Caasi Vs Court of Appeals
Caasi Vs Court of Appeals
Caasi Vs Court of Appeals
Doctrine:
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.
Nature:
Petition for review of the decision of the CA and Petition for certiorari toreview the decision of the Commission on
Election
Facts:
Merito Miguel was elected as municipal mayor of Bolinao, Pangasinan in the local elections of 1988.
Petitions were filed for his disqualification under Sec 68 of the Omnibus Election Code, on the ground that he is a
green card holder, hence, apermanent resident of the US, not of Bolinao
One of the petitioners is Mateo Caasi, his rival candidate for the position of mayor
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 US
He allegedly obtained the green card for convenience in order that h emay freely enter the US for his periodic
medical examination and to visit his children there.
He alleged that he is a permanent resident of Bolinao, Pangasinan thathe voted in all previous elections.
COMELEC dismissed the petitions, except for Commissioner Anacleto Badoy, Jr.
According to COMELEC, the possession of a green card by Miguel does not sufficiently establish that he had
abandoned his residence in the Philippines
COMELEC said that as the respondent meets the basic requirements of citizenship and residence for candidates to
elective local officials under Sec 42 of Local Govt. Code, there is no legal obstacle to his candidacy for mayor.
o
In the dissenting opinion of Commissioner Badoy, he opined that a green card holder, being a permanent resident of
or an immigrant of a foreign country, under Sec. 68 of the Omnibus Election Code, has to prove that he has waived
his status as a permanent resident or immigrant to be qualified to run for election office
Issues:
1. Whether or not a green card is proof that the holder is a permanent resident of the United States.
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.
Held: The Supreme Court held that 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 election on January
18, 1988, the Court’s conclusion is that he was disqualified to run for said public office, hence, his election thereto
was null and void