Salaysay vs. Castro Digest

SUBJECT:

SALAYSAY VS. CASTRO

FACTS: • The petitioner files a petition to the Supreme Court for prohibition with preliminary injunction. • Nicanor G. Salaysay was the duly elected Vice Mayor of San Juan del Monte, Rizal. In Sept. 1955 the elected Mayor of the said town, namely Engracio E. Santos, was suspended from his office due to administrative charges filed against such mayor. The Vice Mayor filled the vacancy by order of succession. As stated under section 2195 of the Revised Administrative Code: “…that in case of temporary disability of the Mayor such as absence, et., his duties shall be discharged by the Vice Mayor..” • In Sept. 8, 1955, while acting as Mayor, Salaysay filed his certificate of candidacy for the same office of Mayor. Interpreting said action of Salaysay in running for the office of Mayor as an automatic resignation from his office of Vice Mayor, consequently, forfeiting the office he was holding as acting Mayor. He was advised to resign, by the Provincial Governor, to turn over the office of Mayor to Braulio Sto. Domingo, being designated by the Office of the President of the Philippines on Sept. 12, 1955, as Vice Mayor. If not he will be prosecuted for violation of Article 237 of the revised penal code for prolonging performance of duties. Salaysay refused to turn over the office of Mayor and brought this action of prohibition with preliminary injunction against Executive Secretary Castro, Governor Pascual and Sto. Domingo to declare invalid. For Salayasay contended that he was actually holding the office of Mayor in his capacity as acting Mayor. • The argument and contention on both parties was in the provision of section 2, Commonwealth Act No. 666 provides: “ Any elective provincial, municipal or city official running for an office than the one for which he has been lastly elected, shall be considered resigned from his office form the moment of the filing of his certificate of candidacy.”

And the amendment found in section 27 of the Revised Election Code. “sec. 27. Candidate holding office- Any elective provincial, municipal or city official, running for an office, other than the one which he is actually holding, shall be considered resigned from his office form the moment of filing of his certificate of candidacy.”

ISSUE: Whether or not elected municipal official was considered resigned when he filed his certificate of candidacy for an office other than the one he was elected or actually holding?

DECISION: The petition for prohibition was denied, with cost. The writ of preliminary injunction heretofore issued was hereby dissolved.

Reason for the decision: To ascertain the purpose and intention of the law, it must be construed in the light of the reason for the amendment in order to give breathe the purpose, meaning, and intention of the statute as intended by the legislature. Not to defeat its purpose and intention but to enforce and to effectuate it. Thus, going back to its history and background of the statute, when it was enacted into law by the legislator. The intention of the amendment by the President Roxas was to give and extend privilege to the appointees and elected official for continuity in their office. This was not applicable for the official who assumed the office by succession because of incapacitated of his predecessor.