ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS v.

COMELEC
G.R. No. 119976; 18 September 1995

FACTS:
Imelda Romualdez-Marcos filed her Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for Representative of
the 1st District of Leyte on 8 March 1995 stating that she had resided in the district for
seven (7) months. On March 23, Cirilo Montejo, the incumbent representative and a
candidate for the same position, filed a disqualification case before the Comelec against
Imelda for lack of residency requirement. On March 29, Imelda filed an
Amended/Corrected COC due to “honest misinterpretation” by rectifying 7 months to
“since childhood” stating that he has always maintained Tacloban City as her
domicile/residence. Comelec striked off her Amended/Corrected COC. Thus, recourse to
the SC was made.

ISSUE:
Did Imelda meet the one-year residency requirement?

HELD:
YES. Residence is used synonymously with domicile for election purposes. A minor follows
the domicile of her parents. Tacloban became Imelda’s domicile of origin by operation of
law when her father brought them to Leyte. To successfully effect a change of domicile, one
must demonstrate: (1) an actual removal or an actual change of domicile; (2) a bona fide
intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a new one; and (3)
acts which correspond with the purpose. In the absence of clear and positive proof based
on these criteria, the residence of origin should be deemed to continue. Assuming that
Imelda gained a new domicile after her marriage and acquired the right to choose a new
one after the death of her husband, her acts such as seeking the PCGG’s permission to
“rehabilitate (our) ancestral house and farm” and by obtaining a residence certificate
clearly indicated that Tacloban was also her domicile of choice.