CONSTILAW CASE DIGEST (VELASCO-ARCEO) 26 Cases, Stopped at P. 206
CONSTILAW CASE DIGEST (VELASCO-ARCEO) 26 Cases, Stopped at P. 206
1. Topic: Dual Citizenship/ Both petitioner Manuel B. Japzon (Japzon) and Whether or not the defendant Yes, the defendant solely complied the residency
Dual Allegiance private respondent Jaime S. Ty (Ty) were has complied with the requirements for elective position.
JAPSON VS. COMELEC candidates for the Office of Mayor of the residency requirement for Ø It bears to point out that Republic Act No. 9225 governs the
Municipality of General Macarthur, Eastern Samar, elective positions. manner in which a natural-born Filipino may reacquire or
in the local elections held on 14 May 2007. retain[17] his Philippine citizenship despite acquiring a foreign
Ø Japzon instituted SPA No. 07-568 by filing before citizenship, and provides for his rights and liabilities under
the COMELEC a Petition[5] to disqualify and/or such circumstances. A close scrutiny of said statute would
cancel Ty's Certificate of Candidacy on the ground reveal that it does not at all touch on the matter of residence
of material misrepresentation. Japzon averred in his of the natural-born Filipino taking advantage of its provisions.
Petition that Ty was a former natural-born Filipino, Republic Act No. 9225 imposes no residency requirement for
having been born on 9 October 1943 in what was the reacquisition or retention of Philippine citizenship; nor
then Pambujan Sur, Hernani Eastern Samar (now does it mention any effect of such reacquisition or retention
the Municipality of General Macarthur, Easter of Philippine citizenship on the current residence of the
Samar) to spouses Ang Chim Ty (a Chinese) and concerned natural-born Filipino. Clearly, Republic Act No.
Crisanta Aranas Sumiguin (a Filipino). 9225 treats citizenship independently of residence. This is
Ø Ty eventually migrated to the United States of only logical and consistent with the general intent of the law
America (USA) and became a citizen thereof. Ty to allow for dual citizenship.
had been residing in the USA for the last 25 years. Ø There is no basis for this Court to require Ty to stay in and
When Ty filed his Certificate of Candidacy on 28 never leave at all the Municipality of General Macarthur,
March 2007, he falsely represented therein that he Eastern Samar, for the full one-year period prior to the 14
was a resident of Barangay6, Poblacion, General May 2007 local elections so that he could be considered a
Macarthur, Eastern Samar, for one year before 14 resident thereof. To the contrary, the Court has previously
May 2007, and was not a permanent resident or ruled that absence from residence to pursue studies or
immigrant of any foreign country. practice a profession or registration as a voter other than in
Ø While Ty may have applied for the reacquisition the place where one is elected, does not constitute loss of
of his Philippine citizenship, he never actually residence.[24] The Court also notes, that even with his trips to
resided in Barangay 6, Poblacion, General other countries, Ty was actually present in the Municipality of
Macarthur, Eastern Samar, for a period of one year General Macarthur, Eastern Samar, Philippines, for at least
immediately preceding the date of election as nine of the 12 months preceding the 14 May 2007 local
required under Section 39 of Republic Act No. 7160, elections. Even if length of actual stay in a place is not
otherwise known as the Local Government Code of necessarily determinative of the fact of residence therein, it
1991 does strongly support and is only consistent with Ty's avowed
Ø Inspite of having reacquisition in his Philippine intent in the instant case to establish residence/domicile in
citizenship, Ty continued to make trips to the USA, the Municipality of General Macarthur, Eastern Samar.
the most recent of which was on 31 October 2006 Ø Japzon repeatedly brings to the attention of this Court that Ty
lasting until 20 January 2007. arrived in the Municipality of General Macarthur, Eastern
Ø Ty already took his Oath of Allegiance to the Samar, on 4 May 2006 only to comply with the one-year
Republic of the Philippines, he continued to comport residency requirement, so Ty could run as a mayoralty
himself as an American citizen as proven by his candidate in the 14 May 2007 elections. In Aquino v.
travel records. He had also failed to renounce his COMELEC,[25] the Court did not find anything wrong in an
foreign citizenship as required by Republic Act No. individual changing residences so he could run for an elective
9225, otherwise known as the Citizenship Retention post, for as long as he is able to prove with reasonable
and Reacquisition Act of 2003, or related laws. certainty that he has effected a change of residence for
Ø Japzon prayed for in his Petition that the election law purposes for the period required by law. As this
COMELEC order the disqualification of Ty from Court already found in the present case, Ty has proven by
running for public office and the cancellation of the substantial evidence that he had established
latter's Certificate of Candidacy. residence/domicile in the Municipality of General Macarthur,
Ø Ty admitted that he was a natural-born Filipino Eastern Samar, by 4 May 2006, a little over a year prior to
who went to the USA to work and subsequently the 14 May 2007 local elections, in which he ran as a
became a naturalized American citizen. Ty claimed, candidate for the Office of the Mayor and in which he
however, that prior to filing his Certificate of garnered the most number of votes.
Candidacy for the Office of Mayor of the
Municipality of General Macarthur, Eastern Samar,
on 28 March 2007, he already performed the Ø To successfully challenge Ty's disqualification, Japzon must
following acts: (1) with the enactment of Republic clearly demonstrate that Ty's ineligibility is so patently
Act No. 9225, granting dual citizenship to natural- antagonistic to constitutional and legal principles that
born Filipinos, Ty filed with the Philippine Consulate overriding such ineligibility and thereby giving effect to the
General in Los Angeles, California, USA, an apparent will of the people would ultimately create greater
application for the reacquisition of his Philippine prejudice to the very democratic institutions and juristic
citizenship; (2) on 2 October 2005, Ty executed an traditions that our Constitution and laws so zealously protect
Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and promote. In this case, Japzon failed to substantiate his
before Noemi T. Diaz, Vice Consul of the Philippine claim that Ty is ineligible to be Mayor of the Municipality, the
Consulate General in Los Angeles, California, USA; instant Petition for Certiorari is dismiss
(3) Ty applied for a Philippine passport indicating in
his application that his residence in the Philippines
was at A. Mabini St., Barangay 6, Poblacion,
General Macarthur, Eastern Samar. Ty's application
was approved and he was issued on 26 October
2005 a Philippine passport; (4) on 8 March 2006, Ty
personally secured and signed his Community Tax
Certificate (CTC) from the Municipality of General
Macarthur, in which he stated that his address was
at Barangay 6, Poblacion, General Macarthur,
Eastern Samar; (5) thereafter, on 17 July 2006, Ty
was registered as a voter in Precinct
0013A, Barangay 6, Poblacion, General Macarthur,
Eastern Samar; (6) Ty secured another CTC dated 4
January 2007 again stating therein his address
as Barangay 6, Poblacion, General Macarthur,
Eastern Samar; and (7) finally, Ty executed on 19
March 2007 a duly notarized Renunciation of
Foreign Citizenship.
Ø He had reacquired his Philippine citizenship and
renounced his American citizenship, and he had
been a resident of the Municipality of General
Macarthur, Eastern Samar, for more than one year
prior to the 14 May 2007 elections. Therefore, Ty
sought the dismissal of Japzon's Petition in SPA No.
07-568.
Ty acquired the highest number of votes and was
declared Mayor of the Municipality of General
Macarthur, Eastern Samar, by the Municipal Board
of Canvassers on 15 May 2007.[7]
Ø The COMELEC First Division found that Ty
complied with the requirements of Sections 3 and 5
of Republic Act No. 9225 and reacquired his
Philippine citizenship, to wit:
Philippine citizenship is an indispensable requirement
for holding an elective public office, and the
purpose of the citizenship qualification is none other
than to ensure that no alien, i.e., no person owing
allegiance to another nation, shall govern our
people and our country or a unit of territory thereof.
Ø Evidences revealed that Ty executed an Oath of
Allegiance before Noemi T. Diaz, Vice Consul of
the Philippine Consulate General, Los Angeles,
California, U.S.A. on October 2, 2005 and executed
a Renunciation of Foreign Citizenship on March
19, 2007 in compliance with R.A. [No.] 9225.
Moreover, neither is Ty a candidate for or occupying
public office nor is in active service as
commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the
armed forces in the country of which he was
naturalized citizen
Ø Ty did not commit material misrepresentation in
stating in his Certificate of Candidacy that he was a
resident of Barangay 6, Poblacion, General
Macarthur, Eastern Samar, for at least one year
before the elections on 14 May 2007. It reasoned
that: Although Ty has lost his domicile in [the]
Philippines when he was naturalized as U.S. citizen
in 1969, the reacquisition of his Philippine
citizenship and subsequent acts thereof proved that
he has been a resident of Barangay 6, Poblacion,
General Macarthur, Eastern Samar for at least one
(1) year before the elections held on 14 May 2007
as he represented in his certificate of candidacy.
Ø The petition was denied and COMELEC was in
favor of the defendant failing to obtain a favorable
resolution from the COMELEC, Japzon proceeded to
file the instant Petition for Certiorari, that the
COMELEC had committed grave abuse of discretion
and lack of discretion for dismissing the petition.
Ø Japzon prays for the Court to annul and set aside
the Resolutions dated 31 July 2007 and 28
September 2007 of the COMELEC First Division
and en banc, respectively; to issue a new resolution
denying due course to or canceling Ty's Certificate
of Candidacy; and to declare Japzon as the duly
elected Mayor of the Municipality of General
Macarthur, Eastern Samar.
Ø Ty sought the dismissal of the present Petition.
According to Ty, the COMELEC already found
sufficient evidence to prove that Ty was a resident
of the Municipality of General Macarthur, Eastern
Samar, one year prior to the 14 May 2007 local
elections. The Court cannot evaluate again the very
same pieces of evidence without violating the well-
entrenched rule that findings of fact of the
COMELEC are binding on the Court.
Ø The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG),
meanwhile, is of the position that Ty failed to meet
the one-year residency requirement set by law to
qualify him to run as a mayoralty candidate in the
14 May 2007 local elections.The Court finds no
merit in the Petition at bar.
Ø . On 19 March 2007, he personally executed a
Renunciation of Foreign Citizenship before a notary
public. By the time he filed his Certificate of
Candidacy for the Office of Mayor of the
Municipality of General Macarthur, Eastern Samar,
on 28 March 2007, he had already effectively
renounced his American citizenship, keeping solely
his Philippine citizenship.
On Residency Requirement
Norlainie Mitmug Limbona, for certiorari with prayer for issuance of a temporary Whether or not the Honorable The Comelec did not err when it continued with the trial and hearing of
petitioner, vs. Commission restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction seeks Commission on Elections acted the petition for disqualification. The Comelec correctly found that
on Elections to reverse and nullify the September 4, 2007 Resolution of with grave abuse of discretion petitioner failed to satisfy the one-year residency requirement.
and Malik “Bobby” the Commission on Elections (Comelec) in SPA Case No. 07- disqualifying petitioner to run as The term “residence” as used in the election law is synonymous with
T. Alingan, 611 disqualifying petitioner to run as mayor of the mayor of the municipality of “domicile”.
respondents. municipality of Pantar, Lanao del Norte, as well as the Pantar, Lanao del Norte? For purpose of election law, the question of residence is mainly one of
G.R. No. 181097June 25, January 9, 2008 Resolution denying the motion for intention. There is no hard and fast rule by which to determine where a
2008 reconsideration. Petitioner Norlainie Mitmug Limbona person actually resides. Three rules are, however, well established:
(Norlainie), her husband, Mohammad G. Limbona first
(Mohammad), and respondent Malik “Bobby” T. Alingan , that a man must have a residence or domicile somewhere;
(Malik) were mayoralty candidates in second
Pantar, Lanao del Norte during 2007 Synchronized National , that where once established it remains until a new one is acquired;
Elections. Petitioner and her husband filed their certificates of and
candidacy with Acting Election Officer, while respondent filed third
his certificate of candidacy with the Office of the Election , a man can have but one domicile at a time. In order to acquire a
Officer. On April 2, 2007, Malik filed a petition to disqualify domicile by choice, there must concur (1) residence or bodily presence
Mohammad for failure to comply with the residency in the new locality, (2) an intention to remain there, and (3) an
requirement and also another petition to disqualify Norlainie intention to abandon the old domicile. To successfully effect a change
on the ground of lack of the one-year residency of domicile one must demonstrate an actual removal or an actual
requirement. On April 21, 2007, Norlainie filed an Affidavit of change of domicile; a bona fide intention of abandoning the former
Withdrawal of Certificate of Candidacy. Thereafter, or on place of residence and establishing a new one, and definite acts which
May 2, 2007 she filed a Motion to Dismiss the petition of correspond with the purpose.
disqualification to the Election Supervisor. Petitioner’s claim that she has been physically present and actually
The Comelec en banc granted the withdrawal of Norlainie’s residing in
certific Pantar for almost20 months prior to the elections, is self-serving and
ate of candidacy. Meanwhile, the First Division of Comelec unsubstantiated. As correctly observed by the Comelec:
granted the petition of Malik and disqualifying Mohammad “In the present case, the evidence adduced by respondent which
from running as Municipal Mayor for failing to satisfy the consists merely of self
one-year residency and fornot being a registered voter of the -serving affidavits cannot persuade Us that she abandoned her
said place. Consequently, Norlainie filed a new certificate of domicile of origin or domicile in Marawi City. Further, we
candidacy as substitute for Mohammad which was given find no other act that would indicate respondent’s intention to stay in
due course by the Comelec en banc. Thus, Malik filed a Pantar for an
second petition for disqualification against Norlainie. After indefinite period of time.
the election, Norlainie emerged as The Court find that her domicile by operation of law (by
the winning candidate and accordingly took her virtue of marriage) effected only on November 11, 2006 when
oath and assumed office. However, on September 4, 2007 her husband Malik change his domicile in favor of Pantar, Lanao del
the Second Division of Comelec disqualified her on three Norte on the same date. Articles 68 and 69 of the Family Code provide:
grounds: lack of the one-year residency requirement; not “Art. 68.
being a registered voter of the municipality; and, nullity of The husband and wife are obliged to live together
her certificate of candidacy for having been filed at a place , observed mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render mutual help
other than the Office of the Election Officer. and support. Art. 69.
The husband and wife shall fix the family domicile
Norlainie filed an Omnibus Motion to declare the petition . In case of disagreement, the court shall decide.
moot and/or for reconsideration on the ground the Comelec The court may exempt one spouse from living with the other
en banc approved her withdrawal and was given due course if the latter should live abroad or there are other valid and
to her new certificate of candidacy as substitute candidate compelling reasons for the exemption
for Mohammad. Malik opposed the Omnibus Motion. On . However,
November 23, 2007, the Second Division of Comelec such exemption shall not apply if the same is not compatible with
disqualify Norlainie from running as mayor of Pantar, Lanao solidarity of the family.”
del Norte. Considering that petitioner failed to show that she maintained a
On January 9, 2008, the Comelec en banc denied Norlainie’s separate residence from her husband, and as there is no evidence to
motion for reconsideration. prove otherwise, reliance on these provisions of Family Code is proper
Hence, this petition. and is in consonance with human experience. Thus, for failure to
comply with the residency requirement, petitioner is disqualified to run
for the office of mayor of Pantar, Lanao del Norte.
However, petitioner’s disqualification would not result in Malik’s
proclamation who came second during the special election.
The rules on succession under the Local Government Code shall apply,
to wit:
“Section 44. Permanent Vacancies in the Offices of
the Governor, Vie-Governor, Mayor, and Vice-Mayor.
–
If a permanent vacancy occurs in the office of the xxx mayor, the xxx
vice-mayor
concerned shall become the xxx mayor.”
Wherefore, the petition for certiorari is
DISMISSED
and the Commission on Elections resolution disqualifying petitioner
Norlainie Mitmug Limbona from running for office of the Mayor of
Pantar, Lanao del Norte, and the Resolution denying the Motion for
reconsideration, are
AFFIRMED
. In view of the permanent vacancy in the Office of the Mayor, the
proclaimed Vice-Mayor shall
SUCCEED
as Mayor
Petitioner Norlanie Mitmug Limbano, her Whether or not petitioner Petitioner failed to satisfy the one-year residency
NORLAINIE MITMUG husband and respondent Malik Bobby T. satisfied the one-year requirement.
LIMBONA v. COMELEC Alingan were mayoralty candidates in Pantar, residency requirements
Lanao Del Norte. After filing their Certificate in order to acquire a domicile by choice, there must concur
of Candidacy, the respondent filed a petition (1) residence or bodily presence in the new locality, (2) an
GR No. 186006, Oct 16, to disqualify the husband of the petitioner for intention to remain there, and (3) an intention toabandon an
2009 noncompliance with the one-year residence
old domicile. A person's domicile once established is
requirement. Subsequently, respondent also
considered tocontinue and will not be deemed lost until a new
Topic: Residence vs. filed the same petition, this time against the
petitioner. Petitioner files for withdrawal of one is established.
Domicile
her candidacy which the Comelec granted.
The manifest intent of the law in fixing a residence
The Comelec granted the disqualification of
petitioner’s husband. Petitioner filed new qualification is to exclude a stranger or newcomer,
certificate of candidacy as substitute unacquainted with the conditions and needs of a community
candidate for her husband which was and not identified with the latter, from an elective office to
approved by the Comelec. Respondent yet serve that community.
again sought petitioner’s disqualification.
Petitioner claimed that she has been staying, Petitioner's claim that she has been physically present and
sleeping and doing business in her house for actually residing in Pantar for almost 20 months prior to the
more than 20 months in Lower Kalangaan. elections, is self-serving and unsubstantiated.Furthermore,
the court finds no other act that would indicate petitioner's
intention to stayin Pantar for an indefinite period of time. The
filing of certificate of candidacy in Pantar isnot sufficient to
hold that she has chosen Pantaras her new residence. In SPA
No. 07-611, the commission has even found that she is not a
registered voter in the paidmunicipality warranting her
disqualification as a candidate.The court noted the findings of
the comelec that petitioner's domicile of origin is Maguing,
Lanao del Norte, which is also her place of birth, and that her
domicile byoperation of law by virtue of marriage, is Rapasun,
Marawi City. The comelec found that the petitioner's husband
effected the change of his domicile in favor of Pantar,
LanaoDel Norte only on November 11,2006. Since it is
presumed that the husband and wife
To acquire a new domicile - a domicile by choice - The false representation under Section 78 must likewise be a
the following must concur: (1) residence or bodily "deliberate attempt to mislead, misinform, or hide a fact that
presence in a new locality; (2) an intention to would otherwise render a candidate ineligible." Given the
remain there; and (3) an intention to abandon the purpose of the requirement, it must be made with the
old domicile. intention to deceive the electorate as to... the would-be
candidate's qualifications for public office.
In other words, there must be an animus non...
revertendi with respect to the old domicile, and an Thus, the misrepresentation that Section 78 addresses cannot
animus manendi at the domicile of choice. The be the result of a mere innocuous mistake, and cannot exist
intent to remain in or at the domicile of choice must in a situation where the intent to deceive is patently absent,
be for an indefinite period of time and the acts of or where... no deception on the electorate results.
the person must be consistent with this intent. Based on these standards, we find that Mitra did not commit
Based on its consideration of the submitted any deliberate material misrepresentation in his COC.
evidence (including various affidavits submitted by Under the evidentiary situation of the case,... there is clearly
both parties and the photographs of the room that no basis for the conclusion... that Mitra deliberately
Mitra claims to be his residence) and citing... attempted to mislead... the Palawan electorate.
jurisprudence, the First Division granted the
Mitra never hid his intention to transfer his residence from
respondents' petition to cancel Mitra's COC.
Puerto Princesa City to Aborlan to comply with the residence
The COMELEC En Banc Ruling requirement of a candidate for an elective provincial office.
The COMELEC en banc - in a divided decision[32] - Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local
subsequently denied Mitra's motion to reconsider Government
the First Division ruling
Code, does not abhor this intended transfer of residence, as
its Section 39 merely requires an elective local official to be a
resident of the local government unit where he intends to run
for at least one (1) year immediately preceding the day of the
election.
the law itself recognizes implicitly that there can be a change
of domicile or residence, but imposes only the condition that
residence at the new place should at least be for a year.
For him to qualify as Governor... he had to abandon his
domicile of origin and acquire a new one within the local
government unit where he intended to run; this would be his
domicile of choice.
To acquire a domicile of choice, jurisprudence, which the
COMELEC correctly invoked, requires the... following:
(1) residence or bodily presence in a new locality;
(2) an intention to remain there; and
(3) an intention to abandon the old domicile.
We do not believe that he committed any deliberate
misrepresentation given what he knew of his transfer, as
shown by the moves he had made to carry it out.
From the evidentiary perspective, we hold that the evidence
confirming residence in Aborlan decidedly tilts in
Mitra's favor
By failing to take into account whether there had been a
deliberate misrepresentation in Mitra's COC, the COMELEC
committed the grave abuse of simply assuming that an error
in the COC was necessarily a deliberate falsity in a material...
representation. In this case, it doubly erred because there
was no falsity; as the carefully considered evidence shows,
Mitra did indeed transfer his residence within the period
required by Section 74 of the OEC.
Mitra has significant relationship with,... and intimate
knowledge of, the constituency... he wishes to serve.
the purpose of the residency requirement under the law.
By law, this residency can be anywhere within the Province of
Palawan, except for Puerto Princesa City because of its
reclassification as a... highly urbanized city. Thus, residency
in Aborlan is completely consistent with the purpose of the
law, as Mitra thereby declared and proved his required
physical presence in the Province of Palawan.
We also consider that even before his transfer of residence,
he already had intimate knowledge of the Province of
Palawan, particularly of the whole 2nd legislative district that
he represented for three terms. For that matter, even the
respondents... themselves impliedly acknowledged that the
Mitras, as a family, have been identified with elective public
service and politics in the Province of Palawan.[78] This
means to us that Mitra grew up in the politics of Palawan.
We can reasonably conclude from all these that Mitra is not
oblivious to the needs, difficulties, aspirations, potential for
growth and development, and all matters vital to the common
welfare of the constituency he intends to serve.
Mitra has been proclaimed winner... in the electoral contest
and has therefore... the mandate of the electorate to serve...
the manifest will of the people as expressed through the
ballot must be given fullest effect... in case of doubt, political
laws must be interpreted to give life and spirit to the popular
mandate.
while provisions relating to certificates of candidacy are in
mandatory terms, it is an established rule of interpretation as
regards election laws, that mandatory provisions, requiring
certain steps before elections, will be construed as directory...
after the elections, to give effect to the will of the people.
however, we warned against a blanket and unqualified
reading and application of this ruling, as it may carry
dangerous significance to the rule of law and the integrity of
our elections.
Short of adopting a clear cut standard, we thus made the...
following clarification:
We distinguish our ruling in this case from others that we
have made in the past by the clarification that COC defects
beyond matters of form and that involve material
misrepresentations cannot avail of the benefit of our ruling
that COC mandatory... requirements before elections are
considered merely directory after the people shall have
spoken. A mandatory and material election law requirement
involves more than the will of the people in any given locality.
Where a material COC misrepresentation under oath is
made,... thereby violating both our election and criminal laws,
we are faced as well with an assault on the will of the people
of the Philippines as expressed in our laws. In a choice
between provisions on material qualifications of elected
officials, on the one hand, and the will... of the electorate in
any given locality, on the other, we believe and so hold that
we cannot choose the electorate will.
Frivaldo v. COMELEC[87] provided the following test:
To successfully challenge a winning candidate's...
qualifications, the petitioner must clearly demonstrate that
the ineligibility is so patently antagonistic to constitutional
and legal principles that overriding such ineligibility and
thereby giving effect to the apparent will of the people would
ultimately create greater... prejudice to the very democratic
institutions and juristic traditions that our Constitution and
laws so zealously protect and promote.
With the conclusion that Mitra did not commit any material
misrepresentation in his COC, we see no reason in this case
to appeal to the primacy of the electorate's will. We cannot
deny, however, that the people of Palawan have spoken in an
election where residency... qualification had been squarely
raised and their voice has erased any doubt about their
verdict on Mitra's qualifications.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, we GRANT the petition
and ANNUL the assailed COMELEC Resolutions
We DENY the respondents' petition... to cancel Abraham
Kahlil Mitra's Certificate of Candidacy.
We resolve the Motion for Reconsideration Filed by Whether the SC erred when We resolve to deny, for lack of merit, the motions for
G.R. No. 191938 : public respondent Commission on Elections it reviewed the probative reconsideration and for oral arguments.
October 19, 2010 (COMELEC) and the Motion for Reconsideration with value of the evidence
Motion for Oral Arguments filed by private presented and substituted its We note at the outset that the COMELEC and private
ABRAHAM KAHLIL B. respondents Antonio V. Gonzales and Orlando R. own factual findings over that respondent's arguments are mere rehashes of their previous
MITRA, Petitioner, v. Balbon, Jr. (private respondents), dated July 19, of the public respondent. submissions; they are the same arguments addressing the
COMMISSION ON 2010 and July 20, 2010, respectively, addressing our
issues we already considered and passed upon in our July 2,
ELECTIONS, ANTONIO Decision of July 2, 2010 (July 2, 2010 Decision or
2010 Decision.Thus, both the COMELEC and private
V. GONZALES AND Decision).We annulled in this Decision the February
ORLANDO R. BALBON, 10, 2010 and May 4, 2010 Resolutions of the respondents failed to raise any new and substantial argument
JR., Respondent. COMELEC, and denied the private respondents meriting reconsideration.The denial of the motion for oral
petition to cancel the Certificate of Candidacy (COC) arguments proceeds from this same reasoning; mere
of petitioner Abraham Kahlil B. Mitra (Mitra). reiterations of the parties original submissions on issues our
Decision has sufficiently covered, without more, do not merit
To recall its highlights, our Decision emphasized that
the time, effort and attention that an oral argument shall
despite our limited certiorari jurisdiction in election
cases, we are not only obliged but are require.
constitutionally bound to intervene when the
Having said these, we shall still proceed to discuss the
COMELEC's action on the appreciation and
evaluation of evidence oversteps the limits of its aspects of the case the motions touched upon, if only to put
discretion in this case, a situation where resulting an end to lingering doubts on the correctness of our July 2,
errors, arising from the grave abuse committed by 2010 Decision.
the COMELEC, mutated from being errors of
judgment to errors of jurisdiction.Based on our
evaluation of the evidence presented by both
WHEREFORE, premises considered, we resolve to
parties, we found that Mitra did not commit any
deliberate material misrepresentation in his COC.We DENY with FINALITY, for lack of merit, the motions
noted, too, that the COMELEC gravely abused its for reconsideration and motion for oral arguments
discretion in its appreciation of the evidence, leading now before us.Let entry of judgment be made in due
it to conclude that Mitra is not a resident of Aborlan, course.
Palawan.We also found that the COMELEC failed to
critically consider whether Mitra deliberately
attempted to mislead, misinform or hide a fact that
would otherwise render him ineligible for the
position of Governor of Palawan.
On the critical question of whether Mitra deliberately
misrepresented his Aborlan residence to deceive and
mislead the people of the Province of Palawan, we
found that Mitra did not. In fact, Mitra adduced
positive evidence of transfer of residence which the
private respondents evidence failed to sufficiently
controvert.Specifically, the private respondents
evidence failed to show that Mitra remained a
Puerto Princesa City resident.
G.R. No. 180050, February April 3, 2002, the Office of the President advised the Petition is granted. SEC. 461. Requisites for Creation. -- (a) A
10, 2010 Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Surigao del Norte to province may be created if it has an average annual income,
Rodolfo G. Navarro, Victor deficient population in the propsed Province of as certified by the Department of Finance, of not less than
Bernal and Rene Medina Dinagat Islands. Twenty million pesos (P20,000,000.00) based on 1991
vs Exec. Sec. Eduardo constant prices and either of the following requisites:
Ermita Consequently, Prov. Gov't. of Surigao del Norte
conducted a special census with the assitanc eof the (i) a contiguous territory of at least two thousand (2,000)
NSo District Census Coordinator to determine the square kilometers, as certified by the Lands Management
population of Dinagat. The census yield 371,576 Bureau; or
inhabitants. NSO, however, did not certify the result
of the special census. (ii) a population of not less than two hundred fifty thousand
(250,000) inhabitants as certified by the National Statistics
Bureau of Local Government Finance certified that Office:
the average annual income of Dinagat was 82M .
The land area is 802.12 sqkm. Provided, That, the creation thereof shall not reduce the land
area, population, and income of the original unit or units at
Later, Congress passed the bill for the creation of the time of said creation to less than the minimum
the Province of Dinagat which was approved by then requirements prescribed herein.
President GMA. Then a plebiscite was ratified and
approved by the majority. Consequently, new set of (b) The territory need not be contiguous if it comprises two
provincial officials took their oath of office following (2) or more islands or is separated by a chartered city or
their appointment by PGMA, another set were then cities which do not contribute to the income of the province.
elected in the election later.
(c) The average annual income shall include the income
accruing to the general fund, exclusive of special funds, trust
Petitioners aver that they are taxpayers and funds, transfers, and non-recurring income.
residents of the Province of Surigao del Norte, they
are Vice-gov and members of the provincial board. The requirements for the creation of a province contained in
They allege that the creation of the Dinagat Islands Sec. 461 of the Local Government Code are clear, plain and
as a new province is an illegal act of Congress and unambiguous, and its literal application does not result in
unjustly deprives the people of Surigao del Norte a absurdity or injustice. Hence, the provision in Art. 9(2) of the
large chunk of its territory, IRA and rich resources IRR exempting a proposed province composed of one or
from the area. more islands from the land-area requirement cannot be
considered an executive construction of the criteria prescribed
They also claim that the creation is not valid by the Local Government Code. It is an extraneous provision
because it failed to comply with the population and not intended by the Local Government Code and, therefore, is
land area requirement. null and void.
RODOLFO G. NAVARRO v. October 2, 2006, the President of the Republic Whether or not the provision Yes, the Congress, recognizing the capacity and viability of
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY approved into law Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9355 (An in Article 9(2) of the Rules Dinagat to become a full-fledged province, enacted R.A. No.
EDUARDO ERMITA, (D) Act Creating the Province of Dinagat Islands). and Regulations 9355, following the exemption from the land area
Implementing the Local requirement, which, with respect to the creation of provinces,
G.R. No. 180050, April 12, December 3, 2006, the Commission on Elections
Government Code of 1991 can only be found as an express provision in the LGC-IRR. In
2011 (COMELEC) conducted the mandatory plebiscite for
valid. effect, pursuant to its plenary legislative powers, Congress
the ratification of the creation of the province under
breathed flesh and blood into that exemption in Article 9(2)
the Local Government Code (LGC). The plebiscite
of the LGC-IRR and transformed it into law when it enacted
yielded 69,943 affirmative votes and 63,502
R.A. No. 9355 creating the Island Province of Dinagat.
negative votes. With the approval of the people
from both the mother province of Surigao del Norte The land area, while considered as an indicator of viability of
and the Province of Dinagat Islands (Dinagat). a local government unit, is not conclusive in showing that
Dinagat cannot become a province, taking into account its
November 10, 2006, petitioners filed before this
average annual income of P82,696,433.23 at the time of its
Court a petition for certiorari and prohibition
creation, as certified by the Bureau of Local Government
challenging the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9355.
Finance, which is four times more than the minimum
The Court dismissed the petition on technical
requirement of P20,000,000.00 for the creation of a province.
grounds. Their motion for reconsideration was also The delivery of basic services to its constituents has been
denied. proven possible and sustainable. Rather than looking at the
results of the plebiscite and the May 10, 2010 elections as
Undaunted, petitioners filed another petition for
mere fait accompli circumstances which cannot operate in
certiorari seeking to nullify R.A. No. 9355 for being
favor of Dinagat’s existence as a province, they must be seen
unconstitutional. They alleged that the creation of
from the perspective that Dinagat is ready and capable of
Dinagat as a new province, if uncorrected, would
becoming a province. This Court should not be instrumental
perpetuate an illegal act of Congress, and would
in stunting such capacity.
unjustly deprive the people of Surigao del Norte of a
large chunk of the provincial territory, Internal Ratio legis est anima. The spirit rather than the letter of the
Revenue Allocation (IRA), and rich resources from law. A statute must be read according to its spirit or intent,
the area. They pointed out that when the law was for what is within the spirit is within the statute although it is
passed, Dinagat had a land area of 802.12 square not within its letter, and that which is within the letter but not
kilometers only and a population of only 106,951, within the spirit is not within the statute. Put a bit differently,
failing to comply with Section 10, Article X of the that which is within the intent of the lawmaker is as much
Constitution and of Section 461 of the LGC. within the statute as if within the letter, and that which is
within the letter of the statute is not within the statute unless
May 12, 2010, movants-intervenors raised three (3)
within the intent of the lawmakers. Withal, courts ought not
main arguments to challenge the above Resolution,
to interpret and should not accept an interpretation that
namely: (1) that the passage of R.A. No. 9355
would defeat the intent of the law and its legislators.
operates as an act of Congress amending Section
461 of the LGC; (2) that the exemption from
territorial contiguity, when the intended province
consists of two or more islands, includes the
exemption from the application of the minimum land
area requirement; and (3) that the Operative Fact
Doctrine is applicable in the instant case.
G.R. No. 188078, January May 1, 2009, RA 9591 passed into a law, amending RA 9591 is unconstitutional. The 1987 Constitution requires
25, 2010 the Malolos Charter by creating a separate that for a city to have a legislative district, the city must have
legislative district for the city. The population of a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand.[5] The
Victorino Aldaba, etc. Malolos is a contested fact given that the house bill only issue here is whether the City of Malolos has a
for this law relied on the undated certification issued population of at least 250,000, whether actual or projected,
vs COMELEC by NSO that the population of Malolos will be for the purpose of creating a legislative district for the City of
254,030 by year 2010 due its current population Malolos in time for the 10 May 2010 elections. If not, then RA
growth rate. 9591 creating a legislative district in the City of Malolos is
Petitioners, taxpayers and registered residents of unconstitutional.
Malolos filed this petition contending that RA 9591 is
unconstitutional for failing to meet the minimum The Certification of Regional Director Miranda, which is based
population threshold of 250k for a city to merit on demographic projections, is without legal effect because
representation in Congress. Regional Director Miranda has no basis and no authority to
OSG contended that Congress use of projected issue the Certification. The Certification is also void on its face
population is non-justiciable as it involves a because based on its own growth rate assumption, the
determination on the wisdom of the standard population of Malolos will be less than 250,000 in the year
adopted by the legislature to determine compliance 2010. In addition, intercensal demographic projections cannot
with constitutional requirement. be made for the entire year. In any event, a city whose
population has increased to 250,000 is entitled to have a
legislative district only in the immediately following election
after the attainment of the 250,000 population.
Herrera vs COMELEC In its Resolution no. 68, the Sangguniang Whether or not the COMELEC COMELEC did not gravely abuse its discretion. The petition is
Panlalawigan of Guimaras requested the COMELEC committed a grave abuse of dismissed
to have the province subdivided into two provincial discretion in issuing
districts. Acting upon the request, the Provincial Resolution No. 2950? 1. The municipalities belonging to each district are compact,
Election Supervisor conducted two consultative contiguous and adjacent. Contiguous and adjacent means
meetings with the provincial and municipal officials, adjoining, nearby, abutting, having a common border,
barangay captains, barangay kagawads, connected, and/or touching along boundaries often for
representatives of all political parties, and other considerable distances. On its face, the map of Guimaras
interested parties. A consensus was reached in favor shows that the municipalities grouped together are
of the division. contiguous or adjacent.
The PES then issued a memo recommending the 2. There were two consultative meetings held by the Office of
division of the province. the Provincial Election Supervisor. As required by COMELEC
Guimaras was then reclassified from 5th class to 4th Resoluiton No. 2313, all interested parties were duly notified
class province under the Memo Circular No. 97-1 and represented.
issued by the Bureau of Local Government Finance 3. Under Republic Act 6636, a 4th class province shall have 8
of the Department of Finance. Sangguniang Panlalawigan members. Also, under Republic
The COMELEC issued Resolution No. 2950 which Act 7166, provinces with 1 legislative district shall be divided
allotted 8 Sangguniang Panlalawigan seats to into 2 districts for purposes of electing the members of the
Guimaras—1st district (Buenavista and San Sangguniang Panlalawigan. The province of Guimaras, being
Lorenzo)= 3 seats and 2nd district (Jordan, Nueva a 4th class province and having only 1 legislative district, shall
Valencia, and Sibunag)= 5 seats. have 8 Sangguniang Panlalawigan members and 2 districts.
4. Under Republic Act 7166 and COMELEC Resolution No.
The petitioners questioned Resolution No. 2950, 2313, the basis for division shall be the number of inhabitants
pointing out that: of the province concerned not the number of listed or
1.the districts do not comprise a compact, registered voters. The districting of the Province of Guimaras
contiguous and adjacent area. was based on the official 1995 Census of Population as
2.the consultative meetings did not express the true certified by the National Statistics Office.
sentiment of the voters of the province.
3.the apportionment of the two districts are not
equitable.
4.there is disparity in the ratio of the number of
voters that a Board Member represents.
Juanito Mariano v. Re: Based on verifiable indicators of (1) WON RA 7854 did not (1) No. Petitioners have not demonstrated that the
COMELEC, G.R. No. viability/projected capacity properly identify the land delineation of the land area of the proposed City of Makati
118577, March 7, 1995 area or territorial jurisdiction will cause confusion as to its boundaries. We note that said
of Makati by metes and delineation did not change even by an inch the land area
Petitioners assailed the constitutionality of RA 7854 bounds, with technical previously covered by Makati as a municipality. In language
which sought to convert the Municipality of Makati descriptions. that cannot be any clearer, section 2 of RA 7854 stated that,
to a Highly Urbanized City to be known as the City the city's land area "shall comprise the present territory of the
of Makati. Petitioners contend that the special law municipality." The court take judicial notice of the fact that
did not properly identify, in metes and bounds with (2) WON it attempted to alter Congress has also refrained from using the metes and bounds
technical descriptions, the territorial jurisdiction of or restart the "three description of land areas of other local government units with
Makati; that it attempted to alter or restart the consecutive term" limit for unsettled boundary dispute.
"three consecutive term" limit for local elective local elective officials.
officials; that it increased the legislative district of
Makati only by special law; that the increase in (2) No. The requirements before a litigant can challenge the
legislative district was not expressed in the title of (3) WON it is unconstitutional constitutionality of a law are well delineated. They are: 1)
the bill; and that the addition of another legislative for it increased the legislative there must be an actual case or controversy; (2) the question
district in Makati is not in accord with the population district of Makati only by of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party; (3)
requirement, thus violative of the constitution and special law (the Charter in the constitutional question must be raised at the earliest
the LGC. violation of the constitutional possible opportunity; and (4) the decision on the
provision requiring a general constitutional question must be necessary to the
reapportionment law to be determination of the case itself. Petitioners have far from
passed by Congress within complied with these requirements. The petition is premised
three (3) years following the on the occurrence of many contingent events, i.e., that Mayor
return of every census. Binay will run again in this coming mayoralty elections; that
he would be reelected in said elections; and that he would
seek re-election for the same position in the 1998 elections.
(4) WON it is unconstitutional Considering that these contingencies may or may not happen,
for the increase in legislative petitioners merely pose a hypothetical issue which has yet to
district was not expressed in ripen to an actual case or controversy. Petitioners who are
the title of the bill. residents of Taguig (except Mariano) are not also the proper
parties to raise this abstract issue. Worse, they hoist this
futuristic issue in a petition for declaratory relief over which
this Court has no jurisdiction.
(5) WON it is unconstitutional
for the addition of another
legislative district in Makati is
not in accord with Section 5 (3) No. The Constitution clearly provides that Congress shall
(3), Article VI of the be composed of not more than two hundred fifty (250)
Constitution for as of the members, "unless otherwise fixed by law". As thus worded,
latest survey (1990 census), the Constitution did not preclude Congress from increasing its
the population of Makati membership by passing a law, other than a general
stands at only 450,000. Said reapportionment of the law. This is its exactly what was done
section provides, inter alia, by Congress in enacting R.A. No. 7854 and providing for an
that a city with a population increase in Makati's legislative district. Moreover, to hold that
of at least two hundred fifty reapportionment can only be made through a general
thousand (250,000) shall apportionment law, with a review of all the legislative districts
have at least one allotted to each local government unit nationwide, would
representative. create an inequitable situation where a new city or province
created by Congress will be denied legislative representation
for an indeterminate period of time.
6. Whether or not there is an
actual case or controversy to
challenge the constitutionality (4) No. The Constitution does not command that the title of a
of one of the questioned law should exactly mirror, fully index, or completely catalogue
sections of R.A. No. 7854. all its details. it should be sufficient compliance if the title
expresses the general subject and all the provisions are
germane to such general subject.
xxx
Bai Sandra Sema v On 28 August 2006, the ARMM’s legislature, the The petitions raise the WHEREFORE, we declare Section 19, Article VI of Republic
Comelec July 16, 2008 ARMM Regional Assembly, exercising its power to following issues: Act No. 9054 UNCONSTITUTIONAL insofar as it grants to the
create provinces under Section 19, Article VI of RA I. In G.R. No. 177597: Regional Assembly of the Autonomous Region in Muslim
9054, enacted Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act No. (A) Preliminarily – Mindanao the power to create provinces and cities. Thus,
201 (MMA Act 201) creating the Province of Shariff (1) whether the writs we declare VOID Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act No. 201
Kabunsuan composed of the eight municipalities in of Certiorari, Prohibition, and creating the Province of Shariff Kabunsuan. Consequently, we
the first district of Maguindanao. MMA Act 201 Mandamus are proper to test rule that COMELEC Resolution No. 7902 is VALID.
provides: the constitutionality of
COMELEC Resolution No. The creation of any of the four local government units –
Later, three new municipalities were carved out 7902; and province, city, municipality or barangay – must comply with
of the original nine municipalities constituting Shariff (2) whether the three conditions. First, the creation of a local government unit
Kabunsuan, bringing its total number of proclamation of respondent must follow the criteria fixed in the Local Government Code.
municipalities to 11. Thus, what was left of Dilangalen as representative Second, such creation must not conflict with any provision of
Maguindanao were the municipalities constituting its of Shariff Kabunsuan Province the Constitution. Third, there must be a plebiscite in the
second legislative district. Cotabato City, although with Cotabato City mooted political units affected.
part of Maguindanao’s first legislative district, is not the petition in G.R. No. There is neither an express prohibition nor an express
part of the Province of Maguindanao. 177597. grant of authority in the Constitution for Congress to delegate
On 6 February 2007, the Sangguniang to regional or local legislative bodies the power to create local
Panlungsod of Cotabato City passed Resolution No. (B) On the merits – government units. However, under its plenary legislative
3999 requesting the COMELEC to “clarify the status (1) whether Section powers, Congress can delegate to local legislative bodies the
of Cotabato City in view of the conversion of the 19, Article VI of RA 9054, power to create local government units, subject to reasonable
First District of Maguindanao into a regular delegating to the ARMM standards and provided no conflict arises with any provision
province” under MMA Act 201. Regional Assembly the power of the Constitution. In fact, Congress has delegated to
Resolution No. 07-0407, which adopted the to create provinces, cities, provincial boards, and city and municipal councils, the power
recommendation of the COMELEC’s Law Department municipalities and barangays, to create barangays within their jurisdiction, subject to
under a Memorandum dated 27 February 2007, is constitutional; and compliance with the criteria established in the Local
provides in pertinent parts: (2) if in the Government Code, and the plebiscite requirement in Section
Considering the foregoing, the Commission affirmative, whether a 10, Article X of the Constitution. However, under the Local
RESOLVED, as it hereby resolves, to adopt the province created by the Government Code, “only x x x an Act of Congress” can create
recommendation of the Law Department that ARMM Regional Assembly provinces, cities or municipalities.
pending the enactment of the appropriate law by under MMA Act 201 pursuant However, the creation of provinces and cities is another
Congress, to maintain the status quo with Cotabato to Section 19, Article VI of RA matter. Section 5 (3), Article VI of the Constitution provides,
City as part of Shariff Kabunsuan in the First 9054 is entitled to one “Each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty
Legislative District of Maguindanao. representative in the House thousand, or each province, shall have at least one
On 10 May 2007, the COMELEC issued of Representatives without representative” in the House of Representatives. Similarly,
Resolution No. 7902, subject of these petitions, need of a national law Section 3 of the Ordinance appended to the Constitution
amending Resolution No. 07-0407 by renaming the creating a legislative district provides, “Any province that may hereafter be created, or any
legislative district in question as “Shariff Kabunsuan for such province. city whose population may hereafter increase to more than
Province with Cotabato City (formerly First District of II. In G.R No. 177597 two hundred fifty thousand shall be entitled in the
Maguindanao with Cotabato City).” and G.R No. 178628, immediately following election to at least one Member x x x.”
whether COMELEC Resolution Clearly, a province cannot be created without a legislative
No. 7902 is valid for district because it will violate Section 5 (3), Article VI of the
maintaining the status quo in Constitution as well as Section 3 of the Ordinance appended
the first legislative district of to the Constitution. For the same reason, a city with a
Maguindanao (as “Shariff population of 250,000 or more cannot also be created without
Kabunsuan Province with a legislative district.
Cotabato City [formerly First This textual commitment to Congress of the exclusive
District of Maguindanao with power to create or reapportion legislative districts is logical.
Cotabato City]”), despite the Congress is a national legislature and any increase in its
creation of the Province of allowable membership or in its incumbent membership
Shariff Kabunsuan out of through the creation of legislative districts must be embodied
such district (excluding in a national law. Only Congress can enact such a law. It
Cotabato City). would be anomalous for regional or local legislative bodies to
create or reapportion legislative districts for a national
legislature like Congress. An inferior legislative body, created
by a superior legislative body, cannot change the membership
of the superior legislative body.
In view of certiorari and mandamus
The purpose of the writ of Certiorari is to correct grave
abuse of discretion by “any tribunal, board, or officer
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.” On the other
hand, the writ of Mandamus will issue to compel a tribunal,
corporation, board, officer, or person to perform an act
“which the law specifically enjoins as a duty.”
In view of mootness
There is also no merit in the claim that respondent
Dilangalen’s proclamation as winner in the 14 May 2007
elections for representative of “Shariff Kabunsuan Province
with Cotabato City” mooted this petition. This case does not
concern respondent Dilangalen’s election. Rather, it involves
an inquiry into the validity of COMELEC Resolution No. 7902,
as well as the constitutionality of MMA Act 201 and Section
19, Article VI of RA 9054. Admittedly, the outcome of this
petition, one way or another, determines whether the votes
cast in Cotabato City for representative of the district of
“Shariff Kabunsuan Province with Cotabato City” will be
included in the canvassing of ballots. However, this
incidental consequence is no reason for us not to proceed
with the resolution of the novel issues raised here. The
Court’s ruling in these petitions affects not only the recently
concluded elections but also all the other succeeding elections
for the office in question, as well as the power of the ARMM
Regional Assembly to create in the future additional
provinces.
In view of the Felwa case
As further support for her stance, petitioner invokes the
statement in Felwa that “when a province is created by
statute, the corresponding representative district comes into
existence neither by authority of that statute — which cannot
provide otherwise — nor by apportionment, but by operation
of the Constitution, without a reapportionment.”
First. The issue in Felwa, among others, was whether
Republic Act No. 4695 (RA 4695), creating the provinces of
Benguet, Mountain Province, Ifugao, and Kalinga-Apayao and
providing for congressional representation in the old and new
provinces, was unconstitutional for “creating congressional
districts without the apportionment provided in the
Constitution.”
Thus, the Court sustained the constitutionality of RA 4695
because (1) it validly created legislative districts “indirectly”
through a special law enacted by Congress creating a
province and (2) the creation of the legislative districts will
not result in breaching the maximum number of legislative
districts provided under the 1935 Constitution. Felwa does
not apply to the present case because in Felwa the new
provinces were created by a national law enacted by
Congress itself. Here, the new province was created merely
by a regional law enacted by the ARMM Regional Assembly.
What Felwa teaches is that the creation of a legislative
district by Congress does not emanate alone from Congress’
power to reapportion legislative districts, but also from
Congress’ power to create provinces which cannot be created
without a legislative district. Thus, when a province is
created, a legislative district is created by operation of the
Constitution because the Constitution provides that “each
province shall have at least one representative” in the House
of Representatives.
Moreover, if as Sema claims MMA Act 201 apportioned a
legislative district to Shariff Kabunsuan upon its creation, this
will leave Cotabato City as the lone component of the first
legislative district of Maguindanao. However, Cotabato City
cannot constitute a legislative district by itself because as of
the census taken in 2000, it had a population of only
163,849.
Second. Sema’s theory also undermines the composition
and independence of the House of Representatives. Under
Section 19, Article VI of RA 9054, the ARMM Regional
Assembly can create provinces and cities within the ARMM
with or without regard to the criteria fixed in Section 461 of
RA 7160, namely: minimum annual income of P20,000,000,
and minimum contiguous territory of 2,000 square kilometers
or minimum population of 250,000. The following scenarios
thus become distinct possibilities:
It is axiomatic that organic acts of autonomous regions
cannot prevail over the Constitution. Section 20, Article X of
the Constitution expressly provides that the legislative powers
of regional assemblies are limited “[w]ithin its territorial
jurisdiction and subject to the provisions of the Constitution
and national laws, x x x.” The Preamble of the ARMM
Organic Act (RA 9054) itself states that the ARMM
Government is established “within the framework of the
Constitution.” This follows Section 15, Article X of the
Constitution which mandates that the ARMM “shall be created
x x x within the framework of this Constitution and the
national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the
Republic of the Philippines.”
Whether the COMELEC committed No, the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in following
Atong Paglaum, The case constitute 54 Petitions for Certiorari and Petitions for grave abuse of discretion prevailing decisions in disqualifying petitioners from participating in the
Inc. v. COMELEC Certiorari and Prohibition filed by 52 party-list groups and amounting to lack or excess of coming elections. However, since the Court adopts new parameters in
(G.R. No. 203766) organizations assailing the Resolutions issued by the jurisdiction in disqualifying the qualification of the party-list system, thereby abandoning the rulings
Commission on Elections (COMELEC) disqualifying them from petitioners from participating in in the decisions applied by the COMELEC in disqualifying petitioners, we
participating in the 13 May 2013 party-list elections, either by the elections. remand to the COMELEC all the present petitions for the COMELEC to
denial of their petitions for registration under the party-list determine who are qualified to register under the party-list system, and
system, or cancellation of their registration and accreditation to participate in the coming elections, under the new parameters
as party-list organizations. prescribed in this Decision.
Pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act No. 7941 (R.A. No. Moreover, Section 5(2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution mandates
7941) and COMELEC Resolution Nos. 9366 and 9531, that, during the first three consecutive terms of Congress after the
approximately 280 groups and organizations registered and ratification of the 1987 Constitution, "one-half of the seats allocated to
manifested their desire to participate in the 13 May 2013 party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection
party-list elections or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural
communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided
December 5, 2012, the COMELEC En Banc affirmed the by law, except the religious sector." This provision clearly shows again
COMELEC Second Division’s resolution to grant Partido ng that the party-list system is not exclusively for sectoral parties for two
Bayan ng Bida’s (PBB) registration and accreditation as a obvious reasons.
political party in the National Capital Region. However, PBB
was denied participation in the elections because PBB does First, the other one-half of the seats allocated to party-list
not represent any "marginalized and underrepresented" representatives would naturally be open to non-sectoral party-list
sector. representatives, clearly negating the idea that the party-list system is
exclusively for sectoral parties representing the "marginalized and
13 petitioners were not able to secure a mandatory injunction underrepresented."
from the Court. The COMELEC, on 7 January 2013 issued
Resolution No. 9604, and excluded the names of these 13 Second, the reservation of one-half of the party-list seats to sectoral
petitioners in the printing of the official. parties applies only for the first "three consecutive terms after the
ratification of this Constitution," clearly making the party-list system fully
Pursuant to paragraph 2 of Resolution No. 9513, the COMELEC open after the end of the first three congressional terms. This means
En Banc scheduled summary evidentiary hearings to that, after this period, there will be no seats reserved for any class or
determine whether the groups and organizations that filed type of party that qualifies under the three groups constituting the party-
manifestations of intent to participate in the elections have list system.
continually complied with the requirements of R.A. No. 7941
Hence, the clear intent, express wording, and party-list structure
and Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v. COMELEC (Ang
Bagong Bayani). ordained in Section 5(1) and (2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution
cannot be disputed: the party-list system is not for sectoral parties only,
39 petitioners were able to secure a mandatory injunction but also for non-sectoral parties.
from the Court, directing the COMELEC to include the names
R.A. No. 7941 does not require national and regional parties or
of these 39 petitioners in the printing of the official ballot for
the elections. organizations to represent the "marginalized and underrepresented"
sectors. To require all national and regional parties under the party-list
Petitioners prayed for the issuance of a temporary restraining system to represent the "marginalized and underrepresented" is to
order and/or writ of preliminary injunction. This Court issued deprive and exclude, by judicial fiat, ideology-based and cause-oriented
Status Quo Ante Orders in all petitions. parties from the party-list system. How will these ideology-based and
cause-oriented parties, who cannot win in legislative district elections,
participate in the electoral process if they are excluded from the party-
list system? To exclude them from the party-list system is to prevent
them from joining the parliamentary struggle, leaving as their only option
the armed struggle. To exclude them from the party-list system is, apart
from being obviously senseless, patently contrary to the clear intent and
express wording of the 1987 Constitution and R.A. No. 7941