It is final. And it is undeniable. Mabalacat Mayor Marino “Boking” Morales now plays an important role in Philippine history. His story will be told from generations to generations, especially those who study law and jurisprudence. He will be a subject of round-table talks not because he happens to look like Gabby Concepcion or not because he is the only Pampanga Mayor who managed to build a municipal hall inside Clark Freeport Zone.
Morales will always be remembered and referred to as the only local official who beat the local governance system by serving five (5) consecutive terms (and hopefully up to 7) as mayor of Mabalacat since 1995.
The Supreme Court recently unanimously affirmed Morales’ victory during the 2007 election and upheld the Comelec En Banc decision stating that he is entitled to a relection of two more terms. The SC ruling is now officially included in the jurisprudence that will serve as guide and reference to legal minds and practitioners.
Yes, you read it right. The Mayor is entitled for two more consecutive terms. This, despite the fact that he is currently serving his fifth term. But how did that happen?
Although the Local Government Code (LGC) states that local government officials can only serve three (3) consecutive terms, Morales has so far served four terms and now serving his fifth.
After he served term in 1995-1998, 1998-2001 and 2001-2004, the mayor run anew for the same post in the May 2004 elections. Morales argued that he could still run as mayor in 2004 because he did not fully serve his term in 1998-2001. This is because he was suspended for six months along with then Governor Lito Lapid sometime in 1998 in connection with an anti-graft charge related to the collection of environmental taxes. They were cleared of the charges later though.
The LGC states that if a local official’s term was disrupted for six months and above, it is considered to be a term “not fully served.” Thus, Morales then contested that he has the right to run for mayor in 2004 even after serving three terms. And as expected, he ran and was proclaimed winner in the 2004 elections.
His detractors filed a case questioning the legality of his victory. So the case run in the courts until a decision also from the Supreme Court came in 2007 stating Morales’ disqualification in the 2004 elections.
So Morales only served from July 2004 to May 16, 2007.
And so, the mayor, officially “disqualified in the 2004 elections,” ran anew in the last 2007 elections. Of course, he won and has been legitimately serving his second-round of “first term” considering that his stint as mayor in 2004 to May 16, 2007 was technically “not official” because of the SC ruling.
This is the reason why in the recent case decided by the Supreme Court in a case filed by one Roberto Dizon, the highest court noted that Morales’s candidacy in the 2004 elections was cancelled. The court further argued that Morales “was not the duly elected Mayor of Mabalacat, Pampanga for the 2004-2007 term and that he did not serve his full term.”
“Morales cannot be deemed to have served the full term of 2004-2007 because he was ordered to vacate his post before the expiration of the term. Morales’ occupancy of the position of Mayor of Mabalacat from 1 July 2004 to May 16, 2007 cannot be counted as a term for purposes of computing the three-term limit,” the court said.
And there you have it. The happy ever after story for the FIRST TERM mayor of Mabalacat. The Supreme Court concluded that Morales is now serving another first term as mayor and is entitled to reelection for another two more terms. Morales can still run for mayor in the 2013 and 2016 elections.
Morales will always be remembered and referred to as the only local official who beat the local governance system by serving five (5) consecutive terms (and hopefully up to 7) as mayor of Mabalacat since 1995.
The Supreme Court recently unanimously affirmed Morales’ victory during the 2007 election and upheld the Comelec En Banc decision stating that he is entitled to a relection of two more terms. The SC ruling is now officially included in the jurisprudence that will serve as guide and reference to legal minds and practitioners.
Yes, you read it right. The Mayor is entitled for two more consecutive terms. This, despite the fact that he is currently serving his fifth term. But how did that happen?
Although the Local Government Code (LGC) states that local government officials can only serve three (3) consecutive terms, Morales has so far served four terms and now serving his fifth.
After he served term in 1995-1998, 1998-2001 and 2001-2004, the mayor run anew for the same post in the May 2004 elections. Morales argued that he could still run as mayor in 2004 because he did not fully serve his term in 1998-2001. This is because he was suspended for six months along with then Governor Lito Lapid sometime in 1998 in connection with an anti-graft charge related to the collection of environmental taxes. They were cleared of the charges later though.
The LGC states that if a local official’s term was disrupted for six months and above, it is considered to be a term “not fully served.” Thus, Morales then contested that he has the right to run for mayor in 2004 even after serving three terms. And as expected, he ran and was proclaimed winner in the 2004 elections.
His detractors filed a case questioning the legality of his victory. So the case run in the courts until a decision also from the Supreme Court came in 2007 stating Morales’ disqualification in the 2004 elections.
So Morales only served from July 2004 to May 16, 2007.
And so, the mayor, officially “disqualified in the 2004 elections,” ran anew in the last 2007 elections. Of course, he won and has been legitimately serving his second-round of “first term” considering that his stint as mayor in 2004 to May 16, 2007 was technically “not official” because of the SC ruling.
This is the reason why in the recent case decided by the Supreme Court in a case filed by one Roberto Dizon, the highest court noted that Morales’s candidacy in the 2004 elections was cancelled. The court further argued that Morales “was not the duly elected Mayor of Mabalacat, Pampanga for the 2004-2007 term and that he did not serve his full term.”
“Morales cannot be deemed to have served the full term of 2004-2007 because he was ordered to vacate his post before the expiration of the term. Morales’ occupancy of the position of Mayor of Mabalacat from 1 July 2004 to May 16, 2007 cannot be counted as a term for purposes of computing the three-term limit,” the court said.
And there you have it. The happy ever after story for the FIRST TERM mayor of Mabalacat. The Supreme Court concluded that Morales is now serving another first term as mayor and is entitled to reelection for another two more terms. Morales can still run for mayor in the 2013 and 2016 elections.
