Professional Documents
Culture Documents
6 Aquino III vs. Comelec (Tan)
6 Aquino III vs. Comelec (Tan)
COMELEC
[G.R. No. 189793 April 7, 2010]
TOPIC:
PONENTE:
Population
Perez, J.
AUTHOR: Tan
NOTES:
Republic Act No. 9716 is entitled An Act Reapportioning the Composition of
the First (1st) and Second (2nd ) Legislative Districts in the Province of
Camarines Sur and Thereby Creating a New Legislativ District From Such
Reapportionment.
o R.A. 9716 is unconstitutional because the proposed first district will end up with a population of less than 250,000 or only 176,383.
Respondents:
o Petition should be dismissed. RA 9716 should be sustained as a perfectly valid reapportionment law.
o A plain and simple reading of the questioned provision will show that the same has no application with respect to the creation of legislative
districts in provinces. Rather, the 250,000 minimum population is only a requirement for the creation of a legislative district in a city.
ISSUE(S): Whether a population 250,000 is an indispensable constitutional requirement for the creation of a new legislative district in a province.
HELD: NO.
RATIO:
There is no specific provision in the Constitution that fixes a 250,000 minimum population that must compose a legislative district.
The aforementioned provision draws a plain and clear distinction between the entitlement of a city to a district on one hand, and the entitlement of s province
to a district on the other. While a province is entitled to at least a representative, with nothing mentioned about population, a city must first meet a population
minimum of 250,000 in order to be similarly entitled.
The use by the subject provision of a comma to separate the phrase "each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand" from the phrase "or
each province" point to no other conclusion than that the 250,000 minimum population is only required for a city, but not for a province.
Mariano, Jr. v. COMELEC:
o The case limited the application of the 250,000 minimum population requirement for cities only to its initial legislative district. In other
words, while Section 5(3), Article VI of the Constitution requires a city to have a minimum population of 250,000 to be entitled to a
representative, it does not have to increase its population by another 250,000 to be entitled to an additional district.
o There is no reason why the Mariano case, which involves the creation of an additional district within a city, should not be applied to
additional districts in provinces. Indeed, if an additional legislative district created within a city is not required to represent a population of at
least 250,000 in order to be valid, neither should such be needed for an additional district in a province, considering moreover that a province
is entitled to an initial seat by the mere fact of its creation and regardless of its population.
o Apropos for discussion is the provision of the Local Government Code on the creation of a province which, by virtue of and upon creation, is
entitled to at least a legislative district. Thus, Section 461 of the Local Government Code states:
Requisites for Creation. (a) A province may be created if it has an average annual income, as certified by the Department of
Finance, of not less than Twenty million pesos (P20,000,000.00) based on 1991 constant prices and either of the following
requisites:
(i)
a contiguous territory of at least two thousand (2,000) square kilometers, as certified by the Lands Management Bureau; or
(ii)
a population of not less than two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) inhabitants as certified by the National Statistics Office.
o Notably, the requirement of population is not an indispensable requirement, but is merely an alternative addition to the indispensable income
requirement.
WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DISMISSED. Republic Act No. 9716 entitled "An Act Reapportioning the Composition of the First (1st) and Second
(2nd) Legislative Districts in the Province of Camarines Sur and Thereby Creating a New Legislative District From Such Reapportionment" is a VALID
LAW.
DISSENTING/CONCURRING OPINION(S):