Romualdez vs RTC, 226 SCRA 408
Facts:
Philip Romualdez, the petitioner, is a natural born citizen of the Philippines, the son
of the former Governor of Leyte, Benjamin "Kokoy" Romualdez, and nephew of the then
First Lady Imelda Marcos.
Sometime in the early part of 1980, the petitioner, in consonance with his decision to
establish his legal residence at Barangay Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte, caused the construction of
his residential house therein.
He soon thereafter also served as Barangay Captain of the place where he voted.
After the people power, petitioner left the country and fled to America for asylum. When
Romualdez arrived in the Philippines in December 1991, he did not delay his return to his
residence at Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte.
During the registration of voters conducted by the COMELEC on February 1, 1992
for the Synchronized National and Local Election scheduled for May 11, 1992, petitioner
registered himself anew as a voter at Precinct No. 9 of Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte.
On February 21, 1992, Donato Advincula, respondent, filed a petition with the MTC
of Tolosa, Leyte, praying that Romualdez be excluded from the list of voters in Precinct No.
9 of Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte, under BP 881 and RA 7166 alleging that Romualdez was a
resident of Massachusetts, U.S.A.; that his profession and occupation was in the U.S.A.; that
he had just recently arrived in the Philippines; and that he did not have the required one-
year residence in the Philippines and the six-month residence in Tolosa to qualify him to
register as a voter in Barangay Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte. Romualdez contends that he has been
a resident of Tolosa, Leyte, since the early 1980's, and that he has not abandoned his said
residence by his physical absence therefrom during the period from 1986 up to the third
week of December 1991.
After due hearing, the Municipal Court of Tolosa, Leyte held in favor of the petitioner
Advincula then appealed the case to the respondent court then it rendered the assailed
decision that the petitioner is disqualified to register as a voter for the 1992 elections and
hereby reverses the decision of the lower court in toto. Hence, this recourse.
Issue: Whether or not the respondent court erred in finding the petitioner to have
voluntarily left the country and abandoned his residence in Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte.
Held: WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, the court finds the respondent to be
a resident of Brgy. Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte and qualified to register as a voter thereat. Hence,
the instant petition for exclusion of Philip G. Romualdez from the list of voter of Precinct
No. 9, Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte is hereby ordered DENIED and petition DISMISSED.
Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC
G.R. No.119976
September 18, 1995
Facts:
Petitioner Imelda Romualdez-Marcos filed her Certificate of Candidacy for the position of
Representative of the First District of Leyte. Private respondent Cirilo Roy Montejo, a candidate for the
same position, filed a petition for cancellation and disqualification with the COMELEC alleging that
petitioner did not meet the constitutional requirement for residency. Private respondent contended
that petitioner lacked the Constitution's one-year residency requirement for candidates for the House
of Representatives.
Issue:
Whether or not petitioner has satisfied the residency requirement as mandated by Art. VI, Sec. 6 of the
Constitution
Decision:
WHEREFORE, having determined that petitioner possesses the necessary residence qualifications to run
for a seat in the House of Representatives in the First District of Leyte, the COMELEC's questioned
Resolutions dated April 24, May 7, May 11, and May 25, 1995 are hereby SET ASIDE. Respondent
COMELEC is hereby directed to order the Provincial Board of Canvassers to proclaim petitioner as the
duly elected Representative of the First District of Leyte.
Ratio Decidendi:
Yes. For election purposes, residence is used synonymously with domicile. The Court upheld the
qualification of petitioner, despite her own declaration in her certificate of candidacy that she had
resided in the district for only 7 months, because of the following: (a) a minor follows the domicile of
her parents; Tacloban became petitioner’s domicile of origin by operation of law when her father
brought the family to Leyte; (b) domicile of origin is lost only when there is actual removal or change
of domicile, a bona fide intention of abandoning the former residence and establishing a new one, and
acts which correspond with the purpose; in the absence of clear and positive proof of the concurrence
of all these, the domicile of origin should be deemed to continue; (c) the wife does not automatically
gain the husband’s domicile because the term “residence” in Civil Law does not mean the same thing
in Political Law; when petitioner married President Marcos in 1954, she kept her domicile of origin and
merely gained a new home, not a domicilium necessarium; (d) even assuming that she gained a new
domicile after her marriage and acquired the right to choose a new one only after her husband died,
her acts following her return to the country clearly indicate that she chose Tacloban, her domicile of
origin, as her domicile of choice.
