This photo of former Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama, taken last February 21, made rounds at the legislative building of Cebu City Hall, where he lamented the absence of his portrait as city mayor in the hallways. | Photo by Aldo Banaynal
CEBU CITY, PHILIPPINES — The Comelec First Division has ruled that former Cebu City Mayor Michael “Mike” Rama was disqualified to run in the May 2025 National and Local Elections, because his removal from office through an administrative case rendered him ineligible to seek elective local office.
The resolution, promulgated on 11 November 2025 and signed by Presiding Commissioner Aimee D. Ferolino with Commissioners Ernesto Ferdinand P. Maceda Jr. and Maria Norina S. Tangaro-Casingal, granted the petition to disqualify Rama from running for mayor in the elections.
The petition to disqualify Rama was filed by his former ally Jundel L. Bontuyan, who cited an Ombudsman decision that found Rama guilty of nepotism and grave misconduct, and imposed on him a dismissal from service with perpetual disqualification from reemployment in government.
Despite the Ombudsman’s ruling, however, Rama filed his certificate of candidacy on 3 October 2024, and was able to run in the 2025 elections. He came in third in the mayoral race, behind Raymond Garcia and the winning candidate Nestor Archival.
A few days after the last elections, Rama filed an election protest before the Comelec, questioning the integrity of the automated system used during the polls. However, the Comelec Second Division dismissed the protest last August of this year, citing lack of form, substance, and specificity.
The ruling affirmed Archival’s victory and declared the protest insufficient under Section 7(g), Rule 6 of Comelec Resolution 8804.
Countering the disqualification case filed by Bontuyan, Rama argued that the Ombudsman’s decision had not attained finality due to a pending motion for reconsideration, and that the accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification could not be enforced until the principal penalty of dismissal was implemented.
He also cited a Temporary Restraining Order issued by the Supreme Court in October 2024, which barred Comelec from implementing Resolution No. 11044-A — a policy allowing motu proprio cancellation of certificates of candidacy.
However, the Commission clarified that the petition was a disqualification case under Section 40(b) of the Local Government Code, not a cancellation petition under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code, and was therefore unaffected by the TRO.
In its ruling, the First Division emphasized that Ombudsman decisions are immediately executory, even pending appeal, and that the filing of a motion for reconsideration does not stay implementation.
The Commission rejected Rama’s argument that non-implementation by the Department of the Interior and Local Government negated the legal effect of the ruling, stressing that the Ombudsman’s rules mandate immediate enforcement upon receipt.
| Written by Caecent No-ot Magsumbol
