PEDRO GALLEGO, petitioner, vs. VICENTE VERRA, respondent. G.R. No. L-48641, November 24, 1941 - SUFFRAGE

OZAETA, J.:

FACTS:

1. Pedro Gallego, herein petitioner, is a native of Abuyog, Leyte. He was a school teacher in different municipalities and ran for municipal mayor post in his hometown but was defeated. 

2. After his defeat, he was in debt and unemployed. He first went to Oriental Misamis, but finding no employment, he proceeded to Kaato-an, Malaybalay Bukidnon where he arrived on 20 June 1938 and instantly found a job as a nurseryman in the chichona plantation of the Bureau of Forestry. He went back to Abuyog on 30 July 1938 for an offer of being a school teacher. He did not accept the job and returned to Kaato-an on 23 August 1938 until his resignation in 1940. During his stay in Kaato-an, his wife and children remained in Abuyog. He didn't take his family to the house the government offered to him nor availed parcels of land within the reserve of chichona reservation. While he was in Malaybalay, he and his wife purchased real property in Abuyog.

3. Nevertheless, the Court declared that Gallego had acquired a residence or domicile in Malaybalay since: 

   3.1. he registered as an elector in precinct No. 14 of Lantapan, Malaybalay;

   3.2. he voted there in an assemblyman election in December 1938; and

   3.3. although his voter's affidavit corresponding to his period of residence in Malaybalay was left blank, he still obtained a residence certificate in 1940.

4. In the 1940 general elections, he ran as a municipal mayor of Abuyog and won over Vicente Verra. However, Verra petitioned that Gallego's election be declared illegal on the ground that he did not meet the residence qualification since he was then a resident and registered voter in Malaybalay.

5. The trial Court of Appeals declared that the herein petitioner Pedro Gallego had acquired a residence or domicile of origin in the municipality of Malaybalay, Bukidnon, and had lost his domicile of origin in the municipality of Abuyog, Leyte, at the time he was elected mayor of the latter municipality, and, that, therefore, his ELECTION was VOID. 

ISSUE/s:

1. Whether or not Pedro Gallego not Pedro Gallego had been resident of Abuyog for at one year prior to December 10, 1940:

a. Did he lose his domicile in Abuyog by the mere fact that he worked in Malaybalay as a government employee, registered himself as a voter and voted there in the election for assemblymen in December, 1938, and secured his residence certificate there for the year 1940?

b. Assuming that he did, had he reacquired his domicile of origin at least one year prior to his election as mayor of Abuyog on December 10, 1040?

2. Whether or not Gallego validly exercised his right to suffrage during the 1938 assemblyman election as a resident of Malaybalay. 

RULING:

1. YES. Gallego had been a resident of Abuyog for at one year prior to December 10, 1940:

a. NO. Gallego didn't lose his residence. 

In election law, "residence" is synonymous with "domicile" which imports not only intention to reside in a fixed place but also personal presence in that place, coupled with conduct indicative of such intention (Nuval vs. Guray, 52 Phil., 645). 

In order to acquire a domicile by choice, there must concur

(1) residence or bodily presence in the new locality,

(2) an intention to remain there, and

(3) an intention to abandon the old domicile. 

Thus, there must be a purpose to remain in or at the domicile of choice for an indefinite period of time. 

The SC believed that Gallego did not reside in Malaybalay with the intention of staying there indefinitely and not returning to Abuyog. He was employed in Samar and other municipalities in Leyte but he always returned to Abuyog. He even bought a piece of land in Abuyog and didn't avail the government's offer of 10 hectares of land within chicona reservation where he worked as a nurseryman. During the 2 year periof of his stay in Malaybalay as a government employee, he visited Abuyog and his family 3 times despite the great distance between Malaybalay and Abuyog.

b. NO. Petitioner did not lose his domicile of origin at all. The intent of the law in fixing a residence qualification is to exclude a stranger or newcomer, unacquainted with the conditions and needs of a community and not identified with the latter, from an elective office to serve that community.

Gallego is native of Abuyog, had run for the same office of municipal mayor of said town in the preceding election, had only been absent therefrom for about two years without losing contact with his townspeople and without intention of remaining and residing indefinitely in the place of his employment; and he was elected with an overwhelming majority of nearly 800 votes in a third-class municipality. 

Thus, the will of the electorate should be respected. 

2. Yes. Gallego validly exercised his right to suffrage. The qualification of residence to exercise to suffrage in municipality back then was just 6months preceding the election. He started residing in Malaybalay in June, registered as an elector in October, and voted in December 1938. He also obtained a certificate stating that he has resided Malaybalay for one year and a half.