merito C. Miguel as municipal mayor of Bolinao, Pangasinan is hereby
annulled. Costs against the said respondent.
SO ORDERED.
Fernan, C.J., Narvasa, Melencio-Herrera, Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Paras, Gancayco, Padilla,
Bidin, Sarmiento, Medialdea, and Regalado, JJ., concur.
Feliciano, J., on leave.
Source: Supreme Court E-Library | Date created: June 18, 2015
This page was dynamically generated by the E-Library Content Management System
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/search 5/5
