Instruction: Write the letter of your choice in your booklet. For the
problem, write your answer with explanation why.
1.Mayor Lucia of Casidsid filed her certificate of candidacy for
congresswoman of the district covering Casidsid. Still, she continued to act as
mayor of Casidsid without collecting her salaries as such. When she lost the
election and a new mayor assumed office, she filed an action to collect the
salaries she did not get while serving as mayor even when she ran for
congresswoman. Is her action correct?
A. No, salaries can be waived and she waived them.
B. No, because her acts as de facto officer are void insofar as she is
concerned.
C. Yes, public policy demands that a de facto officer enjoy the same
rights of a de jure officer.
D. A. Yes, it is but just that she be paid for
the service she rendered
2.Anton was the duly elected Mayor of Tunawi in the local elections of
2004.He got 51% of all the votes cast. Fourteen months later, Victoria, who
also ran for mayor, filed with the Local Election Registrar, a petition for
recall against Anton. The COMELEC approved the petition and set a date for its
signing by other qualified voters in order to garner at least 25% of the total
number of registered voters or total number of those who actually voted during
the local election in 2005, whichever is
lower. Anton attacked the COMELEC resolution for being invalid. Do you agree
with Anton?
A. No, the petition, though initiated by just one person, may be
ratified by at least 25% of the total number of registered voters.
B. No, the petition, though initiated by just one person may be ratified
by at least25% of those who actually voted during the 2004 local elections.
C. Yes, the petition should be initiated by at least 25% of the total
number of registered voters who actually voted during the 2004 local elections.
D. Yes,the petition should be initiated by at least 25% of the total
number of registered voters of Tunawi.
3.Van sought to disqualify Manresa as congresswoman of the third
district of Manila on the ground that the latter is a greencard holder. By the
time the case was decided against Manresa, she had already served her full term
as congresswoman. What was Manresa's status during her incumbency as congresswoman?
A. She was a de jure officer, having been duly elected.
B. She was not a public officer because she had no valid existing public
office.
C. She was a de jure officer since she completed her term before she was
disqualified.
D. She was a de facto officer since she was elected, served, and her disqualification
only came later.
4.Adela served as Mayor of Kasim for 2 consecutive terms. On her third
term, COMELEC ousted her in an election protest that Gudi, her opponent, filed against
her. Two years later, Gudi faced recall proceedings and Adela ran in the recall
election against him. Adela won and served as Mayor for Gudi's remaining term.
Can Adela run again for Mayor in the next succeeding election without violating
the 3 term limit?
A. No, she won the regular mayoralty election for two consecutive terms
and the recall election constitutes her third term.
B. A. No, she already won the mayoralty election for 3 consecutive
terms.
C. Yes, her ouster from office in her third term interrupted the
continuity of her service as mayor.
D. Yes, the fresh mandate given her during the recall election erased
her disqualification for a third term.
5.The COMELEC en banc shall decide a motion for reconsideration of
A. the House or Representatives and the Senate electoral tribunals.
B. the decision of the election registrar.
C. the decision of the COMELEC division involving an election protest.
D. its own decision involving an election
protest
6.Xian and Yani ran for Congressman in the same district. During the canvassing,
Yani objected to several returns which he said were tampered with. The board of
canvassers did not entertain Yani's objections for lack of authority to do so. Yani
questions the law prohibiting the filing of pre-proclamation cases involving
the election of Congressmen since the Constitution grants COMELEC jurisdiction
over all pre-proclamation cases, without distinction. Is Yani correct?
A. Yes, the Constitution grants jurisdiction to COMELEC on all
pre-proclamation cases, without exception.
B. No, COMELEC’s jurisdiction over pre-proclamation cases pertains only
to elections for regional, provincial, and city officials.
C. No, COMELEC’s jurisdiction over pre-proclamation cases does not
include those that must be brought directly to the courts.
D. Yes, any conflict between the law and the Constitution relative to
COMELEC's jurisdiction must be resolved in favor of the Constitution.
7.A candidate who commits vote buying on Election Day itself shall be prosecuted
by the
A. COMELEC.
B. Secretary of Justice.
C. police and other law enforcement agencies.
D. City or Provincial Prosecutor.
8.Where a candidate for the Senate stated in his certificate of
candidacy that he is single, when he is very much married, though separated,
his certificate of candidacy
A. may be canceled.
B. will subject him to a quo warranto action.
C. remains valid.
D. may be denied due course.
9.The Commission on Elections is an independent body tasked to enforce all
laws relative to the conduct of elections. Hence, it may
A. conduct two kinds of electoral count: a slow but official count; and
a quick but unofficial count.
B. make an advance and unofficial canvass of election returns through
electronic transmission.
C. undertake a separate and unofficial tabulation of the results of the
election manually.
D. authorize the citizens arm to use election
returns for unofficial count.
10.Pre-proclamation controversies shall be heard
A. summarily without need of trial.
B. through trial by commissioner.
C. ex parte.
D. through speedy arbitration.
11.Alfredo was elected municipal mayor for 3 consecutive terms. During
his third term, the municipality became a city. Alfredo ran for city mayor
during the next immediately succeeding election. Voltaire sought his
disqualification citing the 3 term limit for elective officials. Will
Voltaire's action prosper?
A. No, the 3 term limit should not apply to a person who is running for
a new position title.
B. Yes, the 3 term limit applies regardless of any voluntary or
involuntary interruption in the service of the local elective official.
C. Yes, the 3 term limit uniformly applies to the office of mayor,
whether for city or municipality.
D. No, the 3 term limit should not apply to a local government unit that
has assumed a different corporate existence.
12.X, an administrative officer in the Department of Justice, was
charged with grave misconduct and preventively suspended for 90 days pending
investigation. Based on the evidence, the Secretary of Justice found X guilty
as charged and dismissed him from the service. Pending appeal, X's dismissal
was executed. Subsequently, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) reversed the
Secretary’sdecision and the reversal became final and executory. What is the
effect of X's exoneration?
A. X is entitled to reinstatement and back salaries both during his 90
day preventive suspension and his suspension pending appeal.
B. X is entitled to reinstatement and back salaries corresponding only
to the period of delay caused by those prosecuting the case against him.
C. X is entitled to reinstatement but not to back salaries on ground of
“damnum absque injuria.”
D. X is entitled to reinstatement and back salaries during his
suspension pending appeal.
13.The decision of the Regional Trial Court on appeals pertaining to
inclusions or exclusions from the list of voters
A. is inappealable.
B. is subject to an action for annulment.
C. may be brought straight to the Supreme Court.
D. is appealable to the Commission on Elections
14.Governor Paloma was administratively charged with abuse of
authoritybefore the Office of the President. Pending hearing, he ran for
reelection and won a second term. He then moved to dismiss the charge against
him based on this supervening event. Should the motion be granted?
A. Yes, Governor Paloma's reelection is an expression of the
electorate's obedience to his will.
B. No, Governor Paloma's reelection cannot extinguish his liability for malfeasance
in office.
C. No, Governor Paloma's reelection does not render moot the
administrativecase already pending when he filed his certificate of candidacy
for his reelection bid.
D. Yes, Governor Paloma's reelection is an expression of the
electorate's restored trust.
15.An administrative rule that fixes rates is valid only when the
proposed rates are
A. published and filed with the UP Law Center.
B. published and hearings are conducted.
C. published and posted in three public places.
D. published and all stakeholders are personally
notified
16.The new Commissioner of Immigration, Mr. Suarez, issued an Office
Order directing the top immigration officials to tender courtesy resignation to
give him a free hand in reorganizing the agency. In compliance, Director Sison
of the Administrative Department tendered his resignation in writing which Mr.
Suarez immediately accepted. Director Sisonwent to court, assailing the
validity of his courtesy resignation and Mr. Suarez’s acceptance of the same.
Will the action prosper?
A. No, Director Sison tendered his resignation and it was accepted.
B. No, estoppel precludes Director Sison from disclaiming the
resignation he freely tendered.
C. Yes,for so long as no one has yet been appointed to replace him,
Director Sison may still withdraw his resignation.
D. Yes, Director Sison merely complied with the order of the head of
office; the element of clear intention to relinguish office is lacking.
17.The Comelec en banc cannot hear and decide a case at first instance EXCEPT
when
A. a Division refers the case to it for direct action.
B. the case involves a purely administrative matter.
C. the inhibition of all the members of a Division is sought.
D. a related case is pending before the Supreme
Court en banc.
18.Jax Liner applied for a public utility bus
service from Bacolod to Dumaguete from the Land Transportation Franchising and
Regulatory Board (LTFRB). BB Express opposed. LTFRB ruled in favor of Jax. BB
appealed to the Secretary ofthe Department of Transportation and Communication
(DOTC), who reversed the LTFRB decision. Jax appealed to the Office of the
President which reinstated the LTFRB’s ruling. BB Express went to the Court of
Appeals on certiorari questioning the decision of the Office of the President
on the ground that Office of the President has no jurisdiction over the case in
the absence of any law providing an appeal from DOTC to the Office of the
President. Will the petition prosper?
A. No, exhaustion of administrative remedies up to the level of the
President is a pre-requisite to judicial recourse.
B. No, the action of the DOTC Secretary bears only the implied approval
of the President who is not precluded from reviewing the decision of the
former.
C. Yes, when there is no law providing an appeal to the Office of the
President, no such appeal may be pursued.
D. Yes, the doctrine of qualified political agency renders unnecessary a
further appeal to the Office of the President.
19. Which of
the following is INCORRECT?
(A) The
condonation rule can be applied even if the administrative complaint was not
filed before the reelection of the public official, and even if the alleged
misconduct occurred four days before the elections, respectively.
(B)
Appointment to the position of president of a state university, despite the
pending administrative cases against him, served as a condonation by the Board
of Regents of the alleged acts imputed to him
(C) Under
the principle of vox populi est suprema
lex, the re-election of a public
official may, indeed, supersede a pending administrative case
(D) the non-application of the
condonation doctrine to appointive officials does not violate the right to
equal protection of the law.
20. .Cayat run as a
mayoralty candidate in the May 2008 election in Benguet. He won by a landslide
vote of 9,500 as against Dalut who garnered only 2,500 votes. Before the date
of the election however, a disqualification was filed against Cayat considering
his previous conviction of Acts of Lasciviousness. The conviction became final
and Cayat filed a petition for probation. The disqualification case was decided
on March 2008 against him before the COMELEC. He received the decision which
was promulgated on March 15, 2008. He filed a motion for reconsideration on
March 25, but the same was denied for failure to pay the docket fee of 300
pesos, as his lawyer only paid 200 pesos.
Questions: a) Is Cayat qualified to run as mayor ?
b) Is his proclamation by virtue of his landslide vote
valid?
c) Is the Comelec correct in dismissing his motion for
reconsideration for not filing the correct amount of the docket fee?
d) Can Dalut be declared the mayor of Benguet based on
the above facts of the case?
End of the Examination
Please pay Xerox pay of 5 pesos
