(1) Gandang Bai filed her certificate of candidacy (COC) for municipal mayor stating that she is eligible to run for the said position. Pasyo Maagap, who also filed his COC for the same position, filed a petition to deny due course or cancel Bai’s COC under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code for material misrepresentation as before Bai filed her COC, she had already been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. Hence, she is disqualified perpetually from holding any public office or from being elected to any public office. Before the election, the COMELEC cancelled Bai’ s COC but her motion for reconsideration (MR) remained pending even after the election. Bai garnered the highest number of votes followed by Pasyo Maagap, who took his oath as Acting Mayor. Thereafter, the COMELEC denied Bai’s MR and declared her disqualified for running for Mayor. P. Maagap asked the Department of Interior and Local Government Secretary to be allowed to take his oath as permanent municipal mayor. This request was opposed by Vice Mayor Umaasa, invoking the rule on succession to the permanent vacancy in the Mayor’s office. Who between Pasyo Maagap and Vice Mayor Umaasa has the right to occupy the position of Mayor? Explain your answer. (5%)
(2) How do you differentiate the petition filed under Section 68 from the petition filed under Section 78, both of the Omnibus Election Code? (3%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
Pasyo Maagap has the right to be Mayor. Sections 68 and 78 differ in grounds, status, substitution, and succession. Under Aratea and Maquiling, cancelling a COC under Section 78 renders it void ab initio; the
Unlock the full Political Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What is the legal effect of the cancellation of a Certificate of Candidacy under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code?
Section 78 cancellation renders the COC void ab initio, treating the person as a non-candidate whose votes are stray.
In Maquiling v. COMELEC, who assumes office when the candidate receiving the highest votes is declared a non-candidate under Section 78?
The qualified candidate who received the highest number of valid votes assumes office because the non-candidate's votes are stray.
How does a petition under Section 68 differ from a petition under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code?
Section 68 focuses on commission of election offenses, whereas Section 78 targets false material representations regarding candidate eligibility.
Can a candidate whose Certificate of Candidacy was cancelled under Section 78 be validly substituted before an election?
Choices available with full access.
Under the Local Government Code, when does the Vice Mayor succeed to the office of Municipal Mayor?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Cancellation of COC
Under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code, a petition to deny due course or cancel a certificate of candidacy (COC) is grounded on a deliberate material misrepresentation regarding a candidate's eligibility. When a COC is cancelled under Section 78, the cancellation retroacts to the date of filing, rendering the COC void ab initio. The person whose COC is cancelled is considered a non-candidate who was never validly nominated or voted for. Consequently, votes cast for such a non-candidate are deemed stray votes and cannot be counted in favor of that disqualified person.
2. Top Eligible Candidate
In Maquiling v. COMELEC and Aratea v. COMELEC, the Supreme Court established that when the candidate who garnered the highest number of votes is declared a non-candidate due to a cancelled COC under Section 78, the second-placer rule does not apply. Because the non-candidate's votes are completely stray, the qualified candidate who received the highest number of valid votes is legally recognized as the true winner of the election. Therefore, the eligible candidate with the highest votes assumes the permanent office, rather than triggering the rule on administrative succession under the Local Government Code.
3. Section 68 Disqualification
A petition filed under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code seeks to disqualify a candidate for committing prohibited election offenses, such as bribery or terrorism. Unlike Section 78 cancellation, a Section 68 petition does not render the COC void ab initio. The respondent remains a valid candidate until disqualified by final judgment, and candidate substitution is permitted before the election under statutory rules. If a winning candidate is disqualified under Section 68 after the election, a permanent vacancy arises in the office, which must be filled through legal succession by the Vice Mayor.