ChanRobles Virtual law Library
PHILIPPINE SUPREME
COURT
DECISIONS
ON-LINE
Sponsored by: The ChanRobles LawNet
Search www.chanrobles.com
.
Republic of the
Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
ATTY. ROMULO B.
MACALINTAL,
Petitioner,
G.R.
No.
157013
July 10, 2003
COMMISSION ON
ELECTIONS,
HON. ALBERTO ROMULO,
IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY,
AND HON. EMILIA
T. BONCODIN, SECRETARY OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET
AND MANAGEMENT,
Respondents.
CONCURRING OPINION
Azcuna,
J.:
.
I concur with the ponencia, but wish to state an additional basis to sustain Section 5 (d) of Republic Act No. 9189, which provides:
Sec. 5. Disqualifications. - The following shall be disqualified from voting under this Act:Petitioner contends that Filipinos who establish permanent residence abroad have thereby abandoned their Philippine domicile of origin and replaced it with a domicile of choice in a foreign country. This may indeed be true, but with the execution of the affidavit provided for under Section 5 (d) aforementioned, the affiant expressly states an abandonment of said domicile of choice. The legal effect of this expression is to revive the domicile of origin. For unlike a domicile of choice, which requires both intention and physical presence to be established or maintained, the domicile of origin can be revived by an intention properly expressed. Thus, the abandonment of the present domicile of choice, by the execution of the affidavit, operates to revive the domicile of origin to replace it, because of the principle that no person can be without a domicile at any time. chan robles virtual law libraryx x x chan robles virtual law library x x x chan robles virtual law library x x x
d) An immigrant or a permanent resident who is recognized as such in the host country, unless he/she executes, upon registration, an affidavit prepared for the purpose by the Commission declaring that he/she shall resume actual physical permanent residence in the Philippines not later than three (3) years from approval of his/her registration under this Act. Such affidavit shall also state that he/she has not applied for citizenship in another country. Failure to return shall be cause for the removal of the name of the immigrant or permanent resident from the National Registry of Absentee Voters and his/her permanent disqualification to vote in absentia.
The moment a foreign domicile is abandoned, the native domicile is reacquired.[1] chan robles virtual law library
When a person abandons his domicile of choice, his domicile of origin immediately reverts and remains until a new domicile of choice is established.[2] chan robles virtual law library
On the abandonment of a domicile of choice, the domicile of origin immediately reverts, without regard to any definite intent to return to such original domicile, provided there is a definite intent finally to abandon the acquired domicile of choice.[3] chan robles virtual law library
Through the execution
of the affidavit, the affiant does the operative act that makes said
affiant
once more a Philippine domiciliary. The requirement of resuming
actual
physical presence within three (3) years is only a test of such
intention,
but is not needed to effect the change or reversion of domicile.
If the affiant does not resume the residence physically within said
period,
then the intent expressed in the affidavit is defective and the law
will
deem it inoperative, thereby allowing removal of affiant’s name from
the
National Registry of Absentee Voters.
chan robles virtual law library
Endnotes:
[1]
Story, Conflict Of Laws, Secs. 47, 48.
chan robles virtual law library
[2]
Kennan, A Treatise On Residence And Domicile, Sec. 191.
[3]
Annot., 5 ALR 300 (1920).
chan robles virtual law library
chan
robles virtual law library
Back to Top - Back to Main Index - Back to Table of Contents -2003 SC Decisions - Back to Home
|
|