This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2015-09-22 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| We have held that in order to justify the cancellation of COC under Section 78, it is essential that the false representation mentioned therein pertains to a material matter for the sanction imposed by this provision would affect the substantive rights of a candidate - the right to run for the elective post for which he filed the certificate of candidacy.[36] We concluded that material representation contemplated by Section 78 refers to qualifications for elective office, such as the requisite residency, age, citizenship or any other legal qualification necessary to run for a local elective office as provided for in the Local Government Code.[37] Furthermore, aside from the requirement of materiality, the misrepresentation must consist of a deliberate attempt to mislead, misinform, or hide a fact which would otherwise render a candidate ineligible.[38] We, therefore, find no grave abuse of discretion committed by the COMELEC in canceling petitioner's COC for material misrepresentation. | |||||