Adormeo v.

COMELEC

Facts:

- Petitioner and private respondent were the only candidates who filed their certificates of candidacy for mayor of Lucena City
in the May 14, 2001 elections

o Respondent was then the incumbent Mayor

- Private respondent Talaga, Jr. was elected mayor in May 1992. He served the full term. Again, he was re-elected in 1995-
1998. In the election of 1998, he lost to Bernard G. Tagarao. In the recall election of May 12, 2000, he again won and served
the unexpired term of Tagarao until June 30, 2001

- On March 2, 2001, petitioner filed a Petition to Deny Due Course to or Cancel Certificate of Candidacy and/or Disqualification
of Ramon Y. Talaga, Jr., on the ground that the latter was elected and had served as city mayor for three (3) consecutive
terms

- COMELEC, 1st Division:

o Disqualified Respondent on the ground that he had already served 3 consecutive terms and had his COC ordered
withdrawn and/or cancelled

- COMELEC, En Banc:

o Ruled in favor of Respondent

o Respondent was not elected for three (3) consecutive terms because he did not win in the May 11, 1998 elections

o He was installed only as mayor by reason of his victory in the recall elections

o That his victory in the recall elections was not considered a term of office and is not included in the 3-term
disqualification rule

o He did not fully serve the three (3) consecutive terms, and his loss in the May 11, 1998 elections is considered an
interruption in the continuity of his service as Mayor of Lucena City

- On May 19, 2001, after canvassing, private respondent was proclaimed as the duly elected Mayor

- Hence the present Petition

Issue:

- W/N Public Respondent acted with GADLEJ when it declared Respondent qualified to run for Mayor in Lucena City

Held:

- No

Ratio:

- As held in Borja v. Comelec, the term limit for elective local officials must be taken to refer to the right to be elected as well
as the right to serve in the same elective position

- Consequently, it is not enough that an individual has served three consecutive terms in an elective local office, he must also
have been elected to the same position for the same number of times before the disqualification can apply

- As held in Lonzanida v. COMELEC, there are two conditions for the application of the disqualification must concur: a) that the
official concerned has been elected for three consecutive terms in the same local government post and 2) that he has fully
served three consecutive terms

- Accordingly, COMELEC’s ruling that private respondent was not elected for three (3) consecutive terms should be upheld.
For nearly two years he was a private citizen. The continuity of his mayorship was disrupted by his defeat in the 1998
elections

- The petitioner vacated his post a few months before the next mayoral elections, not by voluntary renunciation but in
compliance with the legal process of writ of execution issued by the COMELEC to that effect. Such involuntary severance
from office is an interruption of continuity of service and thus, the petitioner did not fully serve the 1995-1998 mayoral term
- Petition is DISMISSED