Title

Buenafe vs. Commission on Elections

Case

G.R. No. 260374 & 260426

Ponente

ZALAMEDA, J

Decision Date

28 Jun 2022

A petition seeking to disqualify Ferdinand Marcos Jr. from running for President based on alleged false
representations and previous criminal cases is dismissed by the Supreme Court due to lack of compelling
evidence, affirming his qualifications to run for office.

Introduction

The case involves petitions seeking to disqualify Ferdinand Marcos Jr. from running for President in the
2022 National Elections.

The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions and ruled that Marcos Jr.'s Certificate of Candidacy is valid
and he did not make false material representations.

Parties and Arguments

The case was filed by two groups of petitioners, Buenafe et al. and Ilagan et al.

They argued that Marcos Jr. made false material representations in his Certificate of Candidacy (COC)
and should be disqualified from running for President.

They cited his prior conviction for violation of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) and argued
that he should be perpetually disqualified from holding public office.

Importance of Elections and Qualifications for Public Office

The Court emphasized the importance of elections as the cornerstone of democracy.

It stated that a candidate must not only obtain the highest number of votes but also hold the requisite
qualifications and abide by the required standards set by law.

Dismissal of Petitions

After a careful study of the issues raised, the Court dismissed the petitions.
It found that Marcos Jr. possesses all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications to run for
President.

The Court also ruled that his COC contains no false material representation and is therefore valid.

Previous Criminal Cases and Moral Turpitude

The Court considered the previous criminal cases against Marcos Jr. for violation of the NIRC.

It noted that while he was convicted for failure to file income tax returns and failure to pay income
taxes, the penalty of perpetual disqualification from public office was not imposed by the court.

The Court emphasized that failure to file income tax returns is not a crime involving moral turpitude and
does not automatically result in disqualification from public office.

Lack of Compelling Evidence of Disqualification

The Court concluded that there is no compelling and unequivocal evidence of Marcos Jr.'s
disqualification or failure to meet the requirements for filing a COC.

It emphasized the importance of respecting the will of the electorate and the need for a proper and
definitive ruling to dispel any doubts on the outcome of the elections.

Summary and Conclusion

The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions seeking to disqualify Ferdinand Marcos Jr. from running for
President.

The Court ruled that his COC is valid and he did not make false material representations.

The Court emphasized the importance of elections and the need for a proper and definitive ruling to
uphold the will of the electorate.

Issue 1: False Material Representations in CoC

Marcos Jr. represented in his CoC that he is eligible to run for President and has not been found liable
for any offense carrying the penalty of perpetual disqualification.

The Court determines that the representation of eligibility is not false, as Marcos Jr. has not been
disqualified from running for public office.

However, the representation that he has not been found liable for any offense carrying the penalty of
perpetual disqualification is false, as he was convicted for failure to file income tax returns (ITRs) for the
years 1982 to 1985.

The Court concludes that this false representation does not warrant disqualification.

Issue 2: Disqualification under Section 12 of the OEC

The Court concludes that the penalty was not explicitly imposed in the decision of the Court of Appeals
(CA), which acquitted Marcos Jr. of charges for non-payment of deficiency taxes but found him guilty of
failure to file ITRs.

As a result, the penalty of perpetual disqualification was not imposed on Marcos Jr.

The Court determines that Marcos Jr. is not disqualified under Section 12 of the Omnibus Election Code
(OEC).

Validity of CA Decision and Imposition of Penalties

The Court addresses the argument that the CA decision is void for failing to impose the penalty of
perpetual disqualification.

The Court explains that penalties should be expressly stated in a decision, but the failure to do so does
not render the decision void.

The CA decision, despite its error in not imposing the penalty, has already attained finality and cannot be
modified.

Failure to File ITRs and Moral Turpitude

The Court determines that failure to file ITRs does not involve moral turpitude.

Previous cases are cited to distinguish between offenses of false return, fraudulent return, and failure to
file a return.

Only the first two offenses involve moral turpitude, while the third offense, which Marcos Jr. was
convicted of, does not.

Alleged Non-Payment of Fines and Evasion of Sentence

The Court rejects the argument that Marcos Jr.'s alleged non-payment of fines constitutes evasion of
sentence and a violation of the law involving moral turpitude.

There is no evidence of a criminal prosecution for evasion of service of sentence, making the argument
baseless.

Conclusion

The Court dismisses the petition for disqualification, as Marcos Jr. did not make false material
representations in his CoC and is not disqualified under Section 12 of the OEC.

The Court emphasizes that penalties should be expressly stated in a decision, but the failure to do so
does not render the decision void.
The Court also clarifies that failure to file ITRs does not involve moral turpitude.

Background and Petitions

Two consolidated petitions were filed before the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) regarding the
disqualification and cancellation of Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr.'s certificate of candidacy (COC) for the
presidency.

The first petition argues that Marcos, Jr. committed false material representation by stating in his COC
that he is eligible to run for president despite a prior conviction that carries perpetual disqualification
from holding public office and participating in any election.

The second petition alleges that Marcos, Jr. was convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.

Court's Decision on Dismissal of Petitions

The Court dismisses both petitions and upholds the COMELEC's ruling.

The Court examines whether Marcos, Jr.'s failure to file income tax returns, for which he was convicted,
constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude.

The Court concludes that the failure to file income tax returns may or may not amount to tax evasion,
which is a crime involving moral turpitude.

The Court emphasizes that tax evasion involves fraud and intentional efforts to reduce or defeat taxes,
while the failure to file income tax returns may be due to various reasons and does not necessarily
involve fraudulent intent.

The Court also considers whether Marcos, Jr.'s conviction for failure to file income tax returns should
result in perpetual disqualification from holding public office.

The Court notes that the accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification is typically attached to specific
principal penalties, but the provision in the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) that imposes
perpetual disqualification does not specify the principal penalty to which it attaches.

The Court concludes that perpetual disqualification should be considered an accessory penalty and must
be expressly imposed in the decision.

Since Marcos, Jr.'s conviction did not carry an express imposition of perpetual disqualification, he cannot
be considered perpetually disqualified from public office.

Based on these findings, the Court determines that Marcos, Jr.'s non-filing of income tax returns does
not involve moral turpitude and does not warrant perpetual disqualification.

Therefore, the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in denying the petitions for
disqualification and cancellation of Marcos, Jr.'s COC.
Importance of Respecting the Will of the Voters

The Court emphasizes the importance of respecting the will of the voters and the democratic process.

It acknowledges that the votes given to a winning candidate, especially for the highest office of the land,
should not be disregarded.

The Court commends the prompt action taken by Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda in handling the
petitions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Court dismisses the petitions filed by Buenafe et al. and Ilagan et al., upholding the
COMELEC's ruling and allowing Marcos, Jr. to run for the presidency.

Title

Buenafe vs. Commission on Elections

Case

G.R. No. 260374 & 260426

Ponente

ZALAMEDA, J

Decision Date

28 Jun 2022

A petition seeking to disqualify Ferdinand Marcos Jr. from running for President based on alleged false
representations and previous criminal cases is dismissed by the Supreme Court due to lack of compelling
evidence, affirming his qualifications to run for office.

Introduction

The case involves petitions seeking to disqualify Ferdinand Marcos Jr. from running for President in the
2022 National Elections.

The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions and ruled that Marcos Jr.'s Certificate of Candidacy is valid
and he did not make false material representations.
Parties and Arguments

The case was filed by two groups of petitioners, Buenafe et al. and Ilagan et al.

They argued that Marcos Jr. made false material representations in his Certificate of Candidacy (COC)
and should be disqualified from running for President.

They cited his prior conviction for violation of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) and argued
that he should be perpetually disqualified from holding public office.

Importance of Elections and Qualifications for Public Office

The Court emphasized the importance of elections as the cornerstone of democracy.

It stated that a candidate must not only obtain the highest number of votes but also hold the requisite
qualifications and abide by the required standards set by law.

Dismissal of Petitions

After a careful study of the issues raised, the Court dismissed the petitions.

It found that Marcos Jr. possesses all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications to run for
President.

The Court also ruled that his COC contains no false material representation and is therefore valid.

Previous Criminal Cases and Moral Turpitude

The Court considered the previous criminal cases against Marcos Jr. for violation of the NIRC.

It noted that while he was convicted for failure to file income tax returns and failure to pay income
taxes, the penalty of perpetual disqualification from public office was not imposed by the court.

The Court emphasized that failure to file income tax returns is not a crime involving moral turpitude and
does not automatically result in disqualification from public office.

Lack of Compelling Evidence of Disqualification

The Court concluded that there is no compelling and unequivocal evidence of Marcos Jr.'s
disqualification or failure to meet the requirements for filing a COC.

It emphasized the importance of respecting the will of the electorate and the need for a proper and
definitive ruling to dispel any doubts on the outcome of the elections.

Summary and Conclusion

The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions seeking to disqualify Ferdinand Marcos Jr. from running for
President.
The Court ruled that his COC is valid and he did not make false material representations.

The Court emphasized the importance of elections and the need for a proper and definitive ruling to
uphold the will of the electorate.

Issue 1: False Material Representations in CoC

Marcos Jr. represented in his CoC that he is eligible to run for President and has not been found liable
for any offense carrying the penalty of perpetual disqualification.

The Court determines that the representation of eligibility is not false, as Marcos Jr. has not been
disqualified from running for public office.

However, the representation that he has not been found liable for any offense carrying the penalty of
perpetual disqualification is false, as he was convicted for failure to file income tax returns (ITRs) for the
years 1982 to 1985.

The Court concludes that this false representation does not warrant disqualification.

Issue 2: Disqualification under Section 12 of the OEC

The Court discusses whether the penalty of perpetual disqualification was properly imposed on Marcos
Jr.

The Court concludes that the penalty was not explicitly imposed in the decision of the Court of Appeals
(CA), which acquitted Marcos Jr. of charges for non-payment of deficiency taxes but found him guilty of
failure to file ITRs.

As a result, the penalty of perpetual disqualification was not imposed on Marcos Jr.

The Court determines that Marcos Jr. is not disqualified under Section 12 of the Omnibus Election Code
(OEC).

Validity of CA Decision and Imposition of Penalties

The Court addresses the argument that the CA decision is void for failing to impose the penalty of
perpetual disqualification.

The Court explains that penalties should be expressly stated in a decision, but the failure to do so does
not render the decision void.

The CA decision, despite its error in not imposing the penalty, has already attained finality and cannot be
modified.

Failure to File ITRs and Moral Turpitude

The Court determines that failure to file ITRs does not involve moral turpitude.
Previous cases are cited to distinguish between offenses of false return, fraudulent return, and failure to
file a return.

Only the first two offenses involve moral turpitude, while the third offense, which Marcos Jr. was
convicted of, does not.

Alleged Non-Payment of Fines and Evasion of Sentence

The Court rejects the argument that Marcos Jr.'s alleged non-payment of fines constitutes evasion of
sentence and a violation of the law involving moral turpitude.

There is no evidence of a criminal prosecution for evasion of service of sentence, making the argument
baseless.

Conclusion

The Court dismisses the petition for disqualification, as Marcos Jr. did not make false material
representations in his CoC and is not disqualified under Section 12 of the OEC.

The Court emphasizes that penalties should be expressly stated in a decision, but the failure to do so
does not render the decision void.

The Court also clarifies that failure to file ITRs does not involve moral turpitude.

Background and Petitions

Two consolidated petitions were filed before the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) regarding the
disqualification and cancellation of Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr.'s certificate of candidacy (COC) for the
presidency.

The first petition argues that Marcos, Jr. committed false material representation by stating in his COC
that he is eligible to run for president despite a prior conviction that carries perpetual disqualification
from holding public office and participating in any election.

The second petition alleges that Marcos, Jr. was convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.

Court's Decision on Dismissal of Petitions

The Court dismisses both petitions and upholds the COMELEC's ruling.

The Court examines whether Marcos, Jr.'s failure to file income tax returns, for which he was convicted,
constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude.

The Court concludes that the failure to file income tax returns may or may not amount to tax evasion,
which is a crime involving moral turpitude.
The Court emphasizes that tax evasion involves fraud and intentional efforts to reduce or defeat taxes,
while the failure to file income tax returns may be due to various reasons and does not necessarily
involve fraudulent intent.

The Court also considers whether Marcos, Jr.'s conviction for failure to file income tax returns should
result in perpetual disqualification from holding public office.

The Court notes that the accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification is typically attached to specific
principal penalties, but the provision in the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) that imposes
perpetual disqualification does not specify the principal penalty to which it attaches.

The Court concludes that perpetual disqualification should be considered an accessory penalty and must
be expressly imposed in the decision.

Since Marcos, Jr.'s conviction did not carry an express imposition of perpetual disqualification, he cannot
be considered perpetually disqualified from public office.

Based on these findings, the Court determines that Marcos, Jr.'s non-filing of income tax returns does
not involve moral turpitude and does not warrant perpetual disqualification.

Therefore, the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in denying the petitions for
disqualification and cancellation of Marcos, Jr.'s COC.

Importance of Respecting the Will of the Voters

The Court emphasizes the importance of respecting the will of the voters and the democratic process.

It acknowledges that the votes given to a winning candidate, especially for the highest office of the land,
should not be disregarded.

The Court commends the prompt action taken by Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda in handling the
petitions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Court dismisses the petitions filed by Buenafe et al. and Ilagan et al., upholding the
COMELEC's ruling and allowing Marcos, Jr. to run for the presidency.