Parts of this answer could not be checked against its sources. Read the law and the decisions in their tabs before relying on it.
Held
No, Mayor Laureta cannot run for a fourth consecutive term as mayor, and Mayor Ruiz is also not eligible to run as the first mayor of the City of Santa Adelwiza, under Article X, Section 8 of the 1987 Constitution and the rulings in Adormeo v. Commission On Elections and Latasa v. Commission On Elections.
Explanation
The 1987 Constitution limits elective local officials to serving no more than three consecutive terms in the same office, with each term lasting three years. This limit applies to both the right to be elected and the right to serve. Voluntary renunciation of office does not interrupt the continuity of service for the term for which the official was elected, meaning that stepping down voluntarily does not reset the term count. However, involuntary interruptions, such as losing an election or being removed from office, do break the continuity of service.
In the case of a recall election, winning it and serving the term is not considered voluntary renunciation. Therefore, if an official has already served three consecutive terms, including a term won through a recall election without interruption, they are barred from running for a fourth consecutive term.
Regarding the conversion of a municipality into a city, the Supreme Court has ruled that the office of municipal mayor and city mayor over the same territorial jurisdiction are considered the same office for the purpose of term limits. The inhabitants and territorial jurisdiction remain the same, so serving three consecutive terms as municipal mayor counts towards the term limit for city mayor. The purpose is to prevent a person from holding the chief executive position over the same area for an excessively long period.
Application to the facts
Mayor Laureta served two consecutive terms as mayor of Manila, lost her bid for a third term, and then won a recall election and served again. However, under Adormeo v. Commission On Elections, defeat in a regular election constitutes an interruption in service. The Supreme Court stated that "the continuity of his mayorship was disrupted by his defeat in the 1998 elections." Therefore, Laureta's service is not considered three consecutive terms for purposes of the constitutional term limit, and she is not barred from running again as mayor.
Mayor Ruiz served three consecutive terms as mayor of the Municipality of Santa Adelwiza. During her third term, the municipality was converted into a city, which has a new corporate existence but covers the same territorial jurisdiction and inhabitants. According to the Supreme Court ruling in Latasa, the office of municipal mayor and city mayor over the same territory is considered the same office for term limit purposes. Since Mayor Ruiz has already served three consecutive terms as municipal mayor, she is barred from running as the first mayor of the newly created City of Santa Adelwiza.
- a constitutional provision is among the sources and controls over any conflicting statute
- unverified (quotation): This quotation does not occur in the supplied source text or question.
- unverified (contradiction): The lead categorically states that Mayor Laureta cannot run for a fourth consecutive term, but the application and conclusion sections later state that Laureta is not barred from running again due to an interruption in service.
"The term of office of elective local officials, except barangay officials, which shall be determined by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected."
[[CASE HOLDING — Adormeo v. Commission On Elections, G.R. No. 147927 (2002-02-04)]] The Supreme Court explained that the two conditions for disqualification under the three-term limit are: (a) the official has been elected for three consecutive terms in the same local government post, and (b) the official has fully served three consecutive terms. The Court also clarified that a recall election is not considered voluntary renunciation and does not interrupt the continuity of service. Involuntary severance from office, such as losing an election, is considered an interruption of service. (Adormeo v. Commission On Elections)
[[CASE HOLDING — Latasa v. Commission On Elections, G.R. No. 154829 (2003-12-10)]] The Supreme Court held that for purposes of the three-term limit, the office of municipal mayor and city mayor over the same territorial jurisdiction are considered the same office. Allowing a municipal mayor who has served three consecutive terms to run as city mayor after conversion would defeat the intent of the Constitution to prevent prolonged stay in the same office over the same area. (Latasa v. Commission On Elections)
Laws retrieved
Everything retrieval surfaced, not only what the answer relied on. Read the ones it quotes.
"The issue before us was already addressed in _Borja, Jr. vs. COMELEC_, 295 SCRA 157, 169 (1998), where we held, To recapitulate, the term limit for elective local officials must be taken to refer to the _right to be elected_ as well as _the right to serve in the same elective position_.1âwphi1 Consequently, it is not enough that an individual has _served_ three consecutive terms in an elective local office, he must also have been _elected_ to the same position for the same number of times before the disqualification can apply. This point can be made clearer by considering the following case or situation: x x x _…
"This does not mean, however, that for the purpose of applying the subject Constitutional provision, the office of the municipal mayor would now be construed as a different local government post as that of the office of the city mayor. As stated earlier, the territorial jurisdiction of the City of Digos is the same as that of the municipality. Consequently, the inhabitants of the municipality are the same as those in the city. These inhabitants are the same group of voters who elected petitioner Latasa to be their municipal mayor for three consecutive terms. These are also the same inhabitants over whom he held p…
Cases retrieved
Everything retrieval surfaced, not only what the answer relied on. Read the ones it quotes.