I. 1. Yes.

Case of Bengson v HRET

(Repatriation) Pubcorp exam answers of jim
2. Jan 2018 took an oath of oath of I.
allegiance. 1. Yes
Election: May 2019 2. Qualified to run. Mercado vs
Satisfies the 1 year residency manzano and aquino vs comelec
requirement. II. Section 5(2) of RA 9225
Citizenship: Recovered his original III.
status on Jan 2018 thru repatriation. A. No
B. No
II. Section 5 (2) of RA 9225 C. Differentiate see notes
Should make a personal D. 9 seats
renunciation of any and full foreign E. See sec. 2 art. XI of consti
citizenship before any public officer IV.
authorized to administer an oath. A. No.
B. No
III. Ad interim or topic on C. Valid
appointment not included D. No
E. No
IV. V.
1. No A. Illegal and unconsti. See sec 13 art
2. Yes. De facto govt official can VII of consti and Civil liberties vs
receive salaries and allowances exec sec
while in office. B. No.
3. It shall be void? (not sure) C. Differentiate see notes
4. Not during her tenure as de facto D. No
congressman however since she was D1. Yes
not the duly elected congressman E. Differentiate see notes
hence she can be requested by the VI. Wala kay putol
Pres. VII.
5. No, 1 year prohibition under Art A. Yes
IX-B, Section 16. B. No . See Jalosjos vs COMELEC. The
effectivity of this accessory penalty
V guys answeri nnyu hahahhahahah (perpetual special disqualification) does not
depend on the duration of the principal
VI penalty, or on whether the convict serves
his jail sentence or not. The convict
1. Yes because appointment was
becomes ineligible to run for any elective
done before she became the public office perpetually.
president’s wife.
2. He still single prior to the filing of C. Yes
the SALN. (present year) VIII. Wala kay putol.
3. HRMO

VII.
1. Yes. Fugitive from justice
2. Yes.
3. Yes if it’s an absolute pardon