Comelec upholds decision declaring Abante as Manila congressman
Bienvenido ‘Benny’ Abante Jr. — File photo
MANILA, Philippines — The Commission on Elections (Comelec) en banc has upheld the decision of the Comelec Second Division to annul the proclamation of Manila City 6th District Representative-elect Joey Chua Uy and to declare Bienvenido “Benny” Abante Jr. as the rightful winner of the congressional race.
In a 12-page resolution dated June 30, the Comelec en banc denied Uy’s motion for reconsideration.
The en banc also directed the Manila City Board of Canvassers to reconvene and proclaim Abante as the duly elected representative of the city’s 6th District.
READ: Comelec division declares Abante winner of Manila’s 6th district
“The Resolution of the Commission (Second Division) dated 18 June 2025 is AFFIRMED. The proclamation of LUIS “JOEY” CHUA UY as the duly elected Member of the House of Representatives for the Sixth (6th) District of the City of Manila is hereby ANNULLED,” the resolution reads.
“The Board of Canvassers of the City of Manila is hereby directed to RECONVENE and PROCLAIM Petitioner BIENVENIDO “BENNY” ABANTE JR., the only qualified candidate, as the duly elected Member of the House of Representatives for the Sixth District of the City of Manila,” it adds.
On June 18, the Comelec Second Division voided the certificate of candidacy (COC) of Uy after ruling that Uy is a naturalized Filipino citizen, and not a natural-born one. The second division argued that Uy “made a false declaration in his COC, which constitutes material misrepresentation under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code.”
Abante lost his reelection bid to Uy in a tight race receiving 63,358 votes compared to Uy’s 64,746.
What the en banc says
On June 23, Uy filed a motion for reconsideration stating that “the evidence is insufficient to justify the Resolution, which, too, is contrary to law.”
READ: Manila’s Joey Uy files motion for reconsideration vs Comelec
Uy said that the second division “gravely erred” in giving due course to the petition filed by Abante under the Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC) despite the lapse of the 25-statutory period.
The Comelec en banc said that the poll body “retains the jurisdiction to decide questions affecting the qualifications and election of candidates even after proclamation under its broad constitutional power to safeguard the elections.”
The en banc noted that as the second division ruled that Uy made a false declaration in his COC, which constitutes a material misrepresentation under the Section 78 of the OEC, this statement did not transform the nature of the petition into one under the said section.
The en banc also pointed out Uy’s argument that the second division erred in declaring Abante as the duly elected representative of the 6th District. Uy cited the recent case of Mangudadatu vs. Comelec where it abandons that the second placer in the race assumes the post.
But Abante said that the case of Mangudadatu vs. Comelec has not yet reached finality as it was only released by the Supreme Court last June 20.
Further, the en banc said that the second division did not commit mistakes in its interpretation of citizenship laws and jurisprudence. It cited the 1935 Constitution, a constitutional regime in which Uy was born into.
Abante in his petition noted that Uy declared in his COC that he is a natural-born citizen and admitted he was born on March 15, 1962, to a Chinese father, Uy Ho, who acquired Philippine citizenship through naturalization when Joel was five years old, and to a Filipina mother.
The Section 1 (4) of the Constitution states that Filipino citizens are “those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and, upon reaching the age of majority, elect Philippine citizenship.”
“Albeit discriminatory by today’s standards, the historical fact remains that women automatically lost their citizenship and acquired that of their foreign husbands by virtue of Subsection 4 above, as well as existing laws prevailing at that time,” the en banc said.
Moreover, the en banc pointed out that Abante claimed that Uy was the legitimate son of Uy Ho, who was naturalized, and a Chinese mother who lost her Filipino citizenship upon marriage. It noted that Uy submitted the immigration records of him and his parents.
The en banc said that Uy was not a Filipino citizen at the time of his birth, citing her mother’s identification records who was described as a Filipina prior to her marriage and a wife to a naturalized Filipino citizen.
“Respondent’s Identification Certificate ascribes to him derivative citizenship by the very words “Recognized as citizen of the Philippines” in view of the naturalization of his father, Uy Ho,” the en banc said.
“Being a naturalized Filipino citizen, Respondent is, thus, not qualified to run for and be elected as a member of the House of Representatives,” the en banc added. /mcm/abc/das
