Practice question
After proclamation, a challenge attacks only an elective municipal official's legal eligibility, with no claim that the rival received more valid votes. Which distinction is correct?
- Every eligibility claim is necessarily a ballot-recount protest
- The challenger may avoid all governing deadlines by changing the title
- An eligibility-based electoral quo warranto inquiry is distinct from an election protest over the election and returns
- The claim automatically proves the challenger won
- The challenge must be decided by a campaign manager
Legal references
- 1987 Constitution, Article IX-C, Section 2(2), election-contest jurisdiction: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/3/353
- Legaspi v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 264661, July 30, 2024, main decision, election remedies and general recount demands: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/jul2024/gr_264661_2024.html
- 2010 Rules of Procedure for Municipal Election Contests, Rule 1, Section 3(u) and (v), remedy definitions, subject to the 2022 interim amendments: https://lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_10-4-1-sc_2010.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.