BONDOC, JOSHUA ROBERT B.

25 MAY 2024
22103116

I.

A. De facto officer is one whose acts are not as a lawful officer but are considered valid due to public
policy and justice. In addition, these de facto officers have a color of title, there exist a de jure office
which they occupy and such acts are, again, valid due to acquiescence of the public to which
primordial concern is placed.

B. Grave misconduct is defined as unlawfully and negligently conducted acts where elements of
corruption, willful neglect of the established rules and disregard of the law are present.

C. Abandonment of office is where a public officer, before the acceptance of his resignation, he leaves
his office to the detriment of the public.

D. Malfeasance are acts by which the public officer who has authority conferred by law exercises such
inattentively or maliciously. In addition, such acts of the public officer are exercised beyond the scope
of his authority (i.e. ultra vires)

E. Nuisance candidates are those candidates who cause confusion, makes a mockery of the election
process and those who have no bona fide intention to run for office.

II.

A. Interpretative regulations are merely a restatement of the laws made by congress. Legislative
regulations are those regulations that fill-in the gaps of those laws made by congress. Both of which
have a law which provides for the creation of the regulations.

B. Regular appointments are those appointments made during the session of congress and ad interim
appointments are those made when congress is not in session.

C. Ministerial and discretionary powers; the former is where the public officer exercises mechanical
acts provided by law with regard to his official functions where no independent judgment is needed.
However, the latter is provided by law to the public officer wherein which the public officer uses
independent judgment, knowledge and skill in the exercise of his function.

D. Nonfeasance is where the public officer fails to act where the law specifically provides for his
function. Misfeasance on the other hand is where the public officers acts negligently while exercising
his function.

E. Residence is the place where an individual resides as a temporary place of abode. Domicile is the
where an individual resides as a permanent place of abode.

III.

A. A petition for disqualification is the means by which a candidate may be removed from the election
by reason of overspending than what the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has made, terrorism,
vote-buying and other reasons as stated in the Local Government Code or the Omnibus Election Code.
However, a candidate who has been removed by this mode may be substituted.

B. Petition to Deny Due Course is a remedy where the candidate has been seen to have the intention
to materially misrepresent himself to the body politic by means of falsifying material information in
his certificate of candidacy. The option to be substituted is not allowed under this mode.
 C. Petition for Quo Warranto is the remedy where the candidate may be removed from the election
because he/she/they has been disloyal to the republic of the Philippines and is ineligible. Such remedy
is available to any interested party to be filed to the COMELEC or any of its divisions. This is covers a
wider scope to attack a elective officer.

D. Election protest is the means to question the integrity of the Board of Canvassers where in material
error has been conducted as to the ballots and other critical aspects of the election which
disenfranchises the body politics’ right to suffrage.

IV.

A sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court may be removed by impeachment and/or a Quo
Warranto. Impeachment is done upon the request of the house of representative, creating the
articles (i.e. reasons) why the sitting Chief Justice should be impeached, a hearing subsequently
conducted by the Senate where the Senate president acts as judge and then the vote whether or not
the sitting Chief Justice should be impeached. On the other hand, a petition for Quo Warranto,
jurisprudence has discussed in the case of Sereno where a sitting Chief Justice who is ineligible to be a
justice based on the integrity one must have as regards the declaration on her Statement of Assets
and Liabilities (SALN), is unbecoming of a judge therefore a petition Quo Warranto is proper to
question “by what right” does a public officer have in occupying such office.

V.

A. A petition for disqualification has different grounds (e.g. terrorism, vote-buying, overspending, etc.)
compared to a petition to cancel COC under Sec. 78 of the Omnibus Election Code (e.g. material
misrepresentation in the certificate of candidacy). The grounds clearly differentiate the two remedies
as provided in the Omnibus Election Code (OEC). As to consequences, as stated earlier, the benefit of
a substitution is not available if a candidate’s certificate of candidacy is to be canceled under Sec. 78
of the OEC. On the other hand, a candidate who has been disqualified may be substituted. This
benefit is material to any party who desires to run for office.

B. The twin requirements under R.A. 9225 before a former Filipino naturalized foreign citizen can run
for public office is first he must take his oath to the republic of the Philippines and second he must
renounce his allegiance to the other state to which he is connected.

C. No. Case law provides, the twin requirement under R.A. 9225 is a pre-requisite for those
naturalized citizens who does an act to acquire citizenship to another country. However, those natural
born citizens, provided that the United States adhere to the principle of Jus Soli where any person
who is born in the United States acquires U.S. Citizenship, does not make an act to acquire citizenship
is considered a natural born citizen and is not required to adhere to the twin requirement under R.A.
9225. Here, it is clear that Harold was born in the United States who did not do any other act to
acquire his citizenship. Therefore, he is a Natural Born Citizen who does not need to adhere (i.e.
comply) with the twin requirement under R.A. 9225.

D. A petition to Cancel COC under Sec. 78 of the Omnibus Election Code. Under said law, a petition for
cancellation of certificate of election is when a candidate materially misrepresents any information in
his certificate of candidacy. Here, it is categorical that citizenship is a material factor in the certificate
of candidacy. Since Harold was a naturalized citizen who did not comply with the twin notice
requirement of R.A. 9225, he has compromised his eligibility to run for office. This in effect will cause
confusion to his citizenship as his allegiance may be a proponent of scrutiny. Therefore, a petition to
Cancel COC is proper.