Scribd
Upload
11 views1 page

Urbano Moreno Vs Comelec

Uploaded by

jayan122015
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
11 views1 page

Urbano Moreno Vs Comelec

Uploaded by

jayan122015
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

The case you're referring to is Urbano M. Moreno v. Commission on Elections, et al.

, decided by the
Supreme Court of the Philippines on August 10, 2006. This case dealt with the disqualification of a
candidate for the position of Punong Barangay (Barangay Captain) due to a previous conviction for a
crime.

Here's a summary of the case:

- The Petitioner: Urbano M. Moreno (Moreno) was a candidate for Punong Barangay in Barangay
Cabugao, Daram, Samar.

- The Conviction: Moreno had been convicted by final judgment of the crime of arbitrary detention and
sentenced to imprisonment. However, he was later granted probation.

- The Disqualification: The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) disqualified Moreno from running for
Punong Barangay based on Section 40(a) of the Local Government Code, which states that those
sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by
one year or more of imprisonment, within two years after serving sentence, are disqualified from
running for any elective local position[1].

- Moreno's Argument: Moreno argued that he should not be disqualified because he had been granted
probation and had not served his sentence. He claimed that the Probation Law should be considered an
exception to the Local Government Code[1].

- The Supreme Court's Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Moreno, finding that the two-year
period of ineligibility under Section 40(a) of the Local Government Code does not begin to run for those
who have not served their sentence due to the grant of probation. The Court held that the Probation
Law should be construed as an exception to the Local Government Code[1].

Key Takeaways:

- The Supreme Court recognized that probation is a suspension of the execution of a sentence, not a
service of the sentence[1].

- The Court emphasized that the Probation Law should be considered an exception to the Local
Government Code, meaning that it takes precedence over the general provisions of the Local
Government Code in cases involving probationers[1].

- This ruling has significant implications for the disqualification of candidates with criminal records in the
Philippines. It clarifies that probationers are not automatically disqualified from running for public office,
even if they have been convicted of a crime[2].

The Moreno v. COMELEC case is a landmark decision that has shaped the interpretation of election laws
in the Philippines. It highlights the importance of considering the specific circumstances of a case and
the nuances of different laws when determining the eligibility of candidates for public office.

You might also like