Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Miranda Vs Abaya

    Uploaded by

    rmelizaga
    36 views2 pages
    Joel Miranda filed a petition to substitute as a mayoral candidate after the deadline had passed, attempting to replace his father Jose "Pempe" Miranda whose candidacy was cancelled. The Comelec denied the substitution and upheld the cancellation. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that a cancelled certificate of candidacy means that person is not a candidate at all and cannot be substituted under the Omnibus Election Code. Allowing the late substitution would violate the legal requirements for filing candidacy and undermine equal protection under the law. The petitioner was not a qualified substitute as the original candidate he tried to replace was not a valid candidate after his certificate was cancelled.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    3. Miranda vs Abaya

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Joel Miranda filed a petition to substitute as a mayoral candidate after the deadline had passed, attempting to replace his father Jose "Pempe" Miranda whose candidacy was cancelled. The Comelec denied the substitution and upheld the cancellation. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that a cancelled certificate of candidacy means that person is not a candidate at all and cannot be substituted under the Omnibus Election Code. Allowing the late substitution would violate the legal requirements for filing candidacy and undermine equal protection under the law. The petitioner was not a qualified substitute as the original candidate he tried to replace was not a valid candidate after his certificate was cancelled.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    36 views2 pages

    Miranda Vs Abaya

    Uploaded by

    rmelizaga
    Joel Miranda filed a petition to substitute as a mayoral candidate after the deadline had passed, attempting to replace his father Jose "Pempe" Miranda whose candidacy was cancelled. The Comelec denied the substitution and upheld the cancellation. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that a cancelled certificate of candidacy means that person is not a candidate at all and cannot be substituted under the Omnibus Election Code. Allowing the late substitution would violate the legal requirements for filing candidacy and undermine equal protection under the law. The petitioner was not a qualified substitute as the original candidate he tried to replace was not a valid candidate after his certificate was cancelled.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

     JOEL G.

    MIRANDA
    MIRANDA VS. ANTONIO
    ANTONIO M. ABAYA 
    ABAYA 

     Jose "Pempe" Miranda,


    Miranda, then incumbent mayor of Santiago City,
    City, Isabela, led
    his certicate of candidacy for the same mayoralty post for the
    synchronized May 11, 1! elections Pri#ate respondent $ntonio M $baya
    led
    led a Petit
    etitio
    ion
    n to %eny
    %eny %ue
    %ue Cour
    Course
    se to and&
    and&or
    or Canc
    Cancel
    el Cert
    Certi
    ica
    cate
    te of 
    Candidacy 'he petition (as )*$+'% by Comelec and they further ruled
    to %IS-.$/I0 Jose "Pempe" Miranda

    2n May
    May 3, 1!
    1!,, (ay
    (ay beyo
    beyond
    nd the
    the dead
    deadli
    line
    ne for
    for lin
    ling
    g a cert
    certi
    ica
    cate
    te of 
    candidacy, petitioner Joel ) Miranda led his certicate of candidacy for
    the mayoralty post, supposedly as a substitute for his father, Jose "Pempe"
    Mira
    Mirand
    ndaa %uri
    %uring
    ng the
    the May
    May 11,
    11, 1!
    1! elec
    electi
    tion
    ons,
    s, peti
    petiti
    tion
    oner
    er and
    and pri#
    pri#at
    ate
    e
    respondent #ied for the mayoralty seat, (ith petitioner garnering 44,554
     #otes, 1,333 more #otes than pri#ate respondent (ho got only 45, 663 #otes

    Pri#ate respondent led a Petition to %eclare +ull and 7oid Substitution


    (ith Prayer for Issuance of 8rit of Preliminary In9unction and&or 'emporary
    *estraining 2rder :e prayed for the nullication of petitioner;s certicate
    of candidacy for being #oid ab initio because the certicate of candidacy of 
     Jose "Pempe" Miranda, (hom petitioner (as supposed to substitute, had
    already been cancelled and denied due course

    Issue<
    Issue< 82+
    82+ thethe peti
    petiti
    tion
    oner
    er,, (h
    (ho
    o (as
    (as beyo
    beyond
    nd the
    the dead
    deadli
    line
    ne for
    for lin
    ling
    g a
    certicate of candidacy, be =ualied to substitute a candidate (hose C2C
    (as cancelled and denied>

    Held<
    Held< +2

    In  Bautista vs. Comelec the the Cour


    Courtt e?pl
    e?plic
    icit
    itly
    ly rule
    ruled
    d that
    that "a cancel
    cancelled
    led
    certicate d!es n!t i#e rise t! a #alid candidac$."  $ person (ithout a
     #alid certicate of candidacy cannot be considered a candidate in much the
    same (ay as any person (ho has not led any certicate of candidacy at all
    can not, by any stretch of the imagination, be a candidate at all

    'he la( clearly pro#ides<


    SC @6 Certifcate o candidacy -- +o person shall be eligible for any
    electi#e public oAice unless he les a s(orn certicate of candidacy
    (ithin the period ?ed herein
    By its
    its e?pr
    e?pres
    ess
    s lang
    langua
    uage
    ge,, the
    the fore
    forego
    goin
    ing
    g pro#
    pro#isi
    ision
    on of la(
    la( is absol
    absolut
    utely
    ely
    mandatory It is but logical to say that any person (ho attempts to run for
    an elect
    electi#
    i#e
    e oAic
    oAicee but
    but does
    does not
    not le
    le a cert
    certi
    ica
    cate
    te of cand
    candid
    idac
    acy
    y, is not
    not a
    candidate at all +o amount of #otes (ould catapult him into oAice
    In Gador vs. Comelec D SC*$ E61 F1!5GH, the Court held that a
    certicate of candidacy led beyond the period ?ed by la( is #oid, and the
    person (ho led it is not, in la(, a candidate Much in the same manner as a
    person (ho led no certicate of candidacy at all and a person (ho led it
    out of time, a person (hose certicate of candidacy is cancelled or denied
    due course is no candidate at all +o amount of #otes should entitle him to
    the electi#e oAice aspired for 'he e#ident purposes of the la( in re=uiring
    the ling of certicates of candidacy and in ?ing the time limit therefor
    are< (a) to enable the #oters to no(, at least si?ty days before the regular
    election, the candidates among (hom they are to mae the choice, and (b)
    to a#oid confusion and incon#enience in the tabulation of the #otes cast 0or
    if the la( did not conne the choice or election by the #oters to the duly
    registered candidates, there might be as many persons #oted for as there
    are #oters, and #otes might be cast e#en for unno(n or ctitious persons
    as a mar to identify the #otes in fa#or of a candidate for another oAice in
    the same election
     $fter ha#ing considered the importance of a certicate of candidacy, it can
    be readily understood (hy in Bautista the Court ruled that a person (ith a
    cancelled certicate is no candidate at all

     $ dis=ualied candidate may only be substituted if he had a valid certicate


    of candidacy in the rst place because, if the dis=ualied candidate did not
    ha#e a #alid and seasonably led certicate of candidacy, he is and (as not
    a candidate at all If a person (as not a candidate, he cannot be substituted
    under Section @@ of the 2mnibus lection Code Besides, if (e (ere to
    allo( the socalled "substitute" to le a "ne(" and "original" certicate of 
    candidacy beyond the period for the ling thereof, it (ould be a crystalline
    case of une=ual protection of the la(, an act abhorred by our Constitution

    :ence, Comelec ruling to $++./ the election and proclamation of 


    petitioner (as $00I*M%

    You might also like