[No. L-8014.

March 14, 1955]

PEDRO V. VILAR, petitioner and appellant, vs.

GAUDENCIO V. PARAISO, respondent and appellant.

1. APPEALS; APPELLATE JURISDICTION WHERE BOTH

PARTIES APPEAL AND ONE OF THE APPEALS
RAISES ONLY QUESTIONS OF LAW.—Where the
petitioner raises in his brief only questions of law and the
respondent, who is also an appellant, raises both
questions of law and fact, and the appeals of both parties
are indivisible in that they pertain to only one case, the
Supreme Court, under sections 17 and 31 of the Judiciary
Act of 1948, may take cognizance of both appeals.

2. ELECTION CONTESTS; MUNICIPAL OFFICE;

ECCLESIASTIC INELIGIBLE TO HOLD MUNICIPAL
OFFICE; WHO ARE ECCLESIASTICS.—An ecclesiastic
is ineligible to hold a municipal office under section 2175
of the Revised Administrative Code. An Ordained minister
of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines
registered as such in the Bureau of Public Libraries with
authority to solemnize marriages, is an ecclesiastic and
ineligible to hold the office of the Municipal Mayor.
Resignation as such minister and acceptance thereof by
the cabinet of his church, are but self-serving evidence if
the resignation and its acceptance are not registered with
the Bureau of Public Libraries. If a candidate to a
municipal office is a minister of a church with license to
solemnize marriages, it is his duty (and not of his church)
to secure from the Bureau of Public Libraries the
cancellation of his resignation as minister and to attach to
his certificate of candidacy a copy of such resignation.

3. ID.; IMPORTANCE AND PURPOSE OF REGISTRATION

WITH THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC LIBRARIES.—The
importance of registration cannot be underestimated. The
purpose of registration is two-fold: to inform the public not
only of the authority of the minister to discharge religious
functions but equally to keep it informed of any change in
his religious status. This information is necessary for the
protection of the public. This is especially so with regard
 to the authority to solemnize marriages, the registration
of which is made by the law mandatory (Articles 92-96,
New Civil Code).

4. ID.; ELECTION FOR MUNICIPAL MAYOR; IF PERSON

ELECTED is INELIGIBLE, CANDIDATE OCCUPYING
SECOND PLACE CANNOT BE DECLARED BY COURT
ELECTED.—When the person elected is

660

660 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Vilar vs. Paraiso

ineligible, the court cannot declare that the candidate

occupying the second place has been elected, even if he
were eligible. (Nuval vs. Guray, 52 Phil., 645; Llamoso vs.
Ferrer, 47 Off. Gaz., No. 2, p. 727.)

APPEALS from a judgment of the Court of First Instance

of Nueva Ecija. Nable. J.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Claro M. Recto and Jose Nava for petitioner and
appellant.
Josefina R. Phodaca and Naomi P. Salvador for
respondent and appellant.

BAUTISTA ANGELO, J.:

In the general elections held on November 13, 1951, Pedro

V. Vilar and Gaudencio V. Paraiso were among the
candidates registered and voted for the office of mayor of
Rizal, Nueva Ecija. After the canvass was made, Vilar
obtained 1,467 votes while Paraiso garnered 1,509, and as
a result the municipal board of canvassers proclaimed the
latter as the mayor duly elected with a plurality of 41
votes. However, contending that Paraiso was ineligible to
hold office as mayor because he was then a minister of the
United Church of Christ in the Philippines and such was
disqualified to be a candidate under section 2175 of the
Revised Administrative Code, Vilar instituted the present
quo warranto proceedings praying that Paraiso be declared
ineligible to assume office and that his proclamation as
mayor-elect be declared null and void. He also prayed that
he be declared duly elected mayor of Rizal, Nueva Ecija, in
lieu of respondent Paraiso.
 Respondent in his answer denied his ineligibility and
claimed that he resigned as minister of the United Church
of Christ in the Philippines on August 21, 1951, that his
resignation was accepted by the cabinet of his church at a
special meeting held in Polo, Bulacan on August 27, 1951,
and that even if respondent was not eligible to the office,
petitioner could not be declared elected to take his place.

661

VOL. 96, MARCH 14, 1955 661

Vilar vs. Paraiso

After due trial, the court found respondent to be ineligible

for the office of mayor, being an ecclesiastic, and,
consequently, it declared his proclamation as mayor null
and void, but refrained from declaring petitioner as mayor-
elect for lack of sufficient legal grounds to do so. From this
decision both parties have appealed, respondent from that
portion finding him ineligible, and petitioner from that
portion holding he cannot be declared elected as mayor for
lack of sufficient legal grounds to do so.
The case was originally taken to the Court of Appeals.
However, as the latter court found that while petitioner
raises in his brief only questions of law respondent raises
both questions of law and fact, and both appeals are
indivisible in that they pertain to only one case, that court
resolved to certify it to this Court pursuant to the
provisions of sections 17 and 31 of the Judiciary Act of
1948, upon the theory that one of the appeals is exclusively
cognizable by the Supreme Court.
The only issue before us is whether respondent, being an
ecclesiastic, is ineligible to hold office under section 2175 of
the Revised Administrative Code, or whether he actually
resigned as minister before the date of the elections, and
his resignation duly accepted, as claimed, thereby
removing his disability. As may be noted, this is a question
of fact the determination of which much depends upon the
credibility and weight of the evidence of both parties,
The evidence for petitioner tends to show that
respondent was ordained as minister of the Evangelical
Church of the Philippines in 1944 and as such was given
license to solemnize marriages by the Bureau of Public
Libraries; that since 1944 up to 1950 he acted as minister
in the town of Rizal, Nueva Ecija, continuously and without
interruption and has been renewing his license to
solemnize marriages as prescribed by the regulations of the
Bureau of Public Libraries; that on April 19, 1950,
respondent transferred to the United Church of Christ in
the Philip-

662

662 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Vilar vs. Paraiso

pines, having been assigned to work in the same place and

chapel during the years 1944-1950; that on April 7, 1951,
respondent applied for, and was issued, a license to
solemnize marriages by the Bureau of Public Libraries as
minister of the new church up to the end of April, 1952;
that said license has never been cancelled, as neither the
head of the united church nor respondent has requested for
its cancellation; and that respondent has been publicly
known as minister of the United Church of Christ, but he
has not attached to his certificate of candidacy a copy of his
alleged resignation as minister.
The evidence for the respondent, on the other hand,
tends to show that while he was formerly a minister of the
United Church of Christ in the Philippines, he, however,
filed his resignation as such minister on August 21, 1951,
because of his desire to engage in politics; that said
resignation was accepted by the cabinet of his church at a
special meeting held in Polo, Bulacan on August 27, 1951;
that respondent turned over his chapel and his office to the
elder members of his religious order on August 21, 1951,
and since then he considered himself separated from his
order and in fact he has refrained ever since from
conducting any religious services pertaining to that order.
Which of these versions is correct?
After carefully examining the evidence of record, and
after weighing its credibility and probative value, we have
not 'found any reason for deviating from the finding of the
trial court that respondent never ceased as minister of the
order to which he belonged and that the resignation he
claims to have filed months before the date of the elections
is but a mere scheme to circumvent the prohibition of the
law regarding ecclesiastics who desire to run for a
municipal office. Indeed, if respondent really and sincerely
intended to resign as minister of the religious organization
to which he belonged for the purpose of

663

VOL. 96, MARCH 14, 1955 663

 Vilar vs. Paraiso

launching his candidacy why did he not resign in due form

and have the acceptance of his resignation registered with
1
the Bureau of Public Libraries. The importance of
resignation cannot be underestimated. The purpose of
registration is two-fold: to inform the public not only of the
authority of the minister to discharge religious functions,
but equally to keep it informed of any change in his
religious status. This information is necessary for the
protection of the public. This is especially so with regard to
the authority to solemnized marriages, the registration of
which is made by the law mandatory (Articles 92-96, new
Civil Code). It is no argument to say that the duty to secure
the cancellation of the requisite resignation devolves, not
upon respondent, but upon the head of his organization or
upon the official in charge of such registration, upon proper
showing of the reason for such cancellation, because the
law likewise imposes upon the interested party the duty of
effecting such cancellation, who in the instant case is the
respondent himself. This he failed to do. And what is more,
he failed to attach to his certificate of candidacy, a copy of
his alleged resignation as minister knowing full well that a
minister is disqualified by law to run for a municipal office.
It is true that respondent attempted to substantiate his
claim by submitting as evidence certain documents
purporting to show the alleged resignation and its
acceptance by the cabinet of his church at a meeting held
on August 27, 1951, but, considering said documents in the
light of the shortcomings we have pointed out above, one
cannot help but brand them as self-serving or as documents
merely prepared to serve the political designs of respondent
in an attempt to obviate his disqualification under the law.
And this feeling appears strengthened

_______________

1 Regulations for the enforcement of the Marriage Law issued by

the Director of Public Libraries and approved by the Secretary of
Education on February 26, 1951, in connection with Article 95, new
Civil Code.

664

664 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Vilar vs. Paraiso
if we examine the so-called minute book wherein, according
to witness Jose Agpalo, are entered the minutes of all the
meetings of the church, because upon an examination
thereof one would at once get the impression that it was
prepared haphazardly and not with such seriousness and
solemnity that should characterize the religious activities
of a well established religious order. As the trial court aptly
remarked "All these lead the court to believe with the
petitioner, that the supposed resignation and acceptance
were made at a later date to cure the ineligibility of the
respondent." We are therefore constrained to hold that
respondent is disqualified to hold the office of mayor as
found by the trial court.
As to the question whether, respondent being ineligible,
petitioner can be declared elected, having obtained second
place in the elections, our answer is simple: this Court has
already declared that this cannot be done in the absence of
an express provision authorizing such declaration. Our law
not only does not contain any such provision but
apparently seems to prohibit it. This is what we said in at
least two cases where we laid down a ruling which is
decisive of the present case.

"* * *, In the first case when the person elected is ineligible, the
court cannot declare that the candidate occupying the second
place has been elected, even if he were eligible, since the law only
authorizes a declaration of election in favor of the person who has
obtained a plurality of votes, and has presented his certificate of
candidacy." (Nuval vs. Guray, 52 Phil., 645.)
"Section 173 of Republic Act No. 180 known as the Revised
Election Code, does not provide that if the contestee is declared
ineligible the contestant will be proclaimed. Indeed it may be
gathered that the law contemplates no such result, because it
permits the filing of the contest by any registered candidate
irrespective of whether the latter occupied the next highest place
or the lowest in the election returns." (Llamoso vs. Ferrer, et al.,
84 Phil., 489, 47 Off. Gaz,, [No. 2] p. 727.)

Wherefore, the decision appealed from is affirmed, without

pronouncement as to costs.

665

VOL. 96, MARCH 19, 1955 665

Chua Hiong vs. Deportation Board

Parás, C. J., Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor,

Reyes, A., Jugo, Labrador, Concepción and Reyes, J. B. L.,
 JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.

_______________

© Copyright 2018 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.