Can a Candidate Be Disqualified for an Extramarital Affair?

COMELEC, Moral Turpitude, and Election Disqualifications in the Philippines

Short answer

An extramarital affair, by itself, is not a ground to disqualify a candidate. Disqualification on “moral turpitude” requires a final criminal conviction for a crime that the courts recognize as involving moral turpitude (CIMT)—not mere allegations, rumors, social media posts, or even administrative findings of “immorality.” If there is no final judgment of conviction, COMELEC will not disqualify a candidate on this basis.

The legal framework at a glance

1) What COMELEC may do (and under what provisions)

Disqualification (Section 68, Omnibus Election Code [OEC]) Targets candidates who commit certain election offenses or prohibited acts (e.g., vote-buying). Moral turpitude is not listed in Section 68.
Certificate of Candidacy (COC) cancellation (Section 78, OEC) If a candidate made a false material representation in the COC (e.g., claiming to be eligible despite a disqualifying conviction involving moral turpitude), COMELEC may deny due course to or cancel the COC.
Nuisance candidates (Section 69, OEC) Not about moral turpitude.

Practical effect: Moral-turpitude issues usually reach COMELEC via a Section 78 petition (cancellation of COC for false material representation about eligibility) or via qualification challenges premised on statutory disqualifications (e.g., under the Local Government Code).

2) Where “moral turpitude” actually appears in election law

Voter disqualifications (Section 12, OEC). A person convicted by final judgment of a crime involving moral turpitude (or sentenced to ≥1 year imprisonment) is disqualified from voter registration for a statutory period. Because most elective positions require that the candidate be a registered voter, a standing Section 12 disqualification can indirectly make a person ineligible to run.
Local candidates (Section 40[a], Local Government Code). Persons sentenced by final judgment for a crime involving moral turpitude (or for an offense punishable by ≥1 year) are disqualified from running for local elective office within two (2) years after serving sentence. After the 2-year period lapses, that specific LGC disqualification is lifted (subject to other laws).
National candidates (Constitution + OEC). The Constitution sets qualifications (age, citizenship, literacy, registered voter status, etc.). Disqualification for CIMT typically arises only if the conviction knocks out a constitutional or statutory qualification (e.g., not a registered voter due to Section 12, OEC), or if the candidate misrepresented eligibility in the COC (Section 78).

Is an extramarital affair “moral turpitude”?

Key distinctions

Private conduct vs. criminal conviction
- Private or alleged affair: Not a ground for COMELEC disqualification.
- Criminal case for adultery or concubinage (Articles 333–334, Revised Penal Code): Only upon final conviction does the question of moral turpitude arise for election law purposes.
Final conviction is essential
- Pending complaint/information, an acquittal, a dismissed case, or an administrative finding (e.g., “grossly immoral conduct” for civil service or professional discipline) does not trigger election disqualification on moral-turpitude grounds.
- “Final” means no further ordinary appeal is available (i.e., the judgment has become final and executory).
Are adultery/concubinage crimes involving moral turpitude?
- Philippine jurisprudence has treated crimes against chastity (including adultery and concubinage) as potentially involving moral turpitude, given the traditional definition: acts of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private duties which a person owes to society or to others.
- But the label matters only if there is a final conviction. Without it, COMELEC will not disqualify.

How a moral-turpitude conviction affects eligibility

A. For local elective posts

Rule: Section 40(a), LGC disqualifies those sentenced by final judgment for a CIMT for two (2) years after service of sentence.
Example: If a candidate was finally convicted of adultery in 2022 and completed the sentence in 2023, they are barred from running for local office until 2025 (count two full years after completing the sentence).

B. For all elective posts via voter status

Rule: Section 12, OEC disqualifies a person convicted by final judgment of a CIMT (or sentenced to ≥1 year) from registration/voting for a statutory period.
Effect: If the person cannot be a registered voter (because the Section 12 disqualification still subsists), and the elective office requires being a registered voter (most do), the person is ineligible to run.
Re-enfranchisement: After the statutory period lapses (and assuming no other bars), the person may regain voter status and, with it, eligibility—subject to any office-specific rules.

C. For national offices (President, VP, Senators, Party-list nominees, etc.)

If the person remains a qualified/registered voter and otherwise meets constitutional qualifications, no automatic disqualification follows from a past CIMT unless:
- The conviction still disables voter registration; or
- The candidate misrepresents eligibility in the COC (triggering Section 78).

Commonly misunderstood paths (and why they fail)

“There was an affair; therefore, disqualify.” → Insufficient. No final criminal conviction = no moral-turpitude disqualification.
“But there’s a pending adultery case.” → Still insufficient. Pending ≠ final; COMELEC does not disqualify on speculation.
“There’s a civil service or professional ‘immorality’ finding.” → Different regime. Administrative liability is not an election-law disqualification ground absent a statutory hook (e.g., removal from office by final judgment may be relevant under LGC, but “immorality” alone doesn’t equal CIMT disqualification).
“We have screenshots and affidavits about the affair.” → Evidence of conduct is not a final judgment of conviction.

Procedural road map

1) What to file—and when

Section 78 (COC cancellation): Allege false material representation (e.g., declaring eligibility despite a final CIMT conviction that disables voter status or triggers LGC Sec. 40[a]). Must be filed within the period fixed by COMELEC rules (generally shortly after the COC filing window).
Section 68 (disqualification): Use for election offenses or vote-buying type grounds—not for moral turpitude.
Pre-/post-proclamation:
- Section 78 petitions are typically pre-proclamation in character.
- If the candidate wins and there’s a final basis for ineligibility, quo warranto in the proper tribunal may be the remedy to unseat.

2) Burden and proof

The petitioner bears the burden to show a final judgment of conviction for a CIMT (or a disqualifying sentence), including proof of finality (e.g., certificate of finality, entry of judgment).
Certified copies of the information, decision, entry of judgment, and mitigating documents (e.g., pardon, probation completion) are often decisive.

3) Effect of pardon, probation, or penalties served

Pardon may remove the disqualification depending on scope (absolute vs. conditional) and timing—but it does not automatically erase the fact of conviction for all purposes.
Probation or suspended sentence still counts as a conviction unless the law or judgment provides otherwise.
Completion of sentence starts the clock for the two-year LGC bar (for local positions) or the applicable Section 12 OEC period (for voter status).

Practical checklists

For those alleging disqualification

Do we have a final conviction?
- If no, moral-turpitude strategy will likely fail.
Is the offense a CIMT?
- Crimes against chastity (adultery/concubinage) have been treated as CIMTs in Philippine jurisprudence.
What is the legal hook?
- Local office → LGC Sec. 40(a) two-year bar after service of sentence.
- Any office → OEC Sec. 12 effect on voter eligibility + COC truthfulness (Sec. 78).
Documents ready?
- Decision, entry of judgment, proof of sentence served, pardon papers (if any).

For candidates facing allegations

Is there any final conviction? If none, say so plainly.
If yes, has the two-year (LGC) or Section 12 (OEC) period expired?
Are you a registered voter as of filing? Keep your voter status records updated.
COC accuracy: Avoid any false material representation. Consult counsel if in doubt.

Frequently asked questions

Q1: If I had an affair but was never charged or convicted, can I still run? Yes. There’s no disqualification on that basis alone.

Q2: If I’m finally convicted of adultery but finished my sentence three years ago, may I run for mayor? Generally yes with respect to the LGC Sec. 40(a) bar, because the two-year period after service of sentence has lapsed—provided you are otherwise qualified (including being a registered voter under the OEC) and there’s no other bar in place.

Q3: Can opponents use “immorality” in administrative rulings to disqualify me? Not by itself. Election disqualification on moral-turpitude grounds turns on a final criminal conviction, not an administrative finding.

Q4: What if the conviction is on appeal? While appeal is pending and no finality, moral-turpitude disqualification does not attach.

Q5: Does a presidential pardon clean the slate? A pardon can remove certain penal disabilities. Whether it cures an election-law disqualification depends on its terms and the specific statute involved; careful legal review is required.

Takeaways

No final conviction = no disqualification for “immorality.”
Adultery/concubinage convictions can qualify as crimes involving moral turpitude; the timing (finality, service of sentence, statutory periods) is critical.
Local races: watch the two-year LGC bar after sentence.
All races: ensure voter eligibility under Section 12, OEC; misstatements in the COC expose you to Section 78 cancellation.
Evidence wins cases: certified final judgments and records determine outcomes—not gossip or screenshots.

Disclaimer

This article provides general legal information for the Philippine election context and is not a substitute for specific legal advice. For a live case (deadlines, pleadings, and remedies vary), consult counsel.