Romualdez-Marcos vs.

COMELEC

DOCTRINE:
If a person retains his domicile of origin for purposes of the residence requirement, the 1 year period is
irrelevant because wherever he is, he is a resident of his domicile of origin. Second, if a person
reestablishes a previously abandoned domicile, the 1 year requirement must be satisfied. (Bernas book)

Facts:
March 8, 1995 Marcos filed her Certificate of Candidacy for the position of Representative of the First
District of Leyte with the Provincial Election Supervisor.

March 23, 1995 Montejo, incumbent of and candidate for the same position, filed a petition for
cancellation and disqualification with the COMELEC, alleging that Marcos did not meet the residency
requirement.

March 29, 1995 Marcos filed an Amended/Corrected Certificate of Candidacy in the COMELECs head
office in Intramuros claiming that her error in the first certificate was the result of an honest
misrepresentation and that she has always maintained Tacloban City as her domicile or residence.

April 24, 1995 COMELEC Second Division by a vote of 2-1 came up with a Resolution that found
Montejos petition for disqualification meritorious, Marcos corrected certificate of candidacy void, and
her original certificate cancelled.

May 7, 1995 COMELEC en banc denied Marcos Motion for Reconsideration of the Resolution drafted
on April 24.

May 11, 1995 COMELEC issued another Resolution allowing Marcos proclamation to the office should
the results of the canvass show that she obtained the highest number of votes. However, this was
reversed and instead directed that the proclamation would be suspended even if she did win.

May 25, 1995 In a supplemental petition, Marcos declared that she was the winner of the said
Congressional election.
ISSUE: Whether petitioner has satisfied the 1year residency requirement to be eligible in running as
representative of the First District of Leyte.





HELD:

Residence is used synonymously with domicile for election purposes. The court are in favor of a
conclusion supporting petitoners claim of legal residence or domicile in the First District of Leyte
despite her own declaration of 7 months residency in the district for the following reasons:

1. A minor follows the domicile of his parents. As domicile, once acquired is retained until a new one is
gained, it follows that in spite of the fact of petitioner's being born in Manila, Tacloban, Leyte was her
domicile of origin by operation of law. This domicile was not established only when her father brought
his family back to Leyte

2. Domicile of origin is not easily lost. To successfully effect a change of domicile, one must
demonstrate:
37

1. An actual removal or an actual change of domicile;
2. A bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a
new one; and
3. Acts which correspond with the purpose.
In the absence of clear and positive proof based on these criteria, the residence of origin should be
deemed to continue.
3. A wife does not automatically gain the husbands domicile because the term residence in Civil Law
does not mean the same thing in Political Law. (The presumption that the wife automatically gains the
husband's domicile by operation of law upon marriage cannot be inferred from the use of the term
"residence" in Article 110 of the Civil Code because the Civil Code is one area where the two concepts
are well delineated).

4. Even assuming for the sake of argument that petitioner gained a new "domicile" after her marriage
and only acquired a right to choose a new one after her husband died, petitioner's acts following her
return to the country clearly indicate that she not only impliedly but expressly chose her domicile of
origin (assuming this was lost by operation of law) as her domicile. This "choice" was unequivocally
expressed in her letters to the Chairman of the PCGG when petitioner sought the PCGG's permission to
"rehabilitate (our) ancestral house in Tacloban and Farm in Olot, Leyte. . . to make them livable for the
Marcos family to have a home in our homeland." She even kept close ties by establishing residences in
Tacloban, celebrating her birthdays and other important milestones.

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.