Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Tested by the foregoing, petitioner in this case clearly has legal standing to file xxxx
the petition. He is a real party-in-interest to assail the constitutionality and
legality of Ordinance Nos. SP-2095 and SP-2235 because respondents did not The requisites in order that an action may be dismissed on the ground of litis
dispute that he is a registered co-owner of a residential property in Quezon City pendentia are: (a) the identity of parties, or at least such as representing the
and that he paid property tax which already included the SHT and the garbage same interest in both actions; (b) the identity of rights asserted and relief
fee. He has substantial right to seek a refund of the payments he made and to prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts, and (c) the identity of
stop future imposition. While he is a lone petitioner, his cause of action to the two cases such that judgment in one, regardless of which party is successful,
declare the validity of the subject ordinances is substantial and of paramount would amount to res judicata in the other.
interest to similarly situated property owners in Quezon City.
xxxx
C. Litis Pendentia
The underlying principle of litis pendentia is the theory that a party is not
Respondents move for the dismissal of this petition on the ground of litis allowed to vex another more than once regarding the same subject matter and
pendentia. They claim that, as early as February 22, 2012, a case for the same cause of action. This theory is founded on the public policy that the
entitled Alliance of Quezon City Homeowners, Inc., et al., v. Hon. Herbert same subject matter should not be the subject of controversy in courts more
Bautista, et al., docketed as Civil Case No. Q-12-7-820, has been pending in the than once, in order that possible conflicting judgments may be avoided for the
Quezon City Regional Trial Court, Branch 104, which assails the legality of sake of the stability of the rights and status of persons, and also to avoid the
Ordinance No. SP-2095. Relying on City of Makati, et al. v. Municipality (now costs and expenses incident to numerous suits.
City) of Taguig, et al.,32 respondents assert that there is substantial identity of
parties between the two cases because petitioner herein and plaintiffs in the Among the several tests resorted to in ascertaining whether two suits relate to
civil case filed their respective cases as taxpayers of Quezon City. a single or common cause of action are: (1) whether the same evidence would
support and sustain both the first and second causes of action; and (2) whether
For petitioner, however, respondents contention is untenable since he is not a the defenses in one case may be used to substantiate the complaint in the other.
payment of the tax, fee, or charge levied therein: Provided, finally, That within
The determination of whether there is an identity of causes of action for thirty (30) days after receipt of the decision or the lapse of the sixty-day
purposes of litis pendentia is inextricably linked with that of res judicata, each period without the Secretary of Justice acting upon the appeal, the aggrieved
constituting an element of the other. In either case, both relate to the sound party may file appropriate proceedings with a court of competent jurisdiction.
practice of including, in a single litigation, the disposition of all issues relating to chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
a cause of action that is before a court.37 The provision, the constitutionality of which was sustained in Drilon v. Lim,40 has
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary been construed as mandatory41 considering that
There is substantial identity of the parties when there is a community of A municipal tax ordinance empowers a local government unit to impose taxes. The
interest between a party in the first case and a party in the second case albeit power to tax is the most effective instrument to raise needed revenues to
the latter was not impleaded in the first case.38Moreover, the fact that the finance and support the myriad activities of local government units for the
positions of the parties are reversed, i.e., the plaintiffs in the first case are the delivery of basic services essential to the promotion of the general welfare and
defendants in the second case or vice-versa, does not negate the identity of enhancement of peace, progress, and prosperity of the people. Consequently, any
parties for purposes of determining whether the case is dismissible on the delay in implementing tax measures would be to the detriment of the public. It is
ground of litis pendentia.39ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary for this reason that protests over tax ordinances are required to be done within
certain time frames. x x x.42
In this case, it is notable that respondents failed to attach any pleading chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
connected with the alleged civil case pending before the Quezon City trial court. The obligatory nature of Section 187 was underscored in Hagonoy Market
Granting that there is substantial identity of parties between said case and this Vendor Asso. v. Municipality of Hagonoy :43cralawlawlibrary
petition, dismissal on the ground of litis pendentia still cannot be had in view of x x x [T]he timeframe fixed by law for parties to avail of their legal remedies
the absence of the second and third requisites. There is no way for Us to before competent courts is not a mere technicality that can be easily brushed
determine whether both cases are based on the same set of facts that require aside. The periods stated in Section 187 of the Local Government Code are
the presentation of the same evidence. Even if founded on the same set of facts, mandatory. x x x Being its lifeblood, collection of revenues by the government is
the rights asserted and reliefs prayed for could be different. Moreover, there is of paramount importance. The funds for the operation of its agencies and
no basis to rule that the two cases are intimately related and/or intertwined provision of basic services to its inhabitants are largely derived from its
with one another such that the judgment that may be rendered in one, revenues and collections. Thus, it is essential that the validity of revenue
regardless of which party would be successful, would amount to res judicata in measures is not left uncertain for a considerable length of time . Hence, the law
the other. provided a time limit for an aggrieved party to assail the legality of revenue
measures and tax ordinances.44
D. Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Despite these cases, the Court, in Ongsuco, et al. v. Hon. Malones ,45 held that
Respondents contend that petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies there was no need for petitioners therein to exhaust administrative remedies
for his non-compliance with Section 187 of the LGC, which mandates: before resorting to the courts, considering that there was only a pure question
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary of law, the parties did not dispute any factual matter on which they had to
Section 187. Procedure for Approval and Effectivity of Tax Ordinances and present evidence. Likewise, in Cagayan Electric Power and Light Co., Inc. v. City
Revenue Measures; Mandatory Public Hearings. The procedure for approval of of Cagayan de Oro,46 We relaxed the application of the rules in view of the more
local tax ordinances and revenue measures shall be in accordance with the substantive matters. For the same reasons, this petition is an exception to the
provisions of this Code: Provided, That public hearings shall be conducted for the general rule.
purpose prior to the enactment thereof: Provided, further, That any question on Substantive Issues
the constitutionality or legality of tax ordinances or revenue measures may be
raised on appeal within thirty (30) days from the effectivity thereof to the Petitioner asserts that the protection of real properties from informal settlers
Secretary of Justice who shall render a decision within sixty (60) days from the and the collection of garbage are basic and essential duties and functions of the
date of receipt of the appeal: Provided, however, That such appeal shall not have Quezon City Government. By imposing the SHT and the garbage fee, the latter
the effect of suspending the effectivity of the ordinance and the accrual and has shown a penchant and pattern to collect taxes to pay for public services that
could be covered by its revenues from taxes imposed on property, idle land, On the Socialized Housing Tax
business, transfer, amusement, etc., as well as the Internal Revenue Allotment
(IRA) from the National Government. For petitioner, it is noteworthy that Respondents emphasize that the SHT is pursuant to the social justice principle
respondents did not raise the issue that the Quezon City Government is in dire found in Sections 1 and 2, Article XIII 57 of the 1987 Constitution and Sections 2
financial state and desperately needs money to fund housing for informal (a)58 and 4359 of R.A. No. 7279, or the Urban Development and Housing Act of
settlers and to pay for garbage collection. In fact, it has not denied that its 1992 (UDHA).
revenue collection in 2012 is in the sum of P13.69 billion.
Relying on Manila Race Horse Trainers Assn., Inc. v. De La
Moreover, the imposition of the SHT and the garbage fee cannot be justified by Fuente,60 and Victorias Milling Co., Inc. v. Municipality of Victorias,
the Quezon City Government as an exercise of its power to create sources of etc.,61 respondents assert that Ordinance No. SP-2095 applies equally to all real
income under Section 5, Article X of the 1987 Constitution.47 According to property owners without discrimination. There is no way that the ordinance could
petitioner, the constitutional provision is not a carte blanche for the LGU to tax violate the equal protection clause because real property owners and informal
everything under its territorial and political jurisdiction as the provision itself settlers do not belong to the same class.
admits of guidelines and limitations.
Ordinance No. SP-2095 is also not oppressive since the tax rate being imposed is
Petitioner further claims that the annual property tax is an ad valorem tax, a consistent with the UDHA. While the law authorizes LGUs to collect SHT on
percentage of the assessed value of the property, which is subject to revision properties with an assessed value of more than P50,000.00, the questioned
every three (3) years in order to reflect an increase in the market value of the ordinance only covers properties with an assessed value exceeding P100,000.00.
property. The SHT and the garbage fee are actually increases in the property As well, the ordinance provides for a tax credit equivalent to the total amount of
tax which are not based on the assessed value of the property or its the special assessment paid by the property owner beginning in the sixth (6 th)
reassessment every three years; hence, in violation of Sections 232 and 233 of year of the effectivity of the ordinance.
the LGC.48ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
On the contrary, petitioner claims that the collection of the SHT is tantamount
For their part, respondents relied on the presumption in favor of the to a penalty imposed on real property owners due to the failure of respondent
constitutionality of Ordinance Nos. SP-2095 and SP-2235, invoking Victorias Quezon City Mayor and Council to perform their duty to secure and protect real
Milling Co., Inc. v. Municipality of Victorias, etc.,49People v. Siton, et property owners from informal settlers, thereby burdening them with the
al.,50 and Hon. Ermita v. Hon. Aldecoa-Delorino.51 They argue that the burden of expenses to provide funds for housing. For petitioner, the SHT cannot be viewed
establishing the invalidity of an ordinance rests heavily upon the party as a charity from real property owners since it is forced, not voluntary.
challenging its constitutionality. They insist that the questioned ordinances are
proper exercises of police power similar to Telecom. & Broadcast Attys. of the Also, petitioner argues that the collection of the SHT is a kind of class
Phils., Inc. v. COMELEC52 and Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, legislation that violates the right of property owners to equal protection of the
Jr.53 and that their enactment finds basis in the social justice principle laws since it favors informal settlers who occupy property not their own and pay
enshrined in Section 9,54 Article II of the 1987 Constitution. no taxes over law-abiding real property owners who pay income and realty taxes.
As to the issue of publication, respondents argue that where the law provides Petitioner further contends that respondents characterization of the SHT as
for its own effectivity, publication in the Official Gazette is not necessary so nothing more than an advance payment on the real property tax has no
long as it is not punitive in character, citing Balbuna, et al. v. Hon. Secretary of statutory basis. Allegedly, property tax cannot be collected before it is due
Education, et al.55 and Askay v. Cosalan.56 Thus, Ordinance No. SP-2095 took because, under the LGC, chartered cities are authorized to impose property tax
effect after its publication, while Ordinance No. SP-2235 became effective based on the assessed value and the general revision of assessment that is made
after its approval on December 26, 2013. every three (3) years.
Additionally, the parties articulate the following positions: As to the rationale of SHT stated in Ordinance No. SP-2095, which, in turn, was
based on Section 43 of the UDHA, petitioner asserts that there is no specific
provision in the 1987 Constitution stating that the ownership and enjoyment of food chains, and other commercial dining places that spew garbage much more
property bear a social function. And even if there is, it is seriously doubtful and than residential property owners.
far-fetched that the principle means that property owners should provide funds
for the housing of informal settlers and for home site development. Social Petitioner likewise contends that the imposition of garbage fee is tantamount to
justice and police power, petitioner believes, does not mean imposing a tax on double taxation because garbage collection is a basic and essential public service
one, or that one has to give up something, for the benefit of another. At best, that should be paid out from property tax, business tax, transfer tax,
the principle that property ownership and enjoyment bear a social function is but amusement tax, community tax certificate, other taxes, and the IRA of the
a reiteration of the Civil Law principle that property should not be enjoyed and Quezon City Government. To bolster the claim, he states that the revenue
abused to the injury of other properties and the community, and that the use of collection of the Quezon City Government reached Php13.69 billion in 2012. A
the property may be restricted by police power, the exercise of which is not small portion of said amount could be spent for garbage collection and other
involved in this case. essential services.
Finally, petitioner alleges that 6 Bistekvilles will be constructed out of the SHT It is further noted that the Quezon City Government already collects garbage
collected. Bistek is the monicker of respondent City Mayor. fee under Section 4768of R.A. No. 9003, or the Ecological Solid Waste
The Bistekvilles makes it clear, therefore, that politicians will take the credit Management Act of 2000, which authorizes LGUs to impose fees in amounts
for the tax imposed on real property owners. sufficient to pay the costs of preparing, adopting, and implementing a solid waste
management plan, and that LGUs have access to the Solid Waste Management
On the Garbage Fee (SWM) Fund created under Section 4669 of the same law. Also, according to
petitioner, it is evident that Ordinance No. S-2235 is inconsistent with R.A. No.
Respondents claim that Ordinance No. S-2235, which is an exercise of police 9003 for while the law encourages segregation, composting, and recycling of
power, collects on the average from every household a garbage fee in the meager waste, the ordinance only emphasizes the collection and payment of garbage fee;
amount of thirty-three (33) centavos per day compared with the sum of while the law calls for an active involvement of the barangay in the collection,
P1,659.83 that the Quezon City Government annually spends for every household segregation, and recycling of garbage, the ordinance skips such mandate.
for garbage collection and waste management.62ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Lastly, in challenging the ordinance, petitioner avers that the garbage fee was
In addition, there is no double taxation because the ordinance involves a fee. collected even if the required publication of its approval had not yet elapsed. He
Even assuming that the garbage fee is a tax, the same cannot be a direct notes that on January 7, 2014, he paid his realty tax which already included the
duplicate tax as it is imposed on a different subject matter and is of a different garbage fee.
kind or character. Based on Villanueva, et al. v. City of Iloilo63 and Victorias The Courts Ruling
Milling Co., Inc. v. Municipality of Victorias, etc.,64 there is no taxing twice
because the real property tax is imposed on ownership based on its assessed Respondents correctly argued that an ordinance, as in every law, is presumed
value, while the garbage fee is required on the domestic household. The only valid.
reference to the property is the determination of the applicable rate and the An ordinance carries with it the presumption of validity. The question of
facility of collection. reasonableness though is open to judicial inquiry. Much should be left thus to the
discretion of municipal authorities. Courts will go slow in writing off an ordinance
Petitioner argues, however, that Ordinance No. S-2235 cannot be justified as an as unreasonable unless the amount is so excessive as to be prohibitive, arbitrary,
exercise of police power. The cases of Calalang v. Williams,65Patalinghug v. Court unreasonable, oppressive, or confiscatory. A rule which has gained acceptance is
of Appeals,66 and Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, Jr.,67 which that factors relevant to such an inquiry are the municipal conditions as a whole
were cited by respondents, are inapplicable since the assailed ordinance is a and the nature of the business made subject to imposition.70
revenue measure and does not regulate the disposal or other aspect of garbage. chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
For an ordinance to be valid though, it must not only be within the corporate
The subject ordinance, for petitioner, is discriminatory as it collects garbage powers of the LGU to enact and must be passed according to the procedure
fee only from domestic households and not from restaurants, food courts, fast prescribed by law, it should also conform to the following requirements: (1) not
contrary to the Constitution or any statute; (2) not unfair or oppressive; (3) not no limitation on the right so far as to the corporation themselves are concerned.
partial or discriminatory; (4) not prohibit but may regulate trade; (5) general and They are, so to phrase it, the mere tenants at will of the legislature.
consistent with public policy; and (6) not unreasonable.71 As jurisprudence
indicates, the tests are divided into the formal (i.e., whether the ordinance was This basic relationship between the national legislature and the local government
enacted within the corporate powers of the LGU and whether it was passed in units has not been enfeebled by the new provisions in the Constitution
accordance with the procedure prescribed by law), and the substantive ( i.e., strengthening the policy of local autonomy. Without meaning to detract from
involving inherent merit, like the conformity of the ordinance with the limitations that policy, we here confirm that Congress retains control of the local
under the Constitution and the statutes, as well as with the requirements of government units although in significantly reduced degree now than under our
fairness and reason, and its consistency with public previous Constitutions. The power to create still includes the power to destroy.
policy).72ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary The power to grant still includes the power to withhold or recall. True, there are
certain notable innovations in the Constitution, like the direct conferment on the
An ordinance must pass muster under the test of constitutionality and the test local government units of the power to tax, which cannot now be withdrawn by
of consistency with the prevailing laws.73 If not, it is void.74 Ordinance should mere statute. By and large, however, the national legislature is still the principal
uphold the principle of the supremacy of the Constitution.75 As to conformity of the local government units, which cannot defy its will or modify or violate it .77
with existing statutes, Batangas CATV, Inc. v. Court of Appeals76 has this to say: chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary LGUs must be reminded that they merely form part of the whole; that the policy
It is a fundamental principle that municipal ordinances are inferior in status and of ensuring the autonomy of local governments was never intended by the
subordinate to the laws of the state. An ordinance in conflict with a state law of drafters of the 1987 Constitution to create an imperium in imperio and install an
general character and statewide application is universally held to be invalid. The intra-sovereign political subdivision independent of a single sovereign
principle is frequently expressed in the declaration that municipal authorities, state.78 [M]unicipal corporations are bodies politic and corporate, created not
under a general grant of power, cannot adopt ordinances which infringe the spirit only as local units of local self-government, but as governmental agencies of the
of a state law or repugnant to the general policy of the state. In every power to state. The legislature, by establishing a municipal corporation, does not divest
pass ordinances given to a municipality, there is an implied restriction that the the State of any of its sovereignty; absolve itself from its right and duty to
ordinances shall be consistent with the general law. In the language of Justice administer the public affairs of the entire state; or divest itself of any power
Isagani Cruz (ret.), this Court, in Magtajas vs. Pryce Properties Corp., Inc., ruled over the inhabitants of the district which it possesses before the charter was
that: granted.79ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
The rationale of the requirement that the ordinances should not contravene a LGUs are able to legislate only by virtue of a valid delegation of legislative power
statute is obvious. Municipal governments are only agents of the national from the national legislature; they are mere agents vested with what is called
government. Local councils exercise only delegated legislative powers conferred the power of subordinate legislation.80Congress enacted the LGC as the
on them by Congress as the national lawmaking body. The delegate cannot be implementing law for the delegation to the various LGUs of the States great
superior to the principal or exercise powers higher than those of the latter. It is powers, namely: the police power, the power of eminent domain, and the power of
a heresy to suggest that the local government units can undo the acts of taxation. The LGC was fashioned to delineate the specific parameters and
Congress, from which they have derived their power in the first place, and limitations to be complied with by each LGU in the exercise of these delegated
negate by mere ordinance the mandate of the statute. powers with the view of making each LGU a fully functioning subdivision of the
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary State subject to the constitutional and statutory
Municipal corporations owe their origin to, and derive their powers and rights limitations.81ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
wholly from the legislature. It breathes into them the breath of life, without
which they cannot exist. As it creates, so it may destroy. As it may destroy, it Specifically, with regard to the power of taxation, it is indubitably the most
may abridge and control. Unless there is some constitutional limitation on the effective instrument to raise needed revenues in financing and supporting myriad
right, the legislature might, by a single act, and if we can suppose it capable of activities of the LGUs for the delivery of basic services essential to the
so great a folly and so great a wrong, sweep from existence all of the municipal promotion of the general welfare and the enhancement of peace, progress, and
corporations in the State, and the corporation could not prevent it. We know of
prosperity of the people.82 As this Court opined in National Power Corp. v. City of the interpretation of the taxing power of a municipal corporation. [Underscoring
Cabanatuan:83cralawlawlibrary supplied]
In recent years, the increasing social challenges of the times expanded the
scope of state activity, and taxation has become a tool to realize social justice xxxx
and the equitable distribution of wealth, economic progress and the protection
of local industries as well as public welfare and similar objectives. Taxation Per Section 5, Article X of the 1987 Constitution, the power to tax is no longer
assumes even greater significance with the ratification of the 1987 Constitution. vested exclusively on Congress; local legislative bodies are now given direct
Thenceforth, the power to tax is no longer vested exclusively on Congress; local authority to levy taxes, fees and other charges. Nevertheless, such authority is
legislative bodies are now given direct authority to levy taxes, fees and other subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide.
charges pursuant to Article X, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution, viz: chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary In conformity with Section 3, Article X of the 1987 Constitution, Congress
Section 5. Each Local Government unit shall have the power to create its own enacted Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code
sources of revenue, to levy taxes, fees and charges subject to such guidelines of 1991. Book II of the LGC governs local taxation and fiscal matters.86
and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
local autonomy. Such taxes, fees and charges shall accrue exclusively to the local Indeed, LGUs have no inherent power to tax except to the extent that such
governments. power might be delegated to them either by the basic law or by the
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary statute.87 Under the now prevailing Constitution, where there is neither a grant
This paradigm shift results from the realization that genuine development can be nor a prohibition by statute, the tax power must be deemed to exist although
achieved only by strengthening local autonomy and promoting decentralization of Congress may provide statutory limitations and guidelines. The
governance. For a long time, the countrys highly centralized government basic rationale for the current rule is to safeguard the viability and self-
structure has bred a culture of dependence among local government leaders upon sufficiency of local government units by directly granting them general and
the national leadership. It has also dampened the spirit of initiative, innovation broad tax powers. Nevertheless, the fundamental law did not intend the
and imaginative resilience in matters of local development on the part of local delegation to be absolute and unconditional; the constitutional objective
government leaders. The only way to shatter this culture of dependence is to obviously is to ensure that, while the local government units are being
give the LGUs a wider role in the delivery of basic services, and confer them strengthened and made more autonomous, the legislature must still see to it that
sufficient powers to generate their own sources for the purpose. To achieve this (a) the taxpayer will not be over-burdened or saddled with multiple and
goal, Section 3 of Article X of the 1987 Constitution mandates Congress to enact unreasonable impositions; (b) each local government unit will have its fair share
a local government code that will, consistent with the basic policy of local of available resources; (c) the resources of the national government will not be
autonomy, set the guidelines and limitations to this grant of taxing powers x x unduly disturbed; and (d) local taxation will be fair, uniform, and
x84 just.88ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Fairly recently, We also stated in Pelizloy Realty Corporation v. Province of Subject to the provisions of the LGC and consistent with the basic policy of local
Benguet85 that: autonomy, every LGU is now empowered and authorized to create its own sources
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary of revenue and to levy taxes, fees, and charges which shall accrue exclusively to
The rule governing the taxing power of provinces, cities, municipalities and the local government unit as well as to apply its resources and assets for
barangays is summarized in Icard v. City Council of Baguio: productive, developmental, or welfare purposes, in the exercise or furtherance
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary of their governmental or proprietary powers and functions.89 The relevant
It is settled that a municipal corporation unlike a sovereign state is clothed with provisions of the LGC which establish the parameters of the taxing power of the
no inherent power of taxation. The charter or statute must plainly show an LGUs are as follows:
intent to confer that power or the municipality, cannot assume it. And the power chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
when granted is to be construed in strictissimi juris. Any doubt or ambiguity SECTION 130. Fundamental Principles. The following fundamental principles
arising out of the term used in granting that power must be resolved against the shall govern the exercise of the taxing and other revenue-raising powers of local
municipality. Inferences, implications, deductions all these have no place in government units:
the guise of charges for wharfage, tolls for bridges or otherwise, or other
(a) Taxation shall be uniform in each local government unit; taxes, fees, or charges in any form whatsoever upon such goods or merchandise;
(b) Taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall: (f) Taxes, fees or charges on agricultural and aquatic products when sold by
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary marginal farmers or fishermen;
(1) be equitable and based as far as practicable on the taxpayers ability to pay;
(g) Taxes on business enterprises certified to by the Board of Investments as
(2) be levied and collected only for public purposes; pioneer or non-pioneer for a period of six (6) and four (4) years, respectively
from the date of registration;
(3) not be unjust, excessive, oppressive, or confiscatory;
(h) Excise taxes on articles enumerated under the National Internal Revenue
(4) not be contrary to law, public policy, national economic policy, or in restraint Code, as amended, and taxes, fees or charges on petroleum products;
of trade;
(i) Percentage or value-added tax (VAT) on sales, barters or exchanges or similar
(c) The collection of local taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall in no transactions on goods or services except as otherwise provided herein;
case be let to any private person;
(j) Taxes on the gross receipts of transportation contractors and persons
(d) The revenue collected pursuant to the provisions of this Code shall inure engaged in the transportation of passengers or freight by hire and common
solely to the benefit of, and be subject to the disposition by, the local carriers by air, land or water, except as provided in this Code;
government unit levying the tax, fee, charge or other imposition unless otherwise
specifically provided herein; and, (k) Taxes on premiums paid by way of reinsurance or retrocession;
(e) Each local government unit shall, as far as practicable, evolve a progressive (l) Taxes, fees or charges for the registration of motor vehicles and for the
system of taxation. issuance of all kinds of licenses or permits for the driving thereof, except
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary tricycles;
SECTION 133. Common Limitations on the Taxing Powers of Local Government
Units. Unless otherwise provided herein, the exercise of the taxing powers of (m) Taxes, fees, or other charges on Philippine products actually exported,
provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays shall not extend to the levy of the except as otherwise provided herein;
following:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary (n) Taxes, fees, or charges, on Countryside and Barangay Business Enterprises
(a) Income tax, except when levied on banks and other financial institutions; and cooperatives duly registered under R.A. No. 6810 and Republic Act
Numbered Sixty-nine hundred thirty-eight (R.A. No. 6938) otherwise known as
(b) Documentary stamp tax; the Cooperative Code of the Philippines respectively; and
(c) Taxes on estates, inheritance, gifts, legacies and other acquisitions mortis (o) Taxes, fees or charges of any kind on the National Government, its agencies
causa, except as otherwise provided herein; and instrumentalities, and local government units.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(d) Customs duties, registration fees of vessel and wharfage on wharves, tonnage SECTION 151. Scope of Taxing Powers. Except as otherwise provided in this
dues, and all other kinds of customs fees, charges and dues except wharfage on Code, the city, may levy the taxes, fees, and charges which the province or
wharves constructed and maintained by the local government unit concerned; municipality may impose: Provided, however, That the taxes, fees and charges
levied and collected by highly urbanized and independent component cities shall
(e) Taxes, fees, and charges and other impositions upon goods carried into or out accrue to them and distributed in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
of, or passing through, the territorial jurisdictions of local government units in
The rates of taxes that the city may levy may exceed the maximum rates the assessed value of land in excess of Php100,000.00. This special assessment
allowed for the province or municipality by not more than fifty percent (50%) is the same tax referred to in R.A. No. 7279 or the UDHA. 96 The SHT is one of
except the rates of professional and amusement taxes. the sources of funds for urban development and housing program. 97Section 43 of
the law provides:
SECTION 186. Power To Levy Other Taxes, Fees or Charges. Local government chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
units may exercise the power to levy taxes, fees or charges on any base or Sec. 43. Socialized Housing Tax. Consistent with the constitutional principle
subject not otherwise specifically enumerated herein or taxed under the that the ownership and enjoyment of property bear a social function and to raise
provisions of the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended, or other funds for the Program, all local government units are hereby authorized to
applicable laws: Provided, That the taxes, fees, or charges shall not be unjust, impose an additional one-half percent (0.5%) tax on the assessed value of all
excessive, oppressive, confiscatory or contrary to declared national policy: lands in urban areas in excess of Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00).
Provided, further, That the ordinance levying such taxes, fees or charges shall chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
not be enacted without any prior public hearing conducted for the purpose. The rationale of the SHT is found in the preambular clauses of the subject
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary ordinance, to wit:
On the Socialized Housing Tax chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
WHEREAS, the imposition of additional tax is intended to provide the City
Contrary to petitioners submission, the 1987 Constitution explicitly espouses the Government with sufficient funds to initiate, implement and undertake
view that the use of property bears a social function and that all economic Socialized Housing Projects and other related preliminary activities;
agents shall contribute to the common good.90The Court already recognized this
in Social Justice Society (SJS), et al. v. Hon. Atienza, Jr.:91cralawlawlibrary WHEREAS, the imposition of 0.5% tax will benefit the Socialized Housing
Property has not only an individual function, insofar as it has to provide for the Programs and Projects of the City Government, specifically the marginalized
needs of the owner, but also a social function insofar as it has to provide for the sector through the acquisition of properties for human settlements;
needs of the other members of society. The principle is this:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary WHEREAS, the removal of the urban blight will definitely increase fair market
Police power proceeds from the principle that every holder of property, however value of properties in the city[.]
absolute and unqualified may be his title, holds it under the implied liability that chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
his use of it shall not be injurious to the equal enjoyment of others having an The above-quoted are consistent with the UDHA, which the LGUs are charged to
equal right to the enjoyment of their property, nor injurious to the right of the implement in their respective localities in coordination with the Housing and
community. Rights of property, like all other social and conventional rights, are Urban Development Coordinating Council, the national housing agencies, the
subject to reasonable limitations in their enjoyment as shall prevent them from Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor, the private sector, and other non-
being injurious, and to such reasonable restraints and regulations established by government organizations.98 It is the declared policy of the State to undertake a
law as the legislature, under the governing and controlling power vested in them comprehensive and continuing urban development and housing program that shall,
by the constitution, may think necessary and expedient.92 among others, uplift the conditions of the underprivileged and homeless citizens
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary in urban areas and in resettlement areas, and provide for the rational use and
Police power, which flows from the recognition that salus populi est suprema development of urban land in order to bring about, among others, reduction in
lex (the welfare of the people is the supreme law), is the plenary power vested in urban dysfunctions, particularly those that adversely affect public health,
the legislature to make statutes and ordinances to promote the health, morals, safety and ecology, and access to land and housing by the underprivileged and
peace, education, good order or safety and general welfare of the homeless citizens.99 Urban renewal and resettlement shall include the
people.93 Property rights of individuals may be subjected to restraints and rehabilitation and development of blighted and slum areas 100 and the
burdens in order to fulfill the objectives of the government in the exercise of resettlement of program beneficiaries in accordance with the provisions of the
police power. 94 In this jurisdiction, it is well-entrenched that taxation may be UDHA.101ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
made the implement of the states police power.95ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Under the UDHA, socialized housing102 shall be the primary strategy in providing
Ordinance No. SP-2095 imposes a Socialized Housing Tax equivalent to 0.5% on shelter for the underprivileged and homeless.103 The LGU or the NHA, in
cooperation with the private developers and concerned agencies, shall provide protection of the law. Such power cannot be exercised whimsically, arbitrarily or
socialized housing or resettlement areas with basic services and facilities such despotically as its exercise is subject to a qualification, limitation or restriction
as potable water, power and electricity, and an adequate power distribution demanded by the respect and regard due to the prescription of the fundamental
system, sewerage facilities, and an efficient and adequate solid waste disposal law, particularly those forming part of the Bill of Rights. Individual rights, it
system; and access to primary roads and transportation facilities.104 The bears emphasis, may be adversely affected only to the extent that may fairly be
provisions for health, education, communications, security, recreation, relief and required by the legitimate demands of public interest or public welfare. Due
welfare shall also be planned and be given priority for implementation by the LGU process requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of
and concerned agencies in cooperation with the private sector and the the person to his life, liberty and property.
beneficiaries themselves.105ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
xxxx
Moreover, within two years from the effectivity of the UDHA, the LGUs, in
coordination with the NHA, are directed to implement the relocation and To successfully invoke the exercise of police power as the rationale for the
resettlement of persons living in danger areas such as esteros, railroad tracks, enactment of the Ordinance, and to free it from the imputation of constitutional
garbage dumps, riverbanks, shorelines, waterways, and other public places like infirmity, not only must it appear that the interests of the public generally, as
sidewalks, roads, parks, and playgrounds.106 In coordination with the NHA, the distinguished from those of a particular class, require an interference with
LGUs shall provide relocation or resettlement sites with basic services and private rights, but the means adopted must be reasonably necessary for the
facilities and access to employment and livelihood opportunities sufficient to accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals. It
meet the basic needs of the affected families. 107ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary must be evident that no other alternative for the accomplishment of the purpose
less intrusive of private rights can work. A reasonable relation must exist
Clearly, the SHT charged by the Quezon City Government is a tax which is within between the purposes of the police measure and the means employed for its
its power to impose. Aside from the specific authority vested by Section 43 of accomplishment, for even under the guise of protecting the public interest,
the UDHA, cities are allowed to exercise such other powers and discharge such personal rights and those pertaining to private property will not be permitted to
other functions and responsibilities as are necessary, appropriate, or incidental be arbitrarily invaded.
to efficient and effective provision of the basic services and facilities which
include, among others, programs and projects for low-cost housing and other Lacking a concurrence of these two requisites, the police measure shall be struck
mass dwellings.108 The collections made accrue to its socialized housing programs down as an arbitrary intrusion into private rights a violation of the due process
and projects. The tax is not a pure exercise of taxing power or merely to raise clause.111
revenue; it is levied with a regulatory purpose. The levy is primarily in the chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
exercise of the police power for the general welfare of the entire city. It is As with the State, LGUs may be considered as having properly exercised their
greatly imbued with public interest. Removing slum areas in Quezon City is not police power only if there is a lawful subject and a lawful method or, to be
only beneficial to the underprivileged and homeless constituents but precise, if the following requisites are met: (1) the interests of the public
advantageous to the real property owners as well. The situation will improve the generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, require its exercise
value of the their property investments, fully enjoying the same in view of an and (2) the means employed are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of
orderly, secure, and safe community, and will enhance the quality of life of the the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon
poor, making them law-abiding constituents and better consumers of business individuals.112ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
products.
In this case, petitioner argues that the SHT is a penalty imposed on real
Though broad and far-reaching, police power is subordinate to constitutional property owners because it burdens them with expenses to provide funds for the
limitations and is subject to the requirement that its exercise must be housing of informal settlers, and that it is a class legislation since it favors the
reasonable and for the public good.109 In the words of City of Manila v. Hon. latter who occupy properties which is not their own and pay no taxes.
Laguio, Jr.:110cralawlawlibrary
The police power granted to local government units must always be exercised We disagree.
with utmost observance of the rights of the people to due process and equal
Equal protection requires that all persons or things similarly situated should be health, safety, and welfare.121 As opined, the purposes and policy underpinnings
treated alike, both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed.113 The of the police power to regulate the collection and disposal of solid waste are: (1)
guarantee means that no person or class of persons shall be denied the same to preserve and protect the public health and welfare as well as the environment
protection of laws which is enjoyed by other persons or other classes in like by minimizing or eliminating a source of disease and preventing and abating
circumstances.114 Similar subjects should not be treated differently so as to give nuisances; and (2) to defray costs and ensure financial stability of the system
undue favor to some and unjustly discriminate against others. 115 The law may, for the benefit of the entire community, with the sum of all charges marshalled
therefore, treat and regulate one class differently from another class provided and designed to pay for the expense of a systemic refuse disposal
there are real and substantial differences to distinguish one class from scheme.122ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
another.116ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Ordinances regulating waste removal carry a strong presumption of
An ordinance based on reasonable classification does not violate the validity.123 Not surprisingly, the overwhelming majority of U.S. cases addressing a
constitutional guaranty of the equal protection of the law. The requirements for city's authority to impose mandatory garbage service and fees have upheld the
a valid and reasonable classification are: (1) it must rest on substantial ordinances against constitutional and statutory
distinctions; (2) it must be germane to the purpose of the law; (3) it must not be challenges.124ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
limited to existing conditions only; and (4) it must apply equally to all members of
the same class.117ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary A municipality has an affirmative duty to supervise and control the collection of
garbage within its corporate limits.125 The LGC specifically assigns the
For the purpose of undertaking a comprehensive and continuing urban responsibility of regulation and oversight of solid waste to local governing bodies
development and housing program, the disparities between a real property owner because the Legislature determined that such bodies were in the best position
and an informal settler as two distinct classes are too obvious and need not be to develop efficient waste management programs. 126 To impose on local
discussed at length. The differentiation conforms to the practical dictates of governments the responsibility to regulate solid waste but not grant them the
justice and equity and is not discriminatory within the meaning of the authority necessary to fulfill the same would lead to an absurd result. 127 As held
Constitution. Notably, the public purpose of a tax may legally exist even if the in one U.S. case:
motive which impelled the legislature to impose the tax was to favor one over chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
another.118 It is inherent in the power to tax that a State is free to select the x x x When a municipality has general authority to regulate a particular subject
subjects of taxation.119 Inequities which result from a singling out of one matter, the manner and means of exercising those powers, where not specifically
particular class for taxation or exemption infringe no constitutional prescribed by the legislature, are left to the discretion of the municipal
limitation.120ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary authorities. x x x Leaving the manner of exercising municipal powers to the
discretion of municipal authorities "implies a range of reasonableness within
Further, the reasonableness of Ordinance No. SP-2095 cannot be disputed. It is which a municipality's exercise of discretion will not be interfered with or upset
not confiscatory or oppressive since the tax being imposed therein is below what by the judiciary."128
the UDHA actually allows. As pointed out by respondents, while the law chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
authorizes LGUs to collect SHT on lands with an assessed value of more than In this jurisdiction, pursuant to Section 16 of the LGC and in the proper exercise
P50,000.00, the questioned ordinance only covers lands with an assessed value of its corporate powers under Section 22 of the same, the Sangguniang
exceeding P100,000.00. Even better, on certain conditions, the ordinance grants Panlungsod of Quezon City, like other local legislative bodies, is empowered to
a tax credit equivalent to the total amount of the special assessment paid enact ordinances, approve resolutions, and appropriate funds for the general
beginning in the sixth (6th) year of its effectivity. Far from being obnoxious, the welfare of the city and its inhabitants.129 Section 16 of the LGC provides:
provisions of the subject ordinance are fair and just. chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
SECTION 16. General Welfare. Every local government unit shall exercise the
On the Garbage Fee powers expressly granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers
necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance,
In the United States of America, it has been held that the authority of a and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare. Within
municipality to regulate garbage falls within its police power to protect public their respective territorial jurisdictions, local government units shall ensure and
support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture, WHEREAS, Quezon City being the largest and premiere city in the Philippines in
promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced terms of population and urban geographical areas, apart from being competent
ecology, encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant and efficient in the delivery of public service, apparently requires a big
scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic budgetary allocation in order to address the problems relative and connected to
prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents, the prompt and efficient delivery of basic services such as the effective system
maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their of waste management, public information programs on proper garbage and proper
inhabitants. waste disposal, including the imposition of waste regulatory measures;
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
The general welfare clause is the delegation in statutory form of the police WHEREAS, to help augment the funds to be spent for the citys waste
power of the State to LGUs.130 The provisions related thereto are liberally management system, the City Government through the Sangguniang
interpreted to give more powers to LGUs in accelerating economic development Panlungsod deems it necessary to impose a schedule of reasonable fees or
and upgrading the quality of life for the people in the community.131 Wide charges for the garbage collection services for residential (domestic household)
discretion is vested on the legislative authority to determine not only what the that it renders to the public.
interests of the public require but also what measures are necessary for the chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
protection of such interests since the Sanggunian is in the best position to Certainly, as opposed to petitioners opinion, the garbage fee is not a tax.
determine the needs of its constituents.132ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary In Smart Communications, Inc. v. Municipality of Malvar, Batangas ,139 the Court
had the occasion to distinguish these two concepts:
One of the operative principles of decentralization is that, subject to the chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
provisions of the LGC and national policies, the LGUs shall share with the national In Progressive Development Corporation v. Quezon City , the Court declared that
government the responsibility in the management and maintenance of ecological if the generating of revenue is the primary purpose and regulation is merely
balance within their territorial jurisdiction.133 In this regard, cities are allowed incidental, the imposition is a tax; but if regulation is the primary purpose, the
to exercise such other powers and discharge such other functions and fact that incidentally revenue is also obtained does not make the imposition a
responsibilities as are necessary, appropriate, or incidental to efficient and tax.
effective provision of the basic services and facilities which include, among
others, solid waste disposal system or environmental management system and In Victorias Milling Co., Inc. v. Municipality of Victorias, the Court reiterated
services or facilities related to general hygiene and sanitation.134 R.A. No. 9003, that the purpose and effect of the imposition determine whether it is a tax or a
or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000,135 affirms this authority fee, and that the lack of any standards for such imposition gives the
as it expresses that the LGUs shall be primarily responsible for the presumption that the same is a tax.
implementation and enforcement of its provisions within their respective We accordingly say that the designation given by the municipal authorities does
jurisdictions while establishing a cooperative effort among the national not decide whether the imposition is properly a license tax or a license fee. The
government, other local government units, non-government organizations, and the determining factors are the purpose and effect of the imposition as may be
private sector.136ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary apparent from the provisions of the ordinance. Thus, [w]hen no police inspection,
supervision, or regulation is provided, nor any standard set for the applicant to
Necessarily, LGUs are statutorily sanctioned to impose and collect such establish, or that he agrees to attain or maintain, but any and all persons
reasonable fees and charges for services rendered. 137 Charges refer to engaged in the business designated, without qualification or hindrance, may come,
pecuniary liability, as rents or fees against persons or property, while Fee and a license on payment of the stipulated sum will issue, to do business, subject
means a charge fixed by law or ordinance for the regulation or inspection of a to no prescribed rule of conduct and under no guardian eye, but according to the
business or activity.138ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary unrestrained judgment or fancy of the applicant and licensee, the presumption is
strong that the power of taxation, and not the police power, is being exercised.
The fee imposed for garbage collections under Ordinance No. SP-2235 is a chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
charge fixed for the regulation of an activity. The basis for this could be In Georgia, U.S.A., assessments for garbage collection services have been
discerned from the foreword of said Ordinance, to wit: consistently treated as a fee and not a tax.140 In another U.S. case,141 the
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary garbage fee was considered as a "service charge" rather than a tax as it was
actually a fee for a service given by the city which had previously been provided No. 9003, barangays shall be responsible for the collection, segregation, and
at no cost to its citizens. recycling of biodegradable, recyclable, compostable and reusable wastes. 150 For
the purpose, a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), which shall receive
Hence, not being a tax, the contention that the garbage fee under Ordinance No. biodegradable wastes for composting and mixed non-biodegradable wastes for
SP-2235 violates the rule on double taxation142 must necessarily fail. final segregation, re-use and recycling, is to be established in every barangay or
cluster of barangays.151ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Nonetheless, although a special charge, tax, or assessment may be imposed by a
municipal corporation, it must be reasonably commensurate to the cost of According to R.A. 9003, an LGU, through its local solid waste management board,
providing the garbage service.143 To pass judicial scrutiny, a regulatory fee must is mandated by law to prepare a 10-year solid waste management plan consistent
not produce revenue in excess of the cost of the regulation because such fee will with the National Solid Waste Management Framework.152 The plan shall be for
be construed as an illegal tax when the revenue generated by the regulation the re-use, recycling and composting of wastes generated in its jurisdiction;
exceeds the cost of the regulation.144ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary ensure the efficient management of solid waste generated within its jurisdiction;
and place primary emphasis on implementation of all feasible re-use, recycling,
Petitioner argues that the Quezon City Government already collects garbage fee and composting programs while identifying the amount of landfill and
under Section 47 of R.A. No. 9003, which authorizes LGUs to impose fees in transformation capacity that will be needed for solid waste which cannot be re-
amounts sufficient to pay the costs of preparing, adopting, and implementing a used, recycled, or composted.153 One of the components of the solid waste
solid waste management plan, and that it has access to the SWM Fund under management plan is source reduction:
Section 46 of the same law. Moreover, Ordinance No. S-2235 is inconsistent chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
with R.A. No. 9003, because the ordinance emphasizes the collection and (e) Source reduction The source reduction component shall include a program
payment of garbage fee with no concern for segregation, composting and and implementation schedule which shows the methods by which the LGU will, in
recycling of wastes. It also skips the mandate of the law calling for the active combination with the recycling and composting components, reduce a sufficient
involvement of the barangay in the collection, segregation, and recycling of amount of solid waste disposed of in accordance with the diversion requirements
garbage. of Section 20.
We now turn to the pertinent provisions of R.A. No. 9003. The source reduction component shall describe the following:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Under R.A. No. 9003, it is the declared policy of the State to adopt a (1) strategies in reducing the volume of solid waste generated at source;
systematic, comprehensive and ecological solid waste management program which
shall, among others, ensure the proper segregation, collection, transport, (2) measures for implementing such strategies and the resources necessary to
storage, treatment and disposal of solid waste through the formulation and carry out such activities;
adoption of the best environmental practices in ecological waste
management.145 The law provides that segregation and collection of solid waste (3) other appropriate waste reduction technologies that may also be considered,
shall be conducted at the barangay level, specifically for biodegradable, provided that such technologies conform with the standards set pursuant to this
compostable and reusable wastes, while the collection of non-recyclable Act;
materials and special wastes shall be the responsibility of the municipality or
city.146 Mandatory segregation of solid wastes shall primarily be conducted at the (4) the types of wastes to be reduced pursuant to Section 15 of this Act;
source, to include household, institutional, industrial, commercial and agricultural
sources.147Segregation at source refers to a solid waste management practice of (5) the methods that the LGU will use to determine the categories of solid
separating, at the point of origin, different materials found in solid waste in wastes to be diverted from disposal at a disposal facility through re-use,
order to promote recycling and re-use of resources and to reduce the volume of recycling and composting; and
waste for collection and disposal.148 Based on Rule XVII of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Administrative Order No. 2001-34, (6) new facilities and of expansion of existing facilities which will be needed to
Series of 2001,149 which is the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of R.A.
implement re-use, recycling and composting. (a) types of solid waste;
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
The LGU source reduction component shall include the evaluation and (b) amount/volume of waste; and
identification of rate structures and fees for the purpose of reducing the
amount of waste generated, and other source reduction strategies, including but (c) distance of the transfer station to the waste management facility.
not limited to, programs and economic incentives provided under Sec. 45 of this chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Act to reduce the use of non-recyclable materials, replace disposable materials The fees shall be used to pay the actual costs incurred by the LGU in collecting
and products with reusable materials and products, reduce packaging, and the local fees. In determining the amounts of the fees, an LGU shall include only
increase the efficiency of the use of paper, cardboard, glass, metal, and other those costs directly related to the adoption and implementation of the plan and
materials. The waste reduction activities of the community shall also take into the setting and collection of the local fees.
account, among others, local capability, economic viability, technical chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
requirements, social concerns, disposition of residual waste and environmental Rule XVII of the IRR of R.A. No. 9003 sets forth the details:
impact: Provided, That, projection of future facilities needed and estimated cost chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
shall be incorporated in the plan. x x x154 Section 1. Power to Collect Solid Waste Management Fees. The Local SWM
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary Board/Local SWM Cluster Board shall impose fees on the SWM services
The solid waste management plan shall also include an implementation schedule provided for by the LGU and/or any authorized organization or unit. In
for solid waste diversion: determining the amounts of the fees, a Local SWM Board/Local SWM Cluster
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary Board shall include only those costs directly related to the adoption and
SEC. 20. Establishing Mandatory Solid Waste Diversion. Each LGU plan shall implementation of the SWM Plan and the setting and collection of the local fees.
include an implementation schedule which shows that within five (5) years after This power to impose fees may be ceded to the private sector and civil society
the effectivity of this Act, the LGU shall divert at least 25% of all solid waste groups which have been duly accredited by the Local SWM Board/Local SWM
from waste disposal facilities through re-use, recycling, and composting Cluster Board; provided, the SWM fees shall be covered by a Contract or
activities and other resource recovery activities: Provided, That the waste Memorandum of Agreement between the respective board and the private sector
diversion goals shall be increased every three (3) years thereafter: Provided, or civil society group.
further, That nothing in this Section prohibits a local government unit from
implementing re-use, recycling, and composting activities designed to exceed the The fees shall pay for the costs of preparing, adopting and implementing a SWM
goal. Plan prepared pursuant to the Act. Further, the fees shall also be used to pay
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary the actual costs incurred in collecting the local fees and for project
The baseline for the twenty-five percent (25%) shall be derived from the waste sustainability.
characterization result155 that each LGU is mandated to
undertake.156ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary Section 2. Basis of SWM Service Fees
In accordance with Section 46 of R.A. No. 9003, the LGUs are entitled to avail Reasonable SWM service fees shall be computed based on but not limited to the
of the SWM Fund on the basis of their approved solid waste management plan. following minimum factors:
Aside from this, they may also impose SWM Fees under Section 47 of the law, chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
which states: a) Types of solid waste to include special waste
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
SEC. 47. Authority to Collect Solid Waste Management Fees The local b) amount/volume of waste
government unit shall impose fees in amounts sufficient to pay the costs of
preparing, adopting, and implementing a solid waste management plan prepared c) distance of the transfer station to the waste management facility
pursuant to this Act. The fees shall be based on the following minimum factors:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary d) capacity or type of LGU constituency
e) cost of construction which purportedly stands at 0.66 kilogram per day, and the increasing trend of
waste generation for the past three years.157 Respondents did not elaborate any
f) cost of management further. The figure presented does not reflect the specific types of wastes
generated whether residential, market, commercial, industrial,
g) type of technology construction/demolition, street waste, agricultural, agro-industrial, institutional,
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary etc. It is reasonable, therefore, for the Court to presume that such amount
Section 3. Collection of Fees. Fees may be collected corresponding to the pertains to the totality of wastes, without any distinction, generated by Quezon
following levels: City constituents. To reiterate, however, the authority of a municipality or city
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary to impose fees extends only to those related to the collection and transport
a) Barangay The Barangay may impose fees for collection and segregation of of non-recyclable and special wastes.
biodegradable, compostable and reusable wastes from households, commerce,
other sources of domestic wastes, and for the use of Barangay MRFs. The Granting, for the sake of argument, that the 0.66 kilogram of solid waste per
computation of the fees shall be established by the respective SWM boards. day refers only to non-recyclable and special wastes, still, We cannot sustain the
The manner of collection of the fees shall be dependent on the style of validity of Ordinance No. S-2235. It violates the equal protection clause of the
administration of respective Barangay Councils. However, all transactions shall Constitution and the provisions of the LGC that an ordinance must be equitable
follow the Commission on Audit rules on collection of fees. and based as far as practicable on the taxpayers ability to pay, and not unjust,
excessive, oppressive, confiscatory.158ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
b) Municipality The municipal and city councils may impose fees on the barangay
MRFs for the collection and transport of non-recyclable and special wastes and In the subject ordinance, the rates of the imposable fee depend on land or floor
for the disposal of these into the sanitary landfill. The level and procedure for area and whether the payee is an occupant of a lot, condominium, social housing
exacting fees shall be defined by the Local SWM Board/Local SWM Cluster project or apartment. For easy reference, the relevant provision is again quoted
Board and supported by LGU ordinances, however, payments shall be consistent below:
with the accounting system of government. chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
On all domestic households in Quezon City;
c) Private Sector/Civil Society Group On the basis of the stipulations of LAND AREA IMPOSABLE FEE
contract or Memorandum of Agreement, the private sector or civil society group Less than 200 sq. m. PHP 100.00
shall impose fees for collection, transport and tipping in their SLFs. Receipts and
201 sq. m. 500 sq. m. PHP 200.00
invoices shall be issued to the paying public or to the government.
501 sq. m. 1,000 sq. m. PHP 300.00
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
1,001 sq. m. 1,500 sq. m. PHP 400.00
From the afore-quoted provisions, it is clear that the authority of a municipality
or city to impose fees is limited to the collection and transport of non- 1,501 sq. m. 2,000 sq. m. or
PHP 500.00
recyclable and special wastes and for the disposal of these into the sanitary more
landfill. Barangays, on the other hand, have the authority to impose fees for the On all condominium unit and socialized housing projects/units in Quezon City;
collection and segregation of biodegradable, compostable and reusable FLOOR AREA IMPOSABLE FEE
wastes from households, commerce, other sources of domestic wastes, and for Less than 40 sq. m. PHP25.00
the use of barangay MRFs. This is but consistent with Section 10 of R.A. No. 41 sq. m. 60 sq. m. PHP50.00
9003 directing that segregation and collection of biodegradable, compostable 61 sq. m. 100 sq. m. PHP75.00
and reusable wastes shall be conducted at the barangay level, while the
101 sq. m. 150 sq. m. PHP100.00
collection of non-recyclable materials and special wastes shall be the
151 sq. m. 200 sq. [m.] or more PHP200.00
responsibility of the municipality or city.
On high-rise Condominium Units
In this case, the alleged bases of Ordinance No. S-2235 in imposing the garbage a) High-rise Condominium The Homeowners Association of high rise
fee is the volume of waste currently generated by each person in Quezon City, condominiums shall pay the annual garbage fee on the total size of the entire
condominium and socialized Housing Unit and an additional garbage fee shall [A] lack of uniformity in the rate charged is not necessarily unlawful
be collected based on area occupied for every unit already sold or being discrimination. The establishment of classifications and the charging of
amortized. different rates for the several classes is not unreasonable and does not violate
b) High-rise apartment units Owners of high-rise apartment units shall pay the requirements of equality and uniformity. Discrimination to be unlawful must
the annual garbage fee on the total lot size of the entire apartment and an draw an unfair line or strike an unfair balance between those in like
additional garbage fee based on the schedule prescribed herein for every circumstances having equal rights and privileges. Discrimination with respect to
unit occupied. rates charged does not vitiate unless it is arbitrary and without a reasonable
For the purpose of garbage collection, there is, in fact, no substantial distinction fact basis or justification.162
between an occupant of a lot, on one hand, and an occupant of a unit in a chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
condominium, socialized housing project or apartment, on the other hand. Most On top of an unreasonable classification, the penalty clause of Ordinance No. SP-
likely, garbage output produced by these types of occupants is uniform and does 2235, which states:
not vary to a large degree; thus, a similar schedule of fee is both just and chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
equitable.159ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary SECTION 3. Penalty Clause A penalty of 25% of the garbage fee due plus an
interest of 2% per month or a fraction thereof (interest) shall be charged
The rates being charged by the ordinance are unjust and inequitable: a resident against a household owner who refuses to pay the garbage fee herein imposed.
of a 200 sq. m. unit in a condominium or socialized housing project has to pay chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
twice the amount than a resident of a lot similar in size; unlike unit occupants, all lacks the limitation required by Section 168 of the LGC, which provides:
occupants of a lot with an area of 200 sq. m. and less have to pay a fixed rate of chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Php100.00; and the same amount of garbage fee is imposed regardless of SECTION 168. Surcharges and Penalties on Unpaid Taxes, Fees, or Charges .
whether the resident is from a condominium or from a socialized housing project. The sanggunian may impose a surcharge not exceeding twenty-five (25%) of the
amount of taxes, fees or charges not paid on time and an interest at the rate not
Indeed, the classifications under Ordinance No. S-2235 are not germane to its exceeding two percent (2%) per month of the unpaid taxes, fees or charges
declared purpose of promoting shared responsibility with the residents to including surcharges, until such amount is fully paid but in no case shall the
attack their common mindless attitude in over-consuming the present resources total interest on the unpaid amount or portion thereof exceed thirty-six
and in generating waste.160 Instead of simplistically categorizing the payee into (36) months. (Emphasis supplied)
land or floor occupant of a lot or unit of a condominium, socialized housing chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
project or apartment, respondent City Council should have considered factors Finally, on the issue of publication of the two challenged ordinances.
that could truly measure the amount of wastes generated and the appropriate
fee for its collection. Factors include, among others, household age and size, Petitioner argues that the garbage fee was collected even if the required
accessibility to waste collection, population density of the barangay or district, publication of its approval had not yet elapsed. He notes that he paid his realty
capacity to pay, and actual occupancy of the property. R.A. No. 9003 may also be tax on January 7, 2014 which already included the garbage fee. Respondents
looked into for guidance. Under said law, SWM service fees may be computed counter that if the law provides for its own effectivity, publication in the
based on minimum factors such as types of solid waste to include special waste, Official Gazette is not necessary so long as it is not penal in nature. Allegedly,
amount/volume of waste, distance of the transfer station to the waste Ordinance No. SP-2095 took effect after its publication while Ordinance No. SP-
management facility, capacity or type of LGU constituency, cost of construction, 2235 became effective after its approval on December 26, 2013.
cost of management, and type of technology. With respect to utility rates set by
municipalities, a municipality has the right to classify consumers under The pertinent provisions of the LGC state:
reasonable classifications based upon factors such as the cost of service, the chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
purpose for which the service or the product is received, the quantity or the SECTION 59. Effectivity of Ordinances or Resolutions. (a) Unless otherwise
amount received, the different character of the service furnished, the time of stated in the ordinance or the resolution approving the local development plan
its use or any other matter which presents a substantial difference as a ground and public investment program, the same shall take effect after ten (10) days
of distinction.161cralawlawlibrary from the date a copy thereof is posted in a bulletin board at the entrance of
the provincial capitol or city, municipal, or barangay hall, as the case may be, and
in at least two (2) other conspicuous places in the local government unit The case records are bereft of any evidence to prove petitioners negative
concerned. allegation that respondents did not comply with the posting and publication
requirements of the law. Thus, We are constrained not to give credit to his
(b) The secretary to the sanggunian concerned shall cause the posting of an unsupported claim.
ordinance or resolution in the bulletin board at the entrance of the provincial
capitol and the city, municipal, or barangay hall in at least two (2) conspicuous WHEREFORE, the petition is PARTIALLY GRANTED. The constitutionality and
places in the local government unit concerned not later than five (5) days after legality of Ordinance No. SP-2095, S-2011, or the Socialized Housing Tax of
approval thereof. Quezon City, is SUSTAINED for being consistent with Section 43 of Republic
Act No. 7279. On the other hand, Ordinance No. SP-2235, S-2013, which
The text of the ordinance or resolution shall be disseminated and posted in collects an annual garbage fee on all domestic households in Quezon City, is
Filipino or English and in the language or dialect understood by the majority of hereby declared as UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ILLEGAL. Respondents
the people in the local government unit concerned, and the secretary to the are DIRECTED to REFUND with reasonable dispatch the sums of money
sanggunian shall record such fact in a book kept for the purpose, stating the collected relative to its enforcement.
dates of approval and posting.
The temporary restraining order issued by the Court on February 5, 2014
(c) The gist of all ordinances with penal sanctions shall be published in a is LIFTED with respect to Ordinance No. SP-2095. In contrast, respondents
newspaper of general circulation within the province where the local legislative are PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from taking any further action to enforce
body concerned belongs. In the absence of any newspaper of general circulation Ordinance No. SP. 2235.
within the province, posting of such ordinances shall be made in all municipalities
and cities of the province where the sanggunian of origin is situated. SO ORDERED.cralawlawlibrary
(d) In the case of highly urbanized and independent component cities, the main
features of the ordinance or resolution duly enacted or adopted shall, in addition FIRST DIVISION
to being posted, be published once in a local newspaper of general circulation
within the city: Provided, That in the absence thereof the ordinance or [G.R. No. 135962. March 27, 2000]
resolution shall be published in any newspaper of general circulation.
METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, petitioner, vs.
SECTION 188. Publication of Tax Ordinances and Revenue Measures. Within BEL-AIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, INC., respondent.
ten (10) days after their approval, certified true copies of all provincial, city,
and municipal tax ordinances or revenue measures shall be published in full for
D E C I S I O N
three (3) consecutive days in a newspaper of local circulation: Provided,
however, That in provinces, cities and municipalities where there are no
PUNO, J.:
newspapers of local circulation, the same may be posted in at least two (2)
conspicuous and publicly accessible places. (Emphasis supplied)
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary Not infrequently, the government is tempted to take legal shortcuts to solve
On October 17, 2011, respondent Quezon City Council enacted Ordinance No. SP- urgent problems of the people. But even when government is armed with the best
2095, which provides that it would take effect after its publication in a of intention, we cannot allow it to run roughshod over the rule of law. Again, we
newspaper of general circulation.163 On the other hand, Ordinance No. SP-2235, let the hammer fall and fall hard on the illegal attempt of the MMDA to open for
which was passed by the City Council on December 16, 2013, provides that it public use a private road in a private subdivision. While we hold that the general
would be effective upon its approval.164 Ten (10) days after its enactment, or on welfare should be promoted, we stress that it should not be achieved at the
December 26, 2013, respondent City Mayor approved the expense of the rule of law. h Y
same.165ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Petitioner MMDA is a government agency tasked with the delivery of basic On the same day, respondent was apprised that the perimeter wall separating
services in Metro Manila. Respondent Bel-Air Village Association, Inc. (BAVA) is the subdivision from the adjacent Kalayaan Avenue would be
a non-stock, non-profit corporation whose members are homeowners in Bel-Air demolished. Sppedsc
Village, a private subdivision in Makati City. Respondent BAVA is the registered
owner of Neptune Street, a road inside Bel-Air Village. On January 2, 1996, respondent instituted against petitioner before the Regional
Trial Court, Branch 136, Makati City, Civil Case No. 96-001 for injunction.
On December 30, 1995, respondent received from petitioner, through its Respondent prayed for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and
Chairman, a notice dated December 22, 1995 requesting respondent to open preliminary injunction enjoining the opening of Neptune Street and prohibiting
Neptune Street to public vehicular traffic starting January 2, 1996. The notice the demolition of the perimeter wall. The trial court issued a temporary
reads: Court restraining order the following day.
"SUBJECT: NOTICE of the Opening of Neptune Street to On January 23, 1996, after due hearing, the trial court denied issuance of a
Traffic preliminary injunction.[2] Respondent questioned the denial before the Court of
Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 39549. The appellate court conducted an ocular
"Dear President Lindo, inspection of Neptune Street[3] and on February 13, 1996, it issued a writ of
preliminary injunction enjoining the implementation of the MMDAs proposed
"Please be informed that pursuant to the mandate of the action.[4]
MMDA law or Republic Act No. 7924 which requires the
Authority to rationalize the use of roads and/or thoroughfares On January 28, 1997, the appellate court rendered a Decision on the merits of
for the safe and convenient movement of persons, Neptune the case finding that the MMDA has no authority to order the opening of
Street shall be opened to vehicular traffic effective January 2, Neptune Street, a private subdivision road and cause the demolition of its
1996. perimeter walls. It held that the authority is lodged in the City Council of Makati
by ordinance. The decision disposed of as follows: Jurissc
"In view whereof, the undersigned requests you to voluntarily
open the points of entry and exit on said street. "WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED; the challenged Order
dated January 23, 1995, in Civil Case No. 96-001, is SET ASIDE
"Thank you for your cooperation and whatever assistance that and the Writ of Preliminary Injunction issued on February 13,
may be extended by your association to the MMDA personnel 1996 is hereby made permanent.
who will be directing traffic in the area.
"For want of sustainable substantiation, the Motion to Cite
"Finally, we are furnishing you with a copy of the handwritten Roberto L. del Rosario in contempt is denied.[5]
instruction of the President on the matter.
"No pronouncement as to costs.
"Very truly yours,
"SO ORDERED."[6]
PROSPERO I. ORETA
The Motion for Reconsideration of the decision was denied on September 28,
Chairman" [1] 1998. Hence, this recourse. Jksm
V
A local government is a "political subdivision of a nation or state which is
constituted by law and has substantial control of local affairs." [16] The Local
HAS RESPONDENT COME TO COURT WITH UNCLEAN Government Code of 1991 defines a local government unit as a "body politic and
HANDS?"[7] corporate"[17]-- one endowed with powers as a political subdivision of the National
Government and as a corporate entity representing the inhabitants of its
Neptune Street is owned by respondent BAVA. It is a private road inside Bel-Air territory.[18] Local government units are the provinces, cities, municipalities and
Village, a private residential subdivision in the heart of the financial and barangays.[19] They are also the territorial and political subdivisions of the state.
commercial district of Makati City. It runs parallel to Kalayaan Avenue, a national [20]
road open to the general public. Dividing the two (2) streets is a concrete
perimeter wall approximately fifteen (15) feet high. The western end of Neptune Our Congress delegated police power to the local government units in the
Street intersects Nicanor Garcia, formerly Reposo Street, a subdivision road Local Government Code of 1991. This delegation is found in Section 16 of the
open to public vehicular traffic, while its eastern end intersects Makati Avenue, same Code, known as the general welfare clause, viz: Chief
a national road. Both ends of Neptune Street are guarded by iron gates. Edp mis
"Sec. 16. General Welfare.Every local government unit shall
exercise the powers expressly granted, those necessarily
implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or government units comprising Metro Manila."[26] There are seven (7) basic metro-
incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those wide services and the scope of these services cover the following: (1)
which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare. development planning; (2) transport and traffic management; (3) solid waste
Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local disposal and management; (4) flood control and sewerage management; (5) urban
government units shall ensure and support, among other things, renewal, zoning and land use planning, and shelter services; (6) health and
the preservation and enrichment of culture, promote health and sanitation, urban protection and pollution control; and (7) public safety. The basic
safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology, service of transport and traffic management includes the following: Lexjuris
encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-
reliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public "(b) Transport and traffic management which include the
morals, enhance economic prosperity and social justice, promote formulation, coordination, and monitoring of policies,
full employment among their residents, maintain peace and standards, programs and projects to rationalize the existing
order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their transport operations, infrastructure requirements, the use
inhabitants."[21] of thoroughfares, and promotion of safe and convenient
movement of persons and goods; provision for the mass
Local government units exercise police power through their respective transport system and the institution of a system to regulate
legislative bodies. The legislative body of the provincial government is road users; administration and implementation of all traffic
the sangguniang panlalawigan, that of the city government is the sangguniang enforcement operations, traffic engineering services and
panlungsod, that of the municipal government is the sangguniang bayan, and that traffic education programs, including the institution of a
of the barangay is the sangguniang barangay. The Local Government Code of single ticketing system in Metropolitan Manila;"[27]
1991 empowers the sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod and
sangguniang bayan to "enact ordinances, approve resolutions and appropriate In the delivery of the seven (7) basic services, the MMDA has the following
funds for the general welfare of the [province, city or municipality, as the case powers and functions: Esm
may be], and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of the Code and in the proper
exercise of the corporate powers of the [province, city municipality] provided "Sec. 5. Functions and powers of the Metro Manila Development
under the Code x x x."[22] The same Code gives the sangguniang barangay the Authority.The MMDA shall:
power to "enact ordinances as may be necessary to discharge the responsibilities
conferred upon it by law or ordinance and to promote the general welfare of the (a) Formulate, coordinate and regulate the implementation of
inhabitants thereon."[23] medium and long-term plans and programs for the delivery of
metro-wide services, land use and physical development within
Metropolitan or Metro Manila is a body composed of several local government Metropolitan Manila, consistent with national development
units - i.e., twelve (12) cities and five (5) municipalities, namely, the cities of objectives and priorities;
Caloocan, Manila, Mandaluyong, Makati, Pasay, Pasig, Quezon, Muntinlupa, Las
Pinas, Marikina, Paranaque and Valenzuela, and the municipalities of Malabon, , (b) Prepare, coordinate and regulate the implementation of
Navotas, , Pateros, San Juan and Taguig. With the passage of Republic Act (R. medium-term investment programs for metro-wide services
A.) No. 7924[24] in 1995, Metropolitan Manila was declared as a "special which shall indicate sources and uses of funds for priority
development and administrative region" and the Administration of "metro- programs and projects, and which shall include the packaging of
wide" basic services affecting the region placed under "a development projects and presentation to funding institutions; Esmsc
authority" referred to as the MMDA.[25]
(d) Coordinate and monitor the implementation of such plans, The governing board of the MMDA is the Metro Manila Council. The Council is
programs and projects in Metro Manila; identify bottlenecks composed of the mayors of the component 12 cities and 5 municipalities, the
and adopt solutions to problems of implementation; president of the Metro Manila Vice-Mayors League and the president of the
Metro Manila Councilors League.[29] The Council is headed by a Chairman who is
(e) The MMDA shall set the policies concerning traffic in appointed by the President and vested with the rank of cabinet member. As the
Metro Manila, and shall coordinate and regulate the policy-making body of the MMDA, the Metro Manila Council approves metro-wide
implementation of all programs and projects concerning plans, programs and projects, and issues the necessary rules and regulations for
traffic management, specifically pertaining to enforcement, the implementation of said plans; it approves the annual budget of the MMDA
engineering and education. Upon request, it shall be and promulgates the rules and regulations for the delivery of basic services,
extended assistance and cooperation, including but not collection of service and regulatory fees, fines and penalties. These functions
limited to, assignment of personnel, by all other government are particularly enumerated as follows: LEX
agencies and offices concerned;
"Sec. 6. Functions of the Metro Manila Council. -
(f) Install and administer a single ticketing system, fix,
impose and collect fines and penalties for all kinds of (a) The Council shall be the policy-making body of the MMDA;
violations of traffic rules and regulations, whether moving or
non-moving in nature, and confiscate and suspend or revoke (b) It shall approve metro-wide plans, programs and projects
drivers licenses in the enforcement of such traffic laws and and issue rules and regulations deemed necessary by the MMDA
regulations, the provisions of RA 4136 and PD 1605 to the to carry out the purposes of this Act;
contrary notwithstanding. For this purpose, the Authority
shall impose all traffic laws and regulations in Metro Manila, (c) It may increase the rate of allowances and per diems of the
through its traffic operation center, and may deputize members of the Council to be effective during the term of the
members of the PNP, traffic enforcers of local government succeeding Council. It shall fix the compensation of the
units, duly licensed security guards, or members of non- officers and personnel of the MMDA, and approve the annual
governmental organizations to whom may be delegated budget thereof for submission to the Department of Budget
certain authority, subject to such conditions and and Management (DBM);
requirements as the Authority may impose; and
(d) It shall promulgate rules and regulations and set policies and
(g) Perform other related functions required to achieve the standards for metro-wide application governing the delivery of
objectives of the MMDA, including the undertaking of delivery basic services, prescribe and collect service and regulatory
of basic services to the local government units, when deemed fees, and impose and collect fines and penalties." Jj sc
necessary subject to prior coordination with and consent of the
local government unit concerned." Jurismis Clearly, the scope of the MMDAs function is limited to the delivery of the seven
(7) basic services. One of these is transport and traffic management which
The implementation of the MMDAs plans, programs and projects is undertaken includes the formulation and monitoring of policies, standards and projects to
by the local government units, national government agencies, accredited peoples rationalize the existing transport operations, infrastructure requirements, the
organizations, non-governmental organizations, and the private sector as well as use of thoroughfares and promotion of the safe movement of persons and goods.
by the MMDA itself. For this purpose, the MMDA has the power to enter into It also covers the mass transport system and the institution of a system of road
regulation, the administration of all traffic enforcement operations, traffic
engineering services and traffic education programs, including the institution of Sangalang v. IAC involved five (5) consolidated petitions filed by respondent
a single ticketing system in Metro Manila for traffic violations. Under this BAVA and three residents of Bel-Air Village against other residents of the
service, the MMDA is expressly authorized "to set the policies concerning Village and the Ayala Corporation, formerly the Makati Development Corporation,
traffic" and "coordinate and regulate the implementation of all traffic as the developer of the subdivision. The petitioners sought to enforce certain
management programs." In addition, the MMDA may "install and administer a restrictive easements in the deeds of sale over their respective lots in the
single ticketing system," fix, impose and collect fines and penalties for all traffic subdivision. These were the prohibition on the setting up of commercial and
violations. Ca-lrsc advertising signs on the lots, and the condition that the lots be used only for
residential purposes. Petitioners alleged that respondents, who were residents
It will be noted that the powers of the MMDA are limited to the following acts: along Jupiter Street of the subdivision, converted their residences into
formulation, coordination, regulation, implementation, preparation, management, commercial establishments in violation of the "deed restrictions," and that
monitoring, setting of policies, installation of a system and administration. There respondent Ayala Corporation ushered in the full commercialization" of Jupiter
is no syllable in R. A. No. 7924 that grants the MMDA police power, let Street by tearing down the perimeter wall that separated the commercial from
alone legislative power. Even the Metro Manila Council has not been delegated the residential section of the village.[35]
any legislative power. Unlike the legislative bodies of the local government units,
there is no provision in R. A. No. 7924 that empowers the MMDA or its Council to The petitions were dismissed based on Ordinance No. 81 of the Municipal Council
"enact ordinances, approve resolutions and appropriate funds for the general of Makati and Ordinance No. 81-01 of the Metro Manila Commission (MMC).
welfare" of the inhabitants of Metro Manila. The MMDA is, as termed in the Municipal Ordinance No. 81 classified Bel-Air Village as a Class A Residential
charter itself, a "development authority."[30] It is an agency created for the Zone, with its boundary in the south extending to the center line of Jupiter
purpose of laying down policies and coordinating with the various national Street. The Municipal Ordinance was adopted by the MMC under the
government agencies, peoples organizations, non-governmental organizations and Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for the National Capital Region and
the private sector for the efficient and expeditious delivery of basic services in promulgated as MMC Ordinance No. 81-01. Bel-Air Village was indicated therein
the vast metropolitan area. All its functions are administrative in nature and as bounded by Jupiter Street and the block adjacent thereto was classified as a
these are actually summed up in the charter itself, viz: High Intensity Commercial Zone.[36]
"Sec. 2. Creation of the Metropolitan Manila Development We ruled that since both Ordinances recognized Jupiter Street as the boundary
Authority. -- x x x. between Bel-Air Village and the commercial district, Jupiter Street was not for
the exclusive benefit of Bel-Air residents. We also held that the perimeter wall
The MMDA shall perform planning, monitoring and on said street was constructed not to separate the residential from the
coordinative functions, and in the process exercise regulatory commercial blocks but simply for security reasons, hence, in tearing down said
and supervisory authority over the delivery of metro-wide wall, Ayala Corporation did not violate the "deed restrictions" in the deeds of
services within Metro Manila, without diminution of the sale. Scc-alr
autonomy of the local government units concerning purely local
matters."[31] We upheld the ordinances, specifically MMC Ordinance No. 81-01, as a legitimate
exercise of police power.[37] The power of the MMC and the Makati Municipal
Petitioner cannot seek refuge in the cases of Sangalang v. Intermediate Council to enact zoning ordinances for the general welfare prevailed over the
Appellate Court[32] where we upheld a zoning ordinance issued by the Metro "deed restrictions".
Manila Commission (MMC), the predecessor of the MMDA, as an exercise of
police power. The first Sangalang decision was on the merits of the petition, In the second Sangalang/Yabut decision, we held that the opening of Jupiter
[33]
while the second decision denied reconsideration of the first case and in Street was warranted by the demands of the common good in terms of "traffic
addition discussed the case of Yabut v. Court of Appeals.[34] decongestion and public convenience." Jupiter was opened by the Municipal
Mayor to alleviate traffic congestion along the public streets adjacent to the
Village.[38] The same reason was given for the opening to public vehicular traffic
of Orbit Street, a road inside the same village. The destruction of the gate in Metropolitan Manila was established as a "public corporation" with the
Orbit Street was also made under the police power of the municipal government. following powers: Calrs-pped
The gate, like the perimeter wall along Jupiter, was a public nuisance because it
hindered and impaired the use of property, hence, its summary abatement by the "Section 1. Creation of the Metropolitan Manila.There is hereby
mayor was proper and legal.[39] created a public corporation, to be known as the Metropolitan
Manila, vested with powers and attributes of a corporation
Contrary to petitioners claim, the two Sangalang cases do not apply to the including the power to make contracts, sue and be sued,
case at bar. Firstly, both involved zoning ordinances passed by the municipal acquire, purchase, expropriate, hold, transfer and dispose
council of Makati and the MMC. In the instant case, the basis for the proposed of property and such other powers as are necessary to
opening of Neptune Street is contained in the notice of December 22, 1995 sent carry out its purposes. The Corporation shall be administered
by petitioner to respondent BAVA, through its president. The notice does not by a Commission created under this Decree."[42]
cite any ordinance or law, either by the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Makati City or
by the MMDA, as the legal basis for the proposed opening of Neptune Street. The administration of Metropolitan Manila was placed under the Metro Manila
Petitioner MMDA simply relied on its authority under its charter "to rationalize Commission (MMC) vested with the following powers:
the use of roads and/or thoroughfares for the safe and convenient movement of
persons." Rationalizing the use of roads and thoroughfares is one of the acts "Sec. 4. Powers and Functions of the Commission. - The
that fall within the scope of transport and traffic management. By no stretch of Commission shall have the following powers and functions:
the imagination, however, can this be interpreted as an express or implied grant
of ordinance-making power, much less police power. Misjuris 1. To act as a central government to establish and
administer programs and provide services common to the
Secondly, the MMDA is not the same entity as the MMC area;
in Sangalang. Although the MMC is the forerunner of the present MMDA, an
examination of Presidential Decree (P. D.) No. 824, the charter of the 2. To levy and collect taxes and special assessments, borrow
MMC, shows that the latter possessed greater powers which were not and expend money and issue bonds, revenue certificates, and
bestowed on the present MMDA. Jjlex other obligations of indebtedness. Existing tax measures
should, however, continue to be operative until otherwise
Metropolitan Manila was first created in 1975 by Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. modified or repealed by the Commission;
824. It comprised the Greater Manila Area composed of the contiguous four (4)
cities of Manila, Quezon, Pasay and Caloocan, and the thirteen (13) municipalities 3. To charge and collect fees for the use of public service
of Makati, Mandaluyong, San Juan, Las Pinas, Malabon, Navotas, Pasig, Pateros, facilities;
Paranaque, Marikina, Muntinlupa and Taguig in the province of Rizal, and
Valenzuela in the province of Bulacan.[40] Metropolitan Manila was created as a
4. To appropriate money for the operation of the metropolitan
response to the finding that the rapid growth of population and the increase of
government and review appropriations for the city and municipal
social and economic requirements in these areas demand a call for simultaneous
units within its jurisdiction with authority to disapprove the
and unified development; that the public services rendered by the respective
same if found to be not in accordance with the established
local governments could be administered more efficiently and economically if
policies of the Commission, without prejudice to any contractual
integrated under a system of central planning; and this coordination, "especially
obligation of the local government units involved existing at the
in the maintenance of peace and order and the eradication of social and economic
time of approval of this Decree;
ills that fanned the flames of rebellion and discontent [were] part of reform
measures under Martial Law essential to the safety and security of the
5. To review, amend, revise or repeal all ordinances,
State."[41]
resolutions and acts of cities and municipalities within
Metropolitan Manila;
6. To enact or approve ordinances, resolutions and to fix The MMC was the "central government" of Metro Manila for the purpose of
penalties for any violation thereof which shall not exceed a establishing and administering programs providing services common to the area.
fine of P10,000.00 or imprisonment of six years or both As a "central government" it had the power to levy and collect taxes and special
such fine and imprisonment for a single offense; assessments, the power to charge and collect fees; the power to appropriate
money for its operation, and at the same time, review appropriations for the city
7. To perform general administrative, executive and policy- and municipal units within its jurisdiction. It was bestowed the power to enact or
making functions; approve ordinances, resolutions and fix penalties for violation of such ordinances
and resolutions. It also had the power to review, amend, revise or repeal all
8. To establish a fire control operation center, which shall ordinances, resolutions and acts of any of the four (4) cities and thirteen (13)
direct the fire services of the city and municipal governments municipalities comprising Metro Manila.
in the metropolitan area;
P. D. No. 824 further provided:
9. To establish a garbage disposal operation center, which shall
direct garbage collection and disposal in the metropolitan area; "Sec. 9. Until otherwise provided, the governments of the four
cities and thirteen municipalities in the Metropolitan Manila
10. To establish and operate a transport and traffic center, shall continue to exist in their present form except as may be
which shall direct traffic activities; Jjjuris inconsistent with this Decree. The members of the existing
city and municipal councils in Metropolitan Manila shall, upon
11. To coordinate and monitor governmental and private promulgation of this Decree, and until December 31, 1975,
activities pertaining to essential services such as become members of the Sangguniang Bayan which is hereby
transportation, flood control and drainage, water supply and created for every city and municipality of Metropolitan
sewerage, social, health and environmental services, housing, Manila.
park development, and others;
In addition, the Sangguniang Bayan shall be composed of as
12. To insure and monitor the undertaking of a comprehensive many barangay captains as may be determined and chosen by
social, economic and physical planning and development of the the Commission, and such number of representatives from
area; other sectors of the society as may be appointed by the
President upon recommendation of the Commission.
Thus, Metropolitan Manila had a "central government," i.e., the MMC which "Section 8. Until otherwise provided by Congress, the President
fully possessed legislative and police powers. Whatever legislative powers the may constitute the Metropolitan Authority to be composed of
component cities and municipalities had were all subject to review and the heads of all local government units comprising the
approval by the MMC. Metropolitan Manila area."[45]
After President Corazon Aquino assumed power, there was a clamor to restore In 1990, President Aquino issued Executive Order (E. O.) No. 392 and
the autonomy of the local government units in Metro Manila. Hence, Sections 1 constituted the Metropolitan Manila Authority (MMA). The powers and
and 2 of Article X of the 1987 Constitution provided: Sj cj functions of the MMC were devolved to the MMA.[46] It ought to be
stressed, however, that not all powers and functions of the MMC were
"Section 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the passed to the MMA. The MMAs power was limited to the "delivery of basic
Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities, urban services requiring coordination in Metropolitan Manila."[47] The MMAs
municipalities and barangays. There shall be autonomous regions governing body, the Metropolitan Manila Council, although composed of the
in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras as herein provided. mayors of the component cities and municipalities, was merely given the
power of: (1) formulation of policies on the delivery of basic services
Section 2. The territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy requiring coordination and consolidation; and (2) promulgation of resolutions
local autonomy." and other issuances, approval of a code of basic services and the exercise
of its rule-making power.[48]
The Constitution, however, recognized the necessity of creating metropolitan
regions not only in the existing National Capital Region but also in potential Under the 1987 Constitution, the local government units became primarily
equivalents in the Visayas and Mindanao.[43] Section 11 of the same Article X thus responsible for the governance of their respective political subdivisions.
provided: The MMAs jurisdiction was limited to addressing common problems involving
basic services that transcended local boundaries. It did not have legislative
"Section 11. The Congress may, by law, create special power. Its power was merely to provide the local government units technical
metropolitan political subdivisions, subject to a plebiscite as set assistance in the preparation of local development plans. Any semblance of
forth in Section 10 hereof. The component cities and legislative power it had was confined to a "review [of] legislation proposed by the
municipalities shall retain their basic autonomy and shall be local legislative assemblies to ensure consistency among local governments and
entitled to their own local executives and legislative assemblies. with the comprehensive development plan of Metro Manila," and to "advise the
The jurisdiction of the metropolitan authority that will thereby local governments accordingly."[49]
be created shall be limited to basic services requiring
coordination." When R.A. No. 7924 took effect, Metropolitan Manila became a "special
development and administrative region" and the MMDA a "special
development authority" whose functions were "without prejudice to the
autonomy of the affected local government units." The character of the Under the Constitution is a Metropolitan Authority with
MMDA was clearly defined in the legislative debates enacting its charter. coordinative power. Meaning to say, it coordinates all of the
different basic services which have to be delivered to the
R. A. No. 7924 originated as House Bill No. 14170/ 11116 and was introduced by constituency. All right.
several legislators led by Dante Tinga, Roilo Golez and Feliciano Belmonte. It was
presented to the House of Representatives by the Committee on Local There is now a problem. Each local government unit is given its respective as a
Governments chaired by Congressman Ciriaco R. Alfelor. The bill was a product political subdivision. Kalookan has its powers, as provided for and protected and
of Committee consultations with the local government units in the National guaranteed by the Constitution. All right, the exercise. However, in the exercise
Capital Region (NCR), with former Chairmen of the MMC and MMA, [50]and career of that power, it might be deleterious and disadvantageous to other local
officials of said agencies. When the bill was first taken up by the Committee on government units. So, we are forming an authority where all of these will be
Local Governments, the following debate took place: members and then set up a policy in order that the basic services can be
effectively coordinated. All right. justice
"THE CHAIRMAN [Hon. Ciriaco Alfelor]: Okay, Let me explain.
This has been debated a long time ago, you know. Its a special Of course, we cannot deny that the MMDA has to survive.
we can create a special metropolitan political We have to provide some funds, resources. But it does not
subdivision. Supreme possess any political power. We do not elect the Governor.
We do not have the power to tax. As a matter of fact, I was
Actually, there are only six (6) political subdivisions provided trying to intimate to the author that it must have the power to
for in the Constitution: barangay, municipality, city, province, sue and be sued because it coordinates. All right. It coordinates
and we have the Autonomous Region of Mindanao and we have practically all these basic services so that the flow and the
the Cordillera. So we have 6. Now. distribution of the basic services will be continuous. Like
traffic, we cannot deny that. Its before our eyes. Sewerage,
HON. [Elias] LOPEZ: May I interrupt, Mr. Chairman. In the case flood control, water system, peace and order, we cannot deny
of the Autonomous Region, that is also specifically mandated by these. Its right on our face. We have to look for a solution.
the Constitution. What would be the right solution? All right, we envision that
there should be a coordinating agency and it is called an
THE CHAIRMAN: Thats correct. But it is considered to be a authority. All right, if you do not want to call it an authority, its
political subdivision. What is the meaning of a political alright. We may call it a council or maybe a management agency.
subdivision? Meaning to say, that it has its own government,
it has its own political personality, it has the power to tax, x x x."[51]
and all governmental powers: police power and everything.
All right. Authority is different; because it does not have Clearly, the MMDA is not a political unit of government. The power delegated
its own government. It is only a council, it is an organization to the MMDA is that given to the Metro Manila Council to promulgate
of political subdivision, powers, no, which is not imbued with administrative rules and regulations in the implementation of the MMDAs
any political power. Esmmis functions. There is no grant of authority to enact ordinances and regulations
for the general welfare of the inhabitants of the metropolis. This was
If you go over Section 6, where the powers and functions of explicitly stated in the last Committee deliberations prior to the bills
the Metro Manila Development Authority, it is purely presentation to Congress. Thus: Ed-p
coordinative. And it provides here that the council is policy-
making. All right. "THE CHAIRMAN: Yeah, but we have to go over the suggested
revision. I think this was already approved before, but it was
reconsidered in view of the proposals, set-up, to make the
MMDA stronger. Okay, so if there is no objection to paragraph HON. BELMONTE: Okay, I will .
"f" And then next is paragraph "b," under Section 6. "It shall
approve metro-wide plans, programs and projects and issue HON. LOPEZ: And you can also say that violation of such
ordinances or resolutions deemed necessary by the MMDA to rule, you impose a sanction. But you know, ordinance has a
carry out the purposes of this Act." Do you have the different legal connotation.
powers? Does the MMDA because that takes the form of a
local government unit, a political subdivision. HON. BELMONTE: All right. I defer to that opinion, your
Honor. sc
HON. [Feliciano] BELMONTE: Yes, I believe so, your Honor.
When we say that it has the policies, its very clear that those THE CHAIRMAN: So instead of ordinances, say rules and
policies must be followed. Otherwise, whats the use of regulations.
empowering it to come out with policies. Now, the policies may
be in the form of a resolution or it may be in the form of a HON. BELMONTE: Or resolutions. Actually, they are
ordinance. The term "ordinance" in this case really gives it more actually considering resolutions now.
teeth, your honor. Otherwise, we are going to see a situation
where you have the power to adopt the policy but you cannot
THE CHAIRMAN: Rules and resolutions.
really make it stick as in the case now, and I think here is
Chairman Bunye. I think he will agree that that is the case now.
HON. BELMONTE: Rules, regulations and resolutions."[52]
Youve got the power to set a policy, the body wants to follow
your policy, then we say lets call it an ordinance and see if they
will not follow it. The draft of H. B. No. 14170/ 11116 was presented by the Committee to the
House of Representatives. The explanatory note to the bill stated that the
proposed MMDA is a "development authority" which is a "national agency, not a
THE CHAIRMAN: Thats very nice. I like that. However, there
political government unit."[53] The explanatory note was adopted as the
is a constitutional impediment. You are making this MMDA a
sponsorship speech of the Committee on Local Governments. No interpellations
political subdivision. The creation of the MMDA would be
or debates were made on the floor and no amendments introduced. The bill was
subject to a plebiscite. That is what Im trying to avoid. Ive
approved on second reading on the same day it was presented.[54]
been trying to avoid this kind of predicament. Under the
Constitution it states: if it is a political subdivision, once it
is created it has to be subject to a plebiscite. Im trying to When the bill was forwarded to the Senate, several amendments were made.
make this as administrative. Thats why we place the These amendments, however, did not affect the nature of the MMDA as
Chairman as a cabinet rank. originally conceived in the House of Representatives.[55]
HON. BELMONTE: All right, Mr. Chairman, okay, what you are It is thus beyond doubt that the MMDA is not a local government unit or a
saying there is . public corporation endowed with legislative power. It is not even a "special
metropolitan political subdivision" as contemplated in Section 11, Article X of the
Constitution. The creation of a "special metropolitan political subdivision"
THE CHAIRMAN: In setting up ordinances, it is a political
requires the approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the
exercise. Believe me.
political units directly affected.[56] R. A. No. 7924 was not submitted to the
inhabitants of Metro Manila in a plebiscite. The Chairman of the MMDA is not an
HON. [Elias] LOPEZ: Mr. Chairman, it can be changed into
official elected by the people, but appointed by the President with the rank and
issuances of rules and regulations. That would be it shall
privileges of a cabinet member. In fact, part of his function is to perform such
also be enforced. Jksm
other duties as may be assigned to him by the President, [57] whereas in local
government units, the President merely exercises supervisory authority. This At issue in this case is the validity of Section 5(f) of Republic Act No. 7924
emphasizes the administrative character of the MMDA. Newmiso creating the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA), which
authorizes it to confiscate and suspend or revoke drivers licenses in the
Clearly then, the MMC under P. D. No. 824 is not the same entity as the enforcement of traffic laws and regulations.
MMDA under R. A. No. 7924. Unlike the MMC, the MMDA has no power to
The issue arose from an incident involving the respondent Dante O. Garin, a
enact ordinances for the welfare of the community. It is the local government
lawyer, who was issued a traffic violation receipt (TVR) and his drivers license
units, acting through their respective legislative councils, that possess legislative
confiscated for parking illegally along Gandara Street, Binondo, Manila, on 05
power and police power. In the case at bar, the Sangguniang Panlungsod of
August 1995. The following statements were printed on the TVR:
Makati City did not pass any ordinance or resolution ordering the opening of
YOU ARE HEREBY DIRECTED TO REPORT TO THE MMDA TRAFFIC
Neptune Street, hence, its proposed opening by petitioner MMDA is illegal and
OPERATIONS CENTER PORT AREA MANILA AFTER 48 HOURS FROM DATE
the respondent Court of Appeals did not err in so ruling. We desist from ruling
OF APPREHENSION FOR DISPOSITION/APPROPRIATE ACTION THEREON.
on the other issues as they are unnecessary. Esmso
CRIMINAL CASE SHALL BE FILED FOR FAILURE TO REDEEM LICENSE
AFTER 30 DAYS.
We stress that this decision does not make light of the MMDAs noble efforts to VALID AS TEMPORARY DRIVERS LICENSE FOR SEVEN DAYS FROM DATE OF
solve the chaotic traffic condition in Metro Manila. Everyday, traffic jams and APPREHENSION.[1]
traffic bottlenecks plague the metropolis. Even our once sprawling boulevards
and avenues are now crammed with cars while city streets are clogged with Shortly before the expiration of the TVRs validity, the respondent
motorists and pedestrians. Traffic has become a social malaise affecting our addressed a letter[2] to then MMDA Chairman Prospero Oreta requesting the
peoples productivity and the efficient delivery of goods and services in the return of his drivers license, and expressing his preference for his case to be
country. The MMDA was created to put some order in the metropolitan filed in court.
transportation system but unfortunately the powers granted by its charter are
Receiving no immediate reply, Garin filed the original complaint [3] with
limited. Its good intentions cannot justify the opening for public use of a private
application for preliminary injunction in Branch 260 of the Regional Trial Court
street in a private subdivision without any legal warrant. The promotion of the
(RTC) of Paraaque, on 12 September 1995, contending that, in the absence of any
general welfare is not antithetical to the preservation of the rule of law. Sdjad
implementing rules and regulations, Sec. 5(f) of Rep. Act No. 7924 grants the
MMDA unbridled discretion to deprive erring motorists of their licenses, pre-
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petition is denied. The Decision and Resolution of the
empting a judicial determination of the validity of the deprivation, thereby
Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 39549 are affirmed. Sppedsc
violating the due process clause of the Constitution. The respondent further
contended that the provision violates the constitutional prohibition against undue
SO ORDERED. delegation of legislative authority, allowing as it does the MMDA to fix and
SECOND DIVISION impose unspecified and therefore unlimited - fines and other penalties on erring
motorists.
For its part, the MMDA, represented by the Office of the Solicitor
D E C I S I O N General, pointed out that the powers granted to it by Sec. 5(f) of Rep. Act No.
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.: 7924 are limited to the fixing, collection and imposition of fines and penalties
for traffic violations, which powers are legislative and executive in nature; the
judiciary retains the right to determine the validity of the penalty imposed. It
further argued that the doctrine of separation of powers does not preclude suspension or revocation of the license, the petitioner points out that under the
admixture of the three powers of government in administrative agencies. [4] terms of the confiscation, the licensee has three options:
The MMDA also refuted Garins allegation that the Metro Manila Council, 1. To voluntarily pay the imposable fine,
the governing board and policy making body of the petitioner, has as yet to
2. To protest the apprehension by filing a protest with the MMDA
formulate the implementing rules for Sec. 5(f) of Rep. Act No. 7924 and
Adjudication Committee, or
directed the courts attention to MMDA Memorandum Circular No. TT-95-001
dated 15 April 1995. Respondent Garin, however, questioned the validity of 3. To request the referral of the TVR to the Public Prosecutors
MMDA Memorandum Circular No. TT-95-001, as he claims that it was passed by Office.
the Metro Manila Council in the absence of a quorum.
The MMDA likewise argues that Memorandum Circular No. TT-95-001 was
Judge Helen Bautista-Ricafort issued a temporary restraining order on 26 validly passed in the presence of a quorum, and that the lower courts finding
September 1995, extending the validity of the TVR as a temporary drivers that it had not was based on a misapprehension of facts, which the petitioner
license for twenty more days. A preliminary mandatory injunction was granted on would have us review. Moreover, it asserts that though the circular is the basis
23 October 1995, and the MMDA was directed to return the respondents for the issuance of TVRs, the basis for the summary confiscation of licenses is
drivers license. Sec. 5(f) of Rep. Act No. 7924 itself, and that such power is self-executory and
does not require the issuance of any implementing regulation or circular.
On 14 August 1997, the trial court rendered the assailed decision [5] in favor
of the herein respondent and held that: Meanwhile, on 12 August 2004, the MMDA, through its Chairman Bayani
a. There was indeed no quorum in that First Regular Meeting of the MMDA Fernando, implemented Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 2004, outlining
Council held on March 23, 1995, hence MMDA Memorandum Circular No. TT-95- the procedures for the use of the Metropolitan Traffic Ticket (MTT) scheme.
001, authorizing confiscation of drivers licenses upon issuance of a TVR, is Under the circular, erring motorists are issued an MTT, which can be paid at any
void ab initio. Metrobank branch. Traffic enforcers may no longer confiscate drivers licenses
b. The summary confiscation of a drivers license without first giving the driver as a matter of course in cases of traffic violations. All motorists with
an opportunity to be heard; depriving him of a property right (drivers license) unredeemed TVRs were given seven days from the date of implementation of the
without DUE PROCESS; not filling (sic) in Court the complaint of supposed new system to pay their fines and redeem their license or vehicle plates. [7]
traffic infraction, cannot be justified by any legislation (and is) hence
unconstitutional. It would seem, therefore, that insofar as the absence of a prima facie case
WHEREFORE, the temporary writ of preliminary injunction is hereby made to enjoin the petitioner from confiscating drivers licenses is concerned, recent
permanent; th(e) MMDA is directed to return to plaintiff his drivers license; events have overtaken the Courts need to decide this case, which has been
th(e) MMDA is likewise ordered to desist from confiscating drivers license rendered moot and academic by the implementation of Memorandum Circular No.
without first giving the driver the opportunity to be heard in an appropriate 04, Series of 2004.
proceeding. The petitioner, however, is not precluded from re-implementing
[6]
In filing this petition, the MMDA reiterates and reinforces its argument Memorandum Circular No. TT-95-001, or any other scheme, for that matter,
in the court below and contends that a license to operate a motor vehicle is that would entail confiscating drivers licenses. For the proper implementation,
neither a contract nor a property right, but is a privilege subject to reasonable therefore, of the petitioners future programs, this Court deems it appropriate
regulation under the police power in the interest of the public safety and to make the following observations:
welfare. The petitioner further argues that revocation or suspension of this 1. A license to operate a motor vehicle is a privilege that the state may withhold
privilege does not constitute a taking without due process as long as the licensee in the exercise of its police power.
is given the right to appeal the revocation.
The petitioner correctly points out that a license to operate a motor vehicle
To buttress its argument that a licensee may indeed appeal the taking and is not a property right, but a privilege granted by the state, which may be
the judiciary retains the power to determine the validity of the confiscation, suspended or revoked by the state in the exercise of its police power, in the
interest of the public safety and welfare, subject to the procedural due process The said case also involved the herein petitioner MMDA which claimed that
requirements. This is consistent with our rulings in Pedro v. Provincial Board of it had the authority to open a subdivision street owned by the Bel-Air Village
Rizal[8] on the license to operate a cockpit, Tan v. Director of Association, Inc. to public traffic because it is an agent of the state endowed
Forestry[9]and Oposa v. Factoran[10] on timber licensing agreements, and Surigao with police power in the delivery of basic services in Metro Manila. From this
Electric Co., Inc. v. Municipality of Surigao [11] on a legislative franchise to operate premise, the MMDA argued that there was no need for the City of Makati to
an electric plant. enact an ordinance opening Neptune Street to the public.
Petitioner cites a long list of American cases to prove this point, such Tracing the legislative history of Rep. Act No. 7924 creating the MMDA,
as State ex. Rel. Sullivan,[12] which states in part that, the legislative power to we concluded that the MMDA is not a local government unit or a public
regulate travel over the highways and thoroughfares of the state for the corporation endowed with legislative power, and, unlike its predecessor, the
general welfare is extensive. It may be exercised in any reasonable manner to Metro Manila Commission, it has no power to enact ordinances for the welfare of
conserve the safety of travelers and pedestrians. Since motor vehicles are the community. Thus, in the absence of an ordinance from the City of Makati, its
instruments of potential danger, their registration and the licensing of their own order to open the street was invalid.
operators have been required almost from their first appearance. The right to
We restate here the doctrine in the said decision as it applies to the case
operate them in public places is not a natural and unrestrained right, but a
at bar: police power, as an inherent attribute of sovereignty, is the power vested
privilege subject to reasonable regulation, under the police power, in the interest
by the Constitution in the legislature to make, ordain, and establish all manner of
of the public safety and welfare. The power to license imports further power to
wholesome and reasonable laws, statutes and ordinances, either with penalties or
withhold or to revoke such license upon noncompliance with prescribed
without, not repugnant to the Constitution, as they shall judge to be for the good
conditions.
and welfare of the commonwealth, and for the subjects of the same.
Likewise, the petitioner quotes the Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Having been lodged primarily in the National Legislature, it cannot be
in Commonwealth v. Funk,[13] to the effect that: Automobiles are vehicles of
exercised by any group or body of individuals not possessing legislative power.
great speed and power. The use of them constitutes an element of danger to
The National Legislature, however, may delegate this power to the president and
persons and property upon the highways. Carefully operated, an automobile is
administrative boards as well as the lawmaking bodies of municipal corporations
still a dangerous instrumentality, but, when operated by careless or incompetent
or local government units (LGUs). Once delegated, the agents can exercise only
persons, it becomes an engine of destruction. The Legislature, in the exercise of
such legislative powers as are conferred on them by the national lawmaking body.
the police power of the commonwealth, not only may, but must, prescribe how and
by whom motor vehicles shall be operated on the highways. One of the primary Our Congress delegated police power to the LGUs in the Local Government
purposes of a system of general regulation of the subject matter, as here by the Code of 1991.[15] A local government is a political subdivision of a nation or state
Vehicle Code, is to insure the competency of the operator of motor vehicles. which is constituted by law and has substantial control of local affairs. [16] Local
Such a general law is manifestly directed to the promotion of public safety and government units are the provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays, which
is well within the police power. exercise police power through their respective legislative bodies.
The common thread running through the cited cases is that it is the Metropolitan or Metro Manila is a body composed of several local
legislature, in the exercise of police power, which has the power and government units. With the passage of Rep. Act No. 7924 in 1995, Metropolitan
responsibility to regulate how and by whom motor vehicles may be operated on Manila was declared as a "special development and administrative region" and the
the state highways. administration of "metro-wide" basic services affecting the region placed under
"a development authority" referred to as the MMDA. Thus:
2. The MMDA is not vested with police power.
. . . [T]he powers of the MMDA are limited to the following acts: formulation,
In Metro Manila Development Authority v. Bel-Air Village Association, Inc., coordination, regulation, implementation, preparation, management, monitoring,
[14]
we categorically stated that Rep. Act No. 7924 does not grant the MMDA setting of policies, installation of a system and administration. There is no
with police power, let alone legislative power, and that all its functions are syllable in R. A. No. 7924 that grants the MMDA police power, let alone
administrative in nature. legislative power. Even the Metro Manila Council has not been delegated any
legislative power. Unlike the legislative bodies of the local government
units, there is no provision in R. A. No. 7924 that empowers the MMDA or governmental organizations to whom may be delegated certain authority, subject
its Council to "enact ordinances, approve resolutions and appropriate funds to such conditions and requirements as the Authority may impose.
for the general welfare" of the inhabitants of Metro Manila. The MMDA is,
Thus, where there is a traffic law or regulation validly enacted by the
as termed in the charter itself, a "development authority." It is an agency
legislature or those agencies to whom legislative powers have been delegated
created for the purpose of laying down policies and coordinating with the
(the City of Manila in this case), the petitioner is not precluded and in fact is
various national government agencies, people's organizations, non-
duty-bound to confiscate and suspend or revoke drivers licenses in the exercise
governmental organizations and the private sector for the efficient and
of its mandate of transport and traffic management, as well as the
expeditious delivery of basic services in the vast metropolitan area. All its
administration and implementation of all traffic enforcement operations, traffic
functions are administrative in nature and these are actually summed up in the
engineering services and traffic education programs.[20]
charter itself, viz:
Sec. 2. Creation of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority. -- -x x x. This is consistent with our ruling in Bel-Air that the MMDA is a
The MMDA shall perform planning, monitoring and coordinative development authority created for the purpose of laying down policies and
functions, and in the process exercise regulatory and supervisory coordinating with the various national government agencies, peoples
authority over the delivery of metro-wide services within Metro organizations, non-governmental organizations and the private sector, which
Manila, without diminution of the autonomy of the local may enforce, but not enact, ordinances.
government units concerning purely local matters.
. This is also consistent with the fundamental rule of statutory construction
Clearly, the MMDA is not a political unit of government. The power delegated to that a statute is to be read in a manner that would breathe life into it, rather
the MMDA is that given to the Metro Manila Council to promulgate than defeat it,[21] and is supported by the criteria in cases of this nature that all
administrative rules and regulations in the implementation of the MMDAs reasonable doubts should be resolved in favor of the constitutionality of a
functions. There is no grant of authority to enact ordinances and regulations statute.[22]
for the general welfare of the inhabitants of the metropolis . [17] (footnotes A last word. The MMDA was intended to coordinate services with metro-
omitted, emphasis supplied) wide impact that transcend local political boundaries or would entail huge
Therefore, insofar as Sec. 5(f) of Rep. Act No. 7924 is understood by the expenditures if provided by the individual LGUs, especially with regard to
lower court and by the petitioner to grant the MMDA the power to confiscate transport and traffic management,[23] and we are aware of the valiant efforts of
and suspend or revoke drivers licenses without need of any other legislative the petitioner to untangle the increasingly traffic-snarled roads of Metro
enactment, such is an unauthorized exercise of police power. Manila. But these laudable intentions are limited by the MMDAs enabling law,
which we can but interpret, and petitioner must be reminded that its efforts in
3. Sec. 5(f) grants the MMDA with the duty to enforce existing traffic rules this respect must be authorized by a valid law, or ordinance, or regulation arising
and regulations. from a legitimate source.
Section 5 of Rep. Act No. 7924 enumerates the Functions and Powers of WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED.
the Metro Manila Development Authority. The contested clause in Sec. 5(f)
states that the petitioner shall install and administer a single ticketing system, SO ORDERED.
fix, impose and collect fines and penalties for all kinds of violations of traffic Republic of the Philippines
rules and regulations, whether moving or nonmoving in nature, and confiscate and Supreme Court
suspend or revoke drivers licenses in the enforcement of such traffic laws and Manila
regulations, the provisions of Rep. Act No. 4136 [18] and P.D. No. 1605[19] to the
contrary notwithstanding, and that (f)or this purpose, the Authority shall
enforce all traffic laws and regulations in Metro Manila, through its traffic FIRST DIVISION
operation center, and may deputize members of the PNP, traffic enforcers of
local government units, duly licensed security guards, or members of non- METROPOLITAN MANILA G.R. No. 179554
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
Petitioner, Present: 16.1. Details of Development Rights. DOTC hereby
PUNO, C.J., Chairper confirms and awards to Metro Rail the rights to (a) develop
son, commercial premises in the Depot and the air space above the
-versus- CARPIO MORALES, Stations, which shall be allowed to such height as is legally and
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, technically feasible, (b) lease or sub-lease interests or assign
BERSAMIN, and such interests in the Depot and such air space and (c) obtain
VILLARAMA, JR., JJ. any advertising income from the Depot and such air space and
TRACKWORKS RAIL TRANSIT LRTS Phase I.
ADVERTISING, VENDING Promulgated:
AND PROMOTIONS, INC., LRTS Phase I means the rail transport system comprising
Respondent. December 16, 2009 about 16.9 line kilometers extending from Taft Avenue, Pasay
x------------------------------------------------------------- City, to North Avenue, Quezon City, occupying a strip in the
----------------------------x center of EDSA approximately 10.5 meters wide (approximately
12 meters wide at or around the Boni Avenue, Santolan and
Buendia Stations), plus about 0.1 to 0.2 line kilometers
R E S O L U T I O N extending from the North Avenue Station to the Depot,
together with the Stations, 73 Light Rail Vehicles and all
BERSAMIN, J.: ancillary plant, equipment and facilities, as more particularly
detailed in the Specifications.
This case concerns whether the Metropolitan Manila Development
Authority (MMDA) could unilaterally dismantle the billboards, signages and other 16.2. Assignment of Rights. During the Development
advertizing media in the structures of the Metro Rail Transit 3 (MRT3) installed Rights Period, Metro Rail shall be entitled to assign all or any of
by respondent advertising company by virtue of its existing contract with the its rights, titles and interests in the Development Rights to
owner of the MRT3. bona fide real estate developers. In this connection, Metro Rail
may enter into such development, lease, sub-lease or other
The trial and appellate courts ruled that MMDA did not have the authority to agreements or contracts relating to the Depot and the air
dismantle. MMDA is now before the Court to assail such adverse ruling. space above the Stations (the space not needed for all or any
portion of the operation of the LRTS) for all or any portion of
the Development Rights Period.
Antecedents
In 1997, the Government, through the Department of Transportation and In 1998, respondent Trackworks Rail Transit Advertising, Vending & Promotions,
Communications, entered into a build-lease-transfer agreement (BLT agreement) Inc. (Trackworks) entered into a contract for advertising services with MRTC.
with Metro Rail Transit Corporation, Limited (MRTC) pursuant to Republic Act Trackworks thereafter installed commercial billboards, signages and other
No. 6957 (Build, Operate and Transfer Law), under which MRTC undertook to advertizing media in the different parts of the MRT3. In 2001, however, MMDA
build MRT3 subject to the condition that MRTC would own MRT3 for 25 years, requested Trackworks to dismantle the billboards, signages and other
upon the expiration of which the ownership would transfer to the Government. advertizing media pursuant to MMDA Regulation No. 96-009, whereby MMDA
prohibited the posting, installation and display of any kind or form of billboards,
The BLT agreement stipulated, among others, that MRTC could build and signs, posters, streamers, in any part of the road, sidewalk, center island, posts,
develop commercial premises in the MRT3 structures, or obtain advertising trees, parks and open space. After Trackworks refused the request of MMDA,
income therefrom, viz: MMDA proceeded to dismantle the formers billboards and similar forms of
advertisement.
On March 1, 2002, Trackworks filed against MMDA in the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) in Pasig City an injunction suit (with prayer for the issuance of a MMDA claims that its mandate under its charter [6] of formulating,
temporary restraining order [TRO] and preliminary injunction), docketed as Civil coordinating and monitoring of policies, standards, progress and projects for the
Case No. 68864. use of thoroughfares and the promotion of safe and convenientmovement of
persons and goods prompted its issuance of MMDA Regulation No. 96-009, which
On March 6, 2002, the RTC (Branch 155) issued a TRO, enjoining MMDA reads in part:
from dismantling or destroying Trackworks billboards, signages and other
advertizing media. On March 25, 2002, the RTC issued a writ of preliminary h. ) It is unlawful for any person/s, private or public
injunction for the same purpose. corporations, advertising and promotions companies, movie
producers, professionals and service contractors to post,
Without filing a motion for reconsideration to challenge the RTCs install, display any kind or form of billboards, signs, posters,
issuances, MMDA brought a petition for certiorari and prohibition before the streamers, professional service advertisements and other visual
Court of Appeals (CA), docketed as C.A.-G.R. SP No. 70932, but the CA denied clutters in any part of the road, sidewalk, center island, posts,
the petition and affirmed the RTC on August 31, 2004. The CA ultimately denied trees parks and open space.
MMDAs motion for reconsideration through its resolution issued on March 14, MMDA avers that the conversion of the center island of Epifanio Delos
2005. Santos Avenue (EDSA) into the carriageway of the MRT3 line did not exempt
the EDSA center island from the coverage of the MMDA regulation; [7] that the
Thence, MMDA appealed to this Court (G.R. No. 167514), which denied Governments grant of development rights to MRTC was not an abdication of its
MMDAs petition for review on October 25, 2005.[1] right to regulate, and, therefore, the development of the MRT3 remained
subject to all existing and applicable national and local laws, ordinances, rules and
Ruling of the RTC regulations;[8] that MMDA was merely implementing existing and applicable laws;
[9]
that Trackworks advertising materials were placed indiscriminately and
In the meanwhile, on October 10, 2005, the RTC (Branch 155) rendered without due regard to safety, and as such might be classified as obstructions
its decision permanently enjoining MMDA from dismantling, removing or and distractions to the motorists traversing EDSA;[10] and that the interests of a
destroying the billboards, signages and other advertizing media installed by few should not prevail over the good of the greater number in the community
Trackworks on the interior and exterior structures of the MRT3.[2] whose safety and general welfare MMDA was mandated to protect.[11]
Ruling of the CA Trackworks maintains, on the other hand, that MMDAs petition was defective
for its failure to raise any genuine question of law; and that the CAs decision
MMDA appealed the RTCs decision to the CA. dated April 30, 2007 was valid and correct.[12]
On April 30, 2007, the CA denied the MMDAs appeal, [3] holding that Ruling of the Court
Trackworks right to install billboards, signages and other advertizing media on
the interior and exterior structures of the MRT3 must be protected by a writ of The petition has no merit.
permanent injunction; and that MMDA had no power to dismantle, remove or
destroy Trackworks billboards, signages and other advertizing media. [4] That Trackworks derived its right to install its billboards, signages and other
advertizing media in the MRT3 from MRTCs authority under the BLT agreement
MMDA moved for reconsideration, but the CA resolution denied to develop commercial premises in the MRT3 structure or to obtain advertising
the motion for reconsideration on September 3, 2007.[5] income therefrom is no longer debatable. Under the BLT agreement, indeed,
MRTC owned the MRT3 for 25 years, upon the expiration of which MRTC would
Hence, this appeal by petition for review. transfer ownership of the MRT3 to the Government.
Issues
Considering that MRTC remained to be the owner of the MRT3 during
the time material to this case, and until this date, MRTCs entering into the The Court also agrees with the CAs ruling that MMDA Regulation No.
contract for advertising services with Trackworks was a valid exercise of 96-009 and MMC Memorandum Circular No. 88-09 did not apply to Trackworks
ownership by the former. In fact, in Metropolitan Manila Development Authority billboards, signages and other advertising media. The prohibition against posting,
v. Trackworks Rail Transit Advertising, Vending & Promotions , Inc.,[13] this Court installation and display of billboards, signages and other advertising media
expressly recognized Trackworks right to install the billboards, signages and applied only to public areas, but MRT3, being private property pursuant to the
other advertising media pursuant to said contract. The latters right should, BLT agreement between the Government and MRTC, was not one of the areas as
therefore, be respected. to which the prohibition applied. Moreover, MMC Memorandum Circular No. 88-
09 did not apply to Trackworks billboards, signages and other advertising media
It is futile for MMDA to simply invoke its legal mandate to justify the in MRT3, because it did not specifically cover MRT3, and because it was issued a
dismantling of Trackworks billboards, signages and other advertising media. year prior to the construction of MRT3 on the center island of EDSA. Clearly,
MMDA simply had no power on its own to dismantle, remove, or destroy the MMC Memorandum Circular No. 88-09 could not have included MRT3 in its
billboards, signages and other advertising media installed on the MRT3 structure prohibition.
by Trackworks. In Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Bel-Air Village
Association, Inc.,[14] Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Viron MMDAs insistence that it was only implementing Presidential Decree No. 1096
Transportation Co., Inc.,[15] and Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. (Building Code) and its implementing rules and regulations is not persuasive. The
Garin,[16] the Court had the occasion to rule that MMDAs powers were limited to power to enforce the provisions of the Building Codewas lodged in the
the formulation, coordination, regulation, implementation, preparation, Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), not in MMDA, considering
management, monitoring, setting of policies, installing a system, and the laws following provision, thus:
administration. Nothing in Republic Act No. 7924 granted MMDA police power,
let alone legislative power.[17] Sec. 201. Responsibility for Administration and Enforcement.
The administration and enforcement of the provisions of this
Clarifying the real nature of MMDA, the Court held: Code including the imposition of penalties for administrative
violations thereof is hereby vested in the Secretary of Public
xxx The MMDA is, as termed in the charter itself, a Works, Transportation and Communications, hereinafter
development authority. It is an agency created for the purpose referred to as the Secretary.
of laying down policies and coordinating with the various
national government agencies, peoples organizations, non-
governmental organizations and the private sector for the There is also no evidence showing that MMDA had been delegated by DPWH to
efficient and expeditious delivery of basic services in the vast implement the Building Code.
metropolitan area. All its functions are administrative in
nature and these are actually summed up in the charter WHEREFORE, we deny the petition for review, and affirm
itself, viz: the decision dated April 30, 2007 and the resolution dated September 3, 2007.
(5) Pursuant to Sec. 65 of RA 8550, the DA, through In addition, the MMDA is ordered to establish,
the BFAR, is ordered to improve and restore the marine life of operate, and maintain a sanitary landfill, as prescribed by RA
the Manila Bay. It is also directed to assist the LGUs in Metro 9003, within a period of one (1) year from finality of this
Manila, Rizal, Cavite, Laguna, Bulacan, Pampanga, and Bataan in Decision. On matters within its territorial jurisdiction and in
connection with the discharge of its duties on the maintenance SO ORDERED.
of sanitary landfills and like undertakings, it is also ordered to
cause the apprehension and filing of the appropriate criminal
cases against violators of the respective penal provisions of RA The government agencies did not file any motion for reconsideration and
9003, Sec. 27 of RA 9275 (the Clean Water Act), and other the Decision became final in January 2009.
existing laws on pollution.
The case is now in the execution phase of the final and executory
(9) The DOH shall, as directed by Art. 76 of PD 1067 December 18, 2008 Decision. The Manila Bay Advisory Committee was created to
and Sec. 8 of RA 9275, within one (1) year from finality of this receive and evaluate the quarterly progressive reports on the activities
Decision, determine if all licensed septic and sludge companies undertaken by the agencies in accordance with said decision and to monitor the
have the proper facilities for the treatment and disposal of execution phase.
fecal sludge and sewage coming from septic tanks. The DOH
shall give the companies, if found to be non-complying, a In the absence of specific completion periods, the Committee
reasonable time within which to set up the necessary facilities recommended that time frames be set for the agencies to perform their
under pain of cancellation of its environmental sanitation assigned tasks. This may be viewed as an encroachment over the powers and
clearance. functions of the Executive Branch headed by the President of the Philippines.
(4) The Local Water Utilities Administration is ordered to submit on or The Philippine Coast Guard shall likewise submit on or before June 30,
before September 30, 2011 its plan to provide, install, operate and maintain 2011 its five-year plan of action on the measures and activities they intend to
sewerage and sanitation facilities in said cities and towns and the completion undertake to apprehend the violators of Presidential Decree No. 979 or
period for said works, which shall be fully implemented by December 31, 2020. the Marine Pollution Decree of 1976 and RA 9993 or the Philippine Coast Guard
(5) The Department of Agriculture (DA), through the Bureau of Law of 2009 and other pertinent laws and regulations to prevent marine pollution
Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, shall submit to the Court on or before June 30, in Manila Bay and to ensure the successful prosecution of violators.
2011 a report on areas in Manila Bay where marine life has to be restored or
improved and the assistance it has extended to the LGUs in Metro Manila, Rizal, (8) The Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) shall
Cavite, Laguna, Bulacan, Pampanga and Bataan in developing the fisheries and submit to the Court on or before June 30, 2011 the names and addresses of the
aquatic resources in Manila Bay. The report shall contain monitoring data on the informal settlers in Metro Manila who, as of December 31, 2010, own and occupy
houses, structures, constructions and other encroachments established or built 8. Kalayaan (Longos), Laguna
along the Pasig-Marikina-San Juan Rivers, the NCR (Paraaque-Zapote, Las Pias) 9. Brgy. Sto. Nino, San Pablo City, Laguna
Rivers, the Navotas-Malabon-Tullahan-Tenejeros Rivers, and connecting 10. Brgy. San Antonio (Pilotage SLF), San Pedro, Laguna
waterways and esteros, in violation of RA 7279 and other applicable laws. On or 11. Morong, Rizal
before June 30, 2011, the MMDA shall submit its plan for the removal of said 12. Sitio Lukutan, Brgy. San Isidro, Rodriguez (Montalban), Rizal
informal settlers and the demolition of the aforesaid houses, structures, (ISWIMS)
constructions and encroachments, as well as the completion dates for said 13. Brgy. Pintong Bukawe, San Mateo, Rizal (SMSLFDC)
activities, which shall be fully implemented not later than December 31, 2015. On or before June 30, 2011, the MMDA and the seventeen (17) LGUs in
Metro Manila are ordered to jointly submit a report on the average amount of
The MMDA is ordered to submit a status report, within thirty (30) days garbage collected monthly per district in all the cities in Metro Manila from
from receipt of this Resolution, on the establishment of a sanitary landfill January 2009 up to December 31, 2010 vis--vis the average amount of garbage
facility for Metro Manila in compliance with the standards under RA 9003 or disposed monthly in landfills and dumpsites. In its quarterly report for the last
the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act. quarter of 2010 and thereafter, MMDA shall report on the apprehensions for
On or before June 30, 2011, the MMDA shall submit a report of the violations of the penal provisions of RA 9003, RA 9275 and other laws on
location of open and controlled dumps in Metro Manila whose operations are pollution for the said period.
illegal after February 21, 2006,[3] pursuant to Secs. 36 and 37 of RA 9003, and On or before June 30, 2011, the DPWH and the LGUs in Rizal, Laguna,
its plan for the closure of these open and controlled dumps to be accomplished Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, and Bataan shall submit the names and addresses of
not later than December 31, 2012. Also, on or before June 30, 2011, the DENR the informal settlers in their respective areas who, as of September 30, 2010,
Secretary, as Chairperson of the National Solid Waste Management Commission own or occupy houses, structures, constructions, and other encroachments built
(NSWMC), shall submit a report on the location of all open and controlled dumps along the Meycauayan-Marilao-Obando (Bulacan) Rivers, the Talisay (Bataan)
in Rizal, Cavite, Laguna, Bulacan, Pampanga and Bataan. River, the Imus (Cavite) River, the Laguna de Bay, and other rivers, connecting
waterways and esteros that discharge wastewater into the Manila Bay, in breach
On or before June 30, 2011, the DENR Secretary, in his capacity as of RA 7279 and other applicable laws. On or before June 30, 2011, the DPWH
NSWMC Chairperson, shall submit a report on whether or not the following and the aforesaid LGUs shall jointly submit their plan for the removal of said
landfills strictly comply with Secs. 41 and 42 of RA 9003 on the establishment informal settlers and the demolition of the aforesaid structures, constructions
and operation of sanitary landfills, to wit: and encroachments, as well as the completion dates for such activities which
shall be implemented not later than December 31, 2012.
National Capital Region (9) The Department of Health (DOH) shall submit to the Court on or
before June 30, 2011 the names and addresses of the owners of septic and
1. Navotas SLF (PhilEco), Brgy. Tanza (New Site), Navotas City sludge companies including those that do not have the proper facilities for the
2. Payatas Controlled Dumpsite, Barangay Payatas, Quezon City treatment and disposal of fecal sludge and sewage coming from septic tanks.
Region III The DOH shall implement rules and regulations on Environmental
Sanitation Clearances and shall require companies to procure a license to operate
3. Sitio Coral, Brgy. Matictic, Norzagaray, Bulacan from the DOH.
4. Sitio Tiakad, Brgy. San Mateo, Norzagaray, Bulacan
5. Brgy. Minuyan, San Jose del Monte City, Bulacan The DOH and DENR-Environmental Management Bureau shall develop a
6. Brgy. Mapalad, Santa Rosa, Nueva Ecija toxic and hazardous waste management system by June 30, 2011 which will
7. Sub-zone Kalangitan, Clark Capas, Tarlac Special implement segregation of hospital/toxic/hazardous wastes and prevent mixing
Economic Zone with municipal solid waste.
Region IV-A
On or before June 30, 2011, the DOH shall submit a plan of action to have remained unchecked and have reverberated to this day. Traffic jams
ensure that the said companies have proper disposal facilities and the completion continue to clog the streets of Metro Manila, bringing vehicles to a standstill at
dates of compliance. main road arteries during rush hour traffic and sapping peoples energies and
(10) The Department of Education (DepEd) shall submit to the Court on patience in the process.
or before May 31, 2011 a report on the specific subjects on pollution prevention, The present petition for review on certiorari, rooted in the traffic congestion
waste management, environmental protection, environmental laws and the like problem, questions the authority of the Metropolitan Manila Development
that it has integrated into the school curricula in all levels for the school year Authority (MMDA) to order the closure of provincial bus terminals along Epifanio
2011-2012. de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) and major thoroughfares of Metro Manila.
Specifically challenged are two Orders issued by Judge Silvino T. Pampilo, Jr. of
On or before June 30, 2011, the DepEd shall also submit its plan of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 26 in Civil Case Nos. 03-105850
action to ensure compliance of all the schools under its supervision with respect and 03-106224.
to the integration of the aforementioned subjects in the school curricula which The first assailed Order of September 8, 2005,2 which resolved a motion for
shall be fully implemented by June 30, 2012. reconsideration filed by herein respondents, declared Executive Order (E.O.) No.
(11) All the agencies are required to submit their quarterly reports 179, hereafter referred to as the E.O., "unconstitutional as it constitutes an
electronically using the forms below. The agencies may add other key unreasonable exercise of police power." The second assailed Order of November
performance indicators that they have identified. 23, 20053denied petitioners motion for reconsideration.
The following facts are not disputed:
SO ORDERED. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo issued the E.O. on February 10, 2003,
"Providing for the Establishment of Greater Manila Mass Transport System," the
Republic of the Philippines pertinent portions of which read:
SUPREME COURT WHEREAS, Metro Manila continues to be the center of employment
Manila opportunities, trade and commerce of the Greater Metro Manila area;
EN BANC WHEREAS, the traffic situation in Metro Manila has affected the
G.R. No. 170656 August 15, 2007 adjacent provinces of Bulacan, Cavite, Laguna, and Rizal, owing to the
THE METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and BAYANI continued movement of residents and industries to more affordable and
FERNANDO as Chairman of the Metropolitan Manila Development economically viable locations in these provinces;
Authority, petitioners, WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) is
vs. tasked to undertake measures to ease traffic congestion in Metro
VIRON TRANSPORTATION CO., INC., respondent. Manila and ensure the convenient and efficient travel of commuters
x --------------------------------------------- x within its jurisdiction;
G.R. No. 170657 August 15, 2007 WHEREAS, a primary cause of traffic congestion in Metro Manila has
HON. ALBERTO G. ROMULO, Executive Secretary, the METROPOLITAN been the numerous buses plying the streets that impedes [sic] the flow
MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and BAYANI FERNANDO as Chairman of vehicles and commuters due to the inefficient connectivity of the
of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority,petitioners, different transport modes;
vs. WHEREAS, the MMDA has recommended a plan to decongest traffic by
MENCORP TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, INC., respondent. eliminating the bus terminals now located along major Metro Manila
D E C I S I O N thoroughfares and providing more convenient access to the mass
CARPIO MORALES, J.: transport system to the commuting public through the provision of mass
The following conditions in 1969, as observed by this Court: transport terminal facilities that would integrate the existing transport
Vehicles have increased in number. Traffic congestion has moved from modes, namely the buses, the rail-based systems of the LRT, MRT and
bad to worse, from tolerable to critical. The number of people who use PNR and to facilitate and ensure efficient travel through the improved
the thoroughfares has multiplied x x x,1 connectivity of the different transport modes;
WHEREAS, the national government must provide the necessary funding f) Enlist the assistance of any national government
requirements to immediately implement and render operational these agency, office or department, including local
projects; and extent to MMDA such other assistance as may be government units, government-owned or controlled
warranted to ensure their expeditious prosecution. corporations, as may be necessary;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, President of g) Assign or hire the necessary personnel for the above
the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by law, do hereby purposes; and
order: h) Perform such other related functions as may be
Section 1. THE PROJECT. The project shall be identified as necessary to enable it to accomplish the objectives and
GREATER MANILA TRANSPORT SYSTEM Project. purposes of this Executive Order.4 (Emphasis in the
Section 2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES. In accordance with the plan original; underscoring supplied)
proposed by MMDA, the project aims to develop four (4) interim As the above-quoted portions of the E.O. noted, the primary cause of traffic
intermodal mass transport terminals to integrate the different congestion in Metro Manila has been the numerous buses plying the streets and
transport modes, as well as those that shall hereafter be developed, to the inefficient connectivity of the different transport modes; 5 and the MMDA
serve the commuting public in the northwest, north, east, south, and had "recommended a plan to decongest traffic by eliminating the bus terminals
southwest of Metro Manila. Initially, the project shall concentrate on now located along major Metro Manila thoroughfares and providing more and
immediately establishing the mass transport terminals for the north and convenient access to the mass transport system to the commuting public through
south Metro Manila commuters as hereinafter described. the provision of mass transport terminal facilities"6 which plan is referred to
Section 3. PROJECT IMPLEMENTING AGENCY. The Metropolitan under the E.O. as the Greater Manila Mass Transport System Project (the
Manila Development Authority (MMDA), is hereby designated as the Project).
implementing Agency for the project. For this purpose, MMDA is The E.O. thus designated the MMDA as the implementing agency for the Project.
directed to undertake such infrastructure development work as may be Pursuant to the E.O., the Metro Manila Council (MMC), the governing board and
necessary and, thereafter, manage the project until it may be turned- policymaking body of the MMDA, issued Resolution No. 03-07 series of
over to more appropriate agencies, if found suitable and convenient. 20037 expressing full support of the Project. Recognizing the imperative to
Specifically, MMDA shall have the following functions and integrate the different transport modes via the establishment of common bus
responsibilities: parking terminal areas, the MMC cited the need to remove the bus terminals
a) Cause the preparation of the Master Plan for the located along major thoroughfares of Metro Manila. 8
projects, including the designs and costing; On February 24, 2003, Viron Transport Co., Inc. (Viron), a domestic corporation
b) Coordinate the use of the land and/or properties engaged in the business of public transportation with a provincial bus
needed for the project with the respective agencies operation,9 filed a petition for declaratory relief10 before the RTC11 of Manila.
and/or entities owning them; In its petition which was docketed as Civil Case No. 03-105850, Viron alleged
c) Supervise and manage the construction of the that the MMDA, through Chairman Fernando, was "poised to issue a Circular,
necessary structures and facilities; Memorandum or Order closing, or tantamount to closing, all provincial bus
d) Execute such contracts or agreements as may be terminals along EDSA and in the whole of the Metropolis under the pretext of
necessary, with the appropriate government agencies, traffic regulation."12 This impending move, it stressed, would mean the closure of
entities, and/or private persons, in accordance with its bus terminal in Sampaloc, Manila and two others in Quezon City.
existing laws and pertinent regulations, to facilitate Alleging that the MMDAs authority does not include the power to direct
the implementation of the project; provincial bus operators to abandon their existing bus terminals to thus deprive
e) Accept, manage and disburse such funds as may be them of the use of their property, Viron asked the court to construe the scope,
necessary for the construction and/or implementation extent and limitation of the power of the MMDA to regulate traffic under R.A.
of the projects, in accordance with prevailing No. 7924, "An Act Creating the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority,
accounting and audit polices and practice in Defining its Powers and Functions, Providing Funds Therefor and For Other
government. Purposes."
Viron also asked for a ruling on whether the planned closure of provincial bus of the MMDA under Section (5)(e) of R.A. No. 7924 does not include the power
terminals would contravene the Public Service Act and related laws which to order the closure of Virons and Mencorps existing bus terminals; and that
mandate public utilities to provide and maintain their own terminals as a requisite the E.O. is inconsistent with the provisions of the Public Service Act.
for the privilege of operating as common carriers. 13 Petitioners motion for reconsideration was denied by Resolution of November
Mencorp Transportation System, Inc. (Mencorp), another provincial bus 23, 2005.
operator, later filed a similar petition for declaratory relief 14 against Executive Hence, this petition, which faults the trial court for failing to rule that: (1) the
Secretary Alberto G. Romulo and MMDA Chairman Fernando. requisites of declaratory relief are not present, there being no justiciable
Mencorp asked the court to declare the E.O. unconstitutional and illegal for controversy in Civil Case Nos. 03-105850 and 03-106224; and (2) the President
transgressing the possessory rights of owners and operators of public land has the authority to undertake or cause the implementation of the Project. 19
transportation units over their respective terminals. Petitioners contend that there is no justiciable controversy in the cases for
Averring that MMDA Chairman Fernando had begun to implement a plan to close declaratory relief as nothing in the body of the E.O. mentions or orders the
and eliminate all provincial bus terminals along EDSA and in the whole of the closure and elimination of bus terminals along the major thoroughfares of Metro
metropolis and to transfer their operations to common bus terminals, 15 Mencorp Manila. Viron and Mencorp, they argue, failed to produce any letter or
prayed for the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or writ of communication from the Executive Department apprising them of an immediate
preliminary injunction to restrain the impending closure of its bus terminals plan to close down their bus terminals.
which it was leasing at the corner of EDSA and New York Street in Cubao and at And petitioners maintain that the E.O. is only an administrative directive to
the intersection of Blumentritt, Laon Laan and Halcon Streets in Quezon City. government agencies to coordinate with the MMDA and to make available for use
The petition was docketed as Civil Case No. 03-106224 and was raffled to government property along EDSA and South Expressway corridors. They add
Branch 47 of the RTC of Manila. that the only relation created by the E.O. is that between the Chief Executive
Mencorps petition was consolidated on June 19, 2003 with Virons petition which and the implementing officials, but not between third persons.
was raffled to Branch 26 of the RTC, Manila. The petition fails.
Mencorps prayer for a TRO and/or writ of injunction was denied as was its It is true, as respondents have pointed out, that the alleged deficiency of the
application for the issuance of a preliminary injunction.16 consolidated petitions to meet the requirement of justiciability was not among
In the Pre-Trial Order17 issued by the trial court, the issues were narrowed the issues defined for resolution in the Pre-Trial Order of January 12, 2004. It
down to whether 1) the MMDAs power to regulate traffic in Metro Manila is equally true, however, that the question was repeatedly raised by petitioners
included the power to direct provincial bus operators to abandon and close their in their Answer to Virons petition,20 their Comment of April 29, 2003 opposing
duly established and existing bus terminals in order to conduct business in a Mencorps prayer for the issuance of a TRO,21 and their Position Paper of August
common terminal; (2) the E.O. is consistent with the Public Service Act and the 23, 2004.22
Constitution; and (3) provincial bus operators would be deprived of their real In bringing their petitions before the trial court, both respondents pleaded the
properties without due process of law should they be required to use the existence of the essential requisites for their respective petitions for
common bus terminals. declaratory relief,23 and refuted petitioners contention that a justiciable
Upon the agreement of the parties, they filed their respective position papers in controversy was lacking.24 There can be no denying, therefore, that the issue was
lieu of hearings. raised and discussed by the parties before the trial court.
By Decision18 of January 24, 2005, the trial court sustained the constitutionality The following are the essential requisites for a declaratory relief petition: (a)
and legality of the E.O. pursuant to R.A. No. 7924, which empowered the MMDA there must be a justiciable controversy; (b) the controversy must be between
to administer Metro Manilas basic services including those of transport and persons whose interests are adverse; (c) the party seeking declaratory relief
traffic management. must have a legal interest in the controversy; and (d) the issue invoked must be
The trial court held that the E.O. was a valid exercise of the police power of the ripe for judicial determination.25
State as it satisfied the two tests of lawful subject matter and lawful means, The requirement of the presence of a justiciable controversy is satisfied when
hence, Virons and Mencorps property rights must yield to police power. an actual controversy or the ripening seeds thereof exist between the parties,
On the separate motions for reconsideration of Viron and Mencorp, the trial all of whom are sui juris and before the court, and the declaration sought will
court, by Order of September 8, 2005, reversed its Decision, this time holding help in ending the controversy.26 A question becomes justiciable when it is
that the E.O. was "an unreasonable exercise of police power"; that the authority translated into a claim of right which is actually contested. 27
In the present cases, respondents resort to court was prompted by the issuance respondents claim a deprivation of their constitutional right to property without
of the E.O. The 4th Whereas clause of the E.O. sets out in clear strokes the due process of law.
MMDAs plan to "decongest traffic by eliminating the bus terminals now located Respondents have thus amply demonstrated a "personal and substantial interest
along major Metro Manila thoroughfares and providing more convenient access to in the case such that [they have] sustained, or will sustain, direct injury as a
the mass transport system to the commuting public through the provision of result of [the E.O.s] enforcement."31 Consequently, the established rule that the
mass transport terminal facilities x x x." (Emphasis supplied) constitutionality of a law or administrative issuance can be challenged by one who
Section 2 of the E.O. thereafter lays down the immediate establishment of will sustain a direct injury as a result of its enforcement has been satisfied by
common bus terminals for north- and south-bound commuters. For this purpose, respondents.
Section 8 directs the Department of Budget and Management to allocate funds On to the merits of the case.
of not more than one hundred million pesos (P100,000,000) to cover the cost of Respondents posit that the MMDA is devoid of authority to order the elimination
the construction of the north and south terminals. And the E.O. was made of their bus terminals under the E.O. which, they argue, is unconstitutional
effective immediately. because it violates both the Constitution and the Public Service Act; and that
The MMDAs resolve to immediately implement the Project, its denials to the neither is the MMDA clothed with such authority under R.A. No. 7924.
contrary notwithstanding, is also evident from telltale circumstances, foremost Petitioners submit, however, that the real issue concerns the Presidents
of which was the passage by the MMC of Resolution No. 03-07, Series of 2003 authority to undertake or to cause the implementation of the Project. They
expressing its full support of the immediate implementation of the Project. assert that the authority of the President is derived from E.O. No. 125,
Notable from the 5th Whereas clause of the MMC Resolution is the plan to "Reorganizing the Ministry of Transportation and Communications Defining its
"remove the bus terminals located along major thoroughfares of Metro Manila Powers and Functions and for Other Purposes," her residual power and/or E.O.
and an urgent need to integrate the different transport modes." The 7th No. 292, otherwise known as the Administrative Code of 1987. They add that the
Whereas clause proceeds to mention the establishment of the North and South E.O. is also a valid exercise of the police power.
terminals. E.O. No. 125,32 which former President Corazon Aquino issued in the exercise of
As alleged in Virons petition, a diagram of the GMA-MTS North Bus/Rail legislative powers, reorganized the then Ministry (now Department) of
Terminal had been drawn up, and construction of the terminal is already in Transportation and Communications. Sections 4, 5, 6 and 22 of E.O. 125, as
progress. The MMDA, in its Answer28 and Position Paper,29 in fact affirmed that amended by E.O. 125-A,33 read:
the government had begun to implement the Project. SECTION 4. Mandate. The Ministry shall be the primary policy,
It thus appears that the issue has already transcended the boundaries of what planning, programming, coordinating, implementing, regulating
is merely conjectural or anticipatory.lawphil and administrative entity of the Executive Branch of the
Under the circumstances, for respondents to wait for the actual issuance by the government in the promotion, development and regulation of
MMDA of an order for the closure of respondents bus terminals would be dependable and coordinated networks of transportation and
foolhardy for, by then, the proper action to bring would no longer be for communication systems as well as in the fast, safe, efficient and reliable
declaratory relief which, under Section 1, Rule 6330 of the Rules of Court, must postal, transportation and communications services.
be brought before there is a breach or violation of rights. To accomplish such mandate, the Ministry shall have the following
As for petitioners contention that the E.O. is a mere administrative issuance objectives:
which creates no relation with third persons, it does not persuade. Suffice it to (a) Promote the development of dependable and
stress that to ensure the success of the Project for which the concerned coordinated networks of transportation and
government agencies are directed to coordinate their activities and resources, communications systems;
the existing bus terminals owned, operated or leased by third persons like (b) Guide government and private investment in
respondents would have to be eliminated; and respondents would be forced to the development of the countrys intermodal
operate from the common bus terminals. transportation and communications systems in a most
It cannot be gainsaid that the E.O. would have an adverse effect on respondents. practical, expeditious, and orderly fashion for
The closure of their bus terminals would mean, among other things, the loss of maximum safety, service, and cost effectiveness;
income from the operation and/or rentals of stalls thereat. Precisely, (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
xxxx
SECTION 5. Powers and Functions. To accomplish its mandate, the As may be seen further, the Minister (now Secretary) of the DOTC is vested
Ministry shall have the following powers and functions: with the authority and responsibility to exercise the mandate given to the
(a) Formulate and recommend national policies and department. Accordingly, the DOTC Secretary is authorized to issue such
guidelines for the preparation and implementation of orders, rules, regulations and other issuances as may be necessary to ensure the
integrated and comprehensive transportation and effective implementation of the law.
communications systems at the national, regional and Since, under the law, the DOTC is authorized to establish and administer
local levels; programs and projects for transportation, it follows that the President may
(b) Establish and administer comprehensive and exercise the same power and authority to order the implementation of the
integrated programs for transportation and Project, which admittedly is one for transportation.
communications, and for this purpose, may call on any Such authority springs from the Presidents power of control over all executive
agency, corporation, or organization, whether public or departments as well as the obligation for the faithful execution of the laws
private, whose development programs include under Article VII, Section 17 of the Constitution which provides:
transportation and communications as an integral part SECTION 17. The President shall have control of all the executive
thereof, to participate and assist in the preparation departments, bureaus and offices. He shall ensure that the laws be
and implementation of such program; faithfully executed.
(c) Assess, review and provide direction to This constitutional provision is echoed in Section 1, Book III of the
transportation and communications research and Administrative Code of 1987. Notably, Section 38, Chapter 37, Book IV of the
development programs of the government in same Code defines the Presidents power of supervision and control over the
coordination with other institutions concerned; executive departments, viz:
(d) Administer all laws, rules and regulations in the SECTION 38. Definition of Administrative Relationships. Unless
field of transportation and communications; otherwise expressly stated in the Code or in other laws defining the
(Emphasis and underscoring supplied) special relationships of particular agencies, administrative relationships
xxxx shall be categorized and defined as follows:
SECTION 6. Authority and Responsibility. The authority and (1) Supervision and Control. Supervision and control shall include
responsibility for the exercise of the mandate of the Ministry and authority to act directly whenever a specific function is entrusted
for the discharge of its powers and functions shall be vested in the by law or regulation to a subordinate; direct the performance of duty;
Minister of Transportation and Communications, hereinafter referred restrain the commission of acts; review, approve, reverse or modify acts
to as the Minister, who shall have supervision and control over the and decisions of subordinate officials or units; determine priorities in
Ministry and shall be appointed by the President. (Emphasis and the execution of plans and programs. Unless a different meaning is
underscoring supplied) explicitly provided in the specific law governing the relationship of
SECTION 22. Implementing Authority of Minister. The Minister particular agencies the word "control" shall encompass supervision and
shall issue such orders, rules, regulations and other issuances as control as defined in this paragraph. x x x (Emphasis and underscoring
may be necessary to ensure the effective implementation of the supplied)
provisions of this Executive Order. (Emphasis and underscoring Thus, whenever a specific function is entrusted by law or regulation to a
supplied) subordinate, the President may act directly or merely direct the performance of
It is readily apparent from the abovequoted provisions of E.O. No. 125, as a duty.34
amended, that the President, then possessed of and exercising legislative Respecting the Presidents authority to order the implementation of the Project
powers, mandated the DOTC to be the primary policy, planning, programming, in the exercise of the police power of the State, suffice it to stress that the
coordinating, implementing, regulating and administrative entity to promote, powers vested in the DOTC Secretary to establish and administer comprehensive
develop and regulate networks of transportation and communications. The grant and integrated programs for transportation and communications and to issue
of authority to the DOTC includes the power orders, rules and regulations to implement such mandate (which, as previously
to establish and administer comprehensive and integrated programs for discussed, may also be exercised by the President) have been so delegated for
transportation and communications.
the good and welfare of the people. Hence, these powers partake of the nature Metropolitan Manila, consistent with national development
of police power. objectives and priorities;
Police power is the plenary power vested in the legislature to make, ordain, and (b) Prepare, coordinate and regulate the implementation of
establish wholesome and reasonable laws, statutes and ordinances, not repugnant medium-term investment programs for metro-wide services
to the Constitution, for the good and welfare of the people. 35 This power to which shall indicate sources and uses of funds for priority
prescribe regulations to promote the health, morals, education, good order or programs and projects, and which shall include the packaging of
safety, and general welfare of the people flows from the recognition that salus projects and presentation to funding institutions;
populi est suprema lex the welfare of the people is the supreme law. (c) Undertake and manage on its own metro-wide programs and
While police power rests primarily with the legislature, such power may be projects for the delivery of specific services under its
delegated, as it is in fact increasingly being delegated.36 By virtue of a valid jurisdiction, subject to the approval of the Council. For this
delegation, the power may be exercised by the President and administrative purpose, MMDA can create appropriate project management
boards37 as well as by the lawmaking bodies of municipal corporations or local offices;
governments under an express delegation by the Local Government Code of (d) Coordinate and monitor the implementation of such plans,
1991.38 programs and projects in Metro Manila; identify bottlenecks
The authority of the President to order the implementation of the Project and adopt solutions to problems of implementation;
notwithstanding, the designation of the MMDA as the implementing agency for (e) The MMDA shall set the policies concerning traffic in
the Project may not be sustained. It is ultra vires, there being no legal basis Metro Manila, and shall coordinate and regulate the
therefor. implementation of all programs and projects concerning
It bears stressing that under the provisions of E.O. No. 125, as amended, it is traffic management, specifically pertaining to enforcement,
the DOTC, and not the MMDA, which is authorized to establish and implement a engineering and education. Upon request, it shall be extended
project such as the one subject of the cases at bar. Thus, the President, assistance and cooperation, including but not limited to,
although authorized to establish or cause the implementation of the Project, assignment of personnel, by all other government agencies and
must exercise the authority through the instrumentality of the DOTC which, by offices concerned;
law, is the primary implementing and administrative entity in the promotion, (f) Install and administer a single ticketing system, fix,
development and regulation of networks of transportation, and the one so impose and collect fines and penalties for all kinds of
authorized to establish and implement a project such as the Project in question. violations of traffic rules and regulations , whether moving or
By designating the MMDA as the implementing agency of the Project, the non-moving in nature, and confiscate and suspend or revoke
President clearly overstepped the limits of the authority conferred by law, drivers licenses in the enforcement of such traffic laws and
rendering E.O. No. 179 ultra vires. regulations, the provisions of RA 4136 and PD 1605 to the
In another vein, the validity of the designation of MMDA flies in the absence of contrary notwithstanding. For this purpose, the Authority shall
a specific grant of authority to it under R.A. No. 7924. impose all traffic laws and regulations in Metro Manila, through
To recall, R.A. No. 7924 declared the Metropolitan Manila area 39 as a "special its traffic operation center, and may deputize members of the
development and administrative region" and placed the administration of "metro- PNP, traffic enforcers of local government units, duly licensed
wide" basic services affecting the region under the MMDA. security guards, or members of non-governmental organizations
Section 2 of R.A. No. 7924 specifically authorizes the MMDA to perform to whom may be delegated certain authority, subject to such
"planning, monitoring and coordinative functions, and in the process exercise conditions and requirements as the Authority may impose; and
regulatory and supervisory authority over the delivery of metro-wide services," (g) Perform other related functions required to achieve the
including transport and traffic management.40 Section 5 of the same law objectives of the MMDA, including the undertaking of delivery
enumerates the powers and functions of the MMDA as follows: of basic services to the local government units, when deemed
(a) Formulate, coordinate and regulate the implementation of necessary subject to prior coordination with and consent of the
medium and long-term plans and programs for the delivery of local government unit concerned." (Emphasis and underscoring
metro-wide services, land use and physical development within supplied)
The scope of the function of MMDA as an administrative, coordinating and of the autonomy of the local government units concerning purely
policy-setting body has been settled in Metropolitan Manila Development local matters.42 (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
Authority (MMDA) v. Bel-Air Village Association, Inc.41 In that case, the Court In light of the administrative nature of its powers and functions, the MMDA is
stressed: devoid of authority to implement the Project as envisioned by the E.O; hence, it
Clearly, the scope of the MMDAs function is limited to the delivery of could not have been validly designated by the President to undertake the
the seven (7) basic services. One of these is transport and traffic Project. It follows that the MMDA cannot validly order the elimination of
management which includes the formulation and monitoring of policies, respondents terminals.
standards and projects to rationalize the existing transport operations, Even the MMDAs claimed authority under the police power must necessarily fail
infrastructure requirements, the use of thoroughfares and promotion of in consonance with the above-quoted ruling in MMDA v. Bel-Air Village
the safe movement of persons and goods. It also covers the mass Association, Inc. and this Courts subsequent ruling in Metropolitan Manila
transport system and the institution of a system of road regulation, the Development Authority v. Garin43 that the MMDA is not vested with police
administration of all traffic enforcement operations, traffic engineering power.
services and traffic education programs, including the institution of a Even assuming arguendo that police power was delegated to the MMDA, its
single ticketing system in Metro Manila for traffic violations. Under this exercise of such power does not satisfy the two tests of a valid police power
service, the MMDA is expressly authorized to "to set the policies measure, viz: (1) the interest of the public generally, as distinguished from that
concerning traffic" and "coordinate and regulate the implementation of of a particular class, requires its exercise; and (2) the means employed are
all traffic management programs." In addition, the MMDA may install reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly
and administer a single ticketing system," fix, impose and collect fines oppressive upon individuals.44 Stated differently, the police power legislation
and penalties for all traffic violations. must be firmly grounded on public interest and welfare and a reasonable relation
It will be noted that the powers of the MMDA are limited to the must exist between the purposes and the means.
following acts: formulation, coordination, regulation, implementation, As early as Calalang v. Williams,45 this Court recognized that traffic congestion
preparation, management, monitoring, setting of policies, installation of is a public, not merely a private, concern. The Court therein held that public
a system and administration. There is no syllable in R.A. No. 7924 that welfare underlies the contested statute authorizing the Director of Public
grants the MMDA police power, let alone legislative power. Even the Works to promulgate rules and regulations to regulate and control traffic on
Metro Manila Council has not been delegated any legislative national roads.
power. Unlike the legislative bodies of the local government Likewise, in Luque v. Villegas,46 this Court emphasized that public welfare lies at
units, there is no provision in R.A. No. 7924 that empowers the the bottom of any regulatory measure designed "to relieve congestion of traffic,
MMDA or its Council to enact ordinances, approve resolutions and which is, to say the least, a menace to public safety."47 As such, measures
appropriate funds for the general welfare of the inhabitants of calculated to promote the safety and convenience of the people using the
Metro Manila. The MMDA is, as termed in the charter itself, a thoroughfares by the regulation of vehicular traffic present a proper subject
development authority. It is an agency created for the purpose of for the exercise of police power.
laying down policies and coordinating with the various national Notably, the parties herein concede that traffic congestion is a public concern
government agencies, peoples organizations, non-governmental that needs to be addressed immediately. Indeed, the E.O. was issued due to the
organizations and the private sector for the efficient and felt need to address the worsening traffic congestion in Metro Manila which, the
expeditious delivery of basic services in the vast metropolitan MMDA so determined, is caused by the increasing volume of buses plying the
area. All its functions are administrative in nature and these are major thoroughfares and the inefficient connectivity of existing transport
actually summed up in the charter itself, viz: systems. It is thus beyond cavil that the motivating force behind the issuance of
SECTION 2. Creation of the Metropolitan Manila Development the E.O. is the interest of the public in general.
Authority. . . . Are the means employed appropriate and reasonably necessary for the
The MMDA shall perform planning, monitoring and accomplishment of the purpose. Are they not duly oppressive?
coordinative functions, and in the process exercise With the avowed objective of decongesting traffic in Metro Manila, the E.O.
regulatory and supervisory authority over the delivery of seeks to "eliminate[e] the bus terminals now located along major Metro Manila
metro-wide services within Metro Manila, without diminution thoroughfares and provid[e] more convenient access to the mass transport
system to the commuting public through the provision of mass transport terminal which might be able to provide facilities better than the franchised
facilities x x x."48Common carriers with terminals along the major thoroughfares terminal are barred from operating at all. (Emphasis and underscoring
of Metro Manila would thus be compelled to close down their existing bus supplied)
terminals and use the MMDA-designated common parking areas. As in Lucena, this Court fails to see how the prohibition against the existence of
In Lucena Grand Central Terminal, Inc. v. JAC Liner, Inc.,49 two city ordinances respondents terminals can be considered a reasonable necessity to ease traffic
were passed by the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Lucena, directing public utility congestion in the metropolis. On the contrary, the elimination of respondents
vehicles to unload and load passengers at the Lucena Grand Central Terminal, bus terminals brings forth the distinct possibility and the equally harrowing
which was given the exclusive franchise to operate a single common terminal. reality of traffic congestion in the common parking areas, a case of transference
Declaring that no other terminals shall be situated, constructed, maintained or from one site to another.
established inside or within the city of Lucena, the sanggunian declared as Less intrusive measures such as curbing the proliferation of "colorum" buses,
inoperable all temporary terminals therein. vans and taxis entering Metro Manila and using the streets for parking and
The ordinances were challenged before this Court for being unconstitutional on passenger pick-up points, as respondents suggest, might even be more effective
the ground that, inter alia, the measures constituted an invalid exercise of police in easing the traffic situation. So would the strict enforcement of traffic rules
power, an undue taking of private property, and a violation of the constitutional and the removal of obstructions from major thoroughfares.
prohibition against monopolies. As to the alleged confiscatory character of the E.O., it need only to be stated
Citing De la Cruz v. Paras50 and Lupangco v. Court of Appeals,51 this Court held that respondents certificates of public convenience confer no property right,
that the assailed ordinances were characterized by overbreadth, as they went and are mere licenses or privileges.52 As such, these must yield to legislation
beyond what was reasonably necessary to solve the traffic problem in the city. safeguarding the interest of the people.
And it found that the compulsory use of the Lucena Grand Terminal was unduly Even then, for reasons which bear reiteration, the MMDA cannot order the
oppressive because it would subject its users to fees, rentals and charges. closure of respondents terminals not only because no authority to implement the
The true role of Constitutional Law is to effect an equilibrium between Project has been granted nor legislative or police power been delegated to it, but
authority and liberty so that rights are exercised within the framework also because the elimination of the terminals does not satisfy the standards of a
of the law and the laws are enacted with due deference to rights. valid police power measure.
A due deference to the rights of the individual thus requires a more Finally, an order for the closure of respondents terminals is not in line with the
careful formulation of solutions to societal problems. provisions of the Public Service Act.
From the memorandum filed before this Court by petitioner, it is Paragraph (a), Section 13 of Chapter II of the Public Service Act (now Section 5
gathered that the Sangguniang Panlungsod had identified the cause of of Executive Order No. 202, creating the Land Transportation Franchising and
traffic congestion to be the indiscriminate loading and unloading of Regulatory Board or LFTRB) vested the Public Service Commission (PSC, now the
passengers by buses on the streets of the city proper, hence, the LTFRB) with "x x x jurisdiction, supervision and control over all public services
conclusion that the terminals contributed to the proliferation of buses and their franchises, equipment and other properties x x x."
obstructing traffic on the city streets. Consonant with such grant of authority, the PSC was empowered to "impose such
Bus terminals per se do not, however, impede or help impede the flow of conditions as to construction, equipment, maintenance, service, or operation
traffic. How the outright proscription against the existence of all as the public interests and convenience may reasonably require" 53 in approving
terminals, apart from that franchised to petitioner, can be any franchise or privilege.
considered as reasonably necessary to solve the traffic Further, Section 16 (g) and (h) of the Public Service Act54 provided that the
problem, this Court has not been enlightened. If terminals lack Commission shall have the power, upon proper notice and hearing in accordance
adequate space such that bus drivers are compelled to load and unload with the rules and provisions of this Act, subject to the limitations and
passengers on the streets instead of inside the terminals, then exceptions mentioned and saving provisions to the contrary:
reasonable specifications for the size of terminals could be instituted, (g) To compel any public service to furnish safe, adequate, and proper
with permits to operate the same denied those which are unable to meet service as regards the manner of furnishing the same as well as the
the specifications. maintenance of the necessary material and equipment.
In the subject ordinances, however, the scope of the proscription (h) To require any public service to establish, construct, maintain, and
against the maintenance of terminals is so broad that even entities operate any reasonable extension of its existing facilities, where in
the judgment of said Commission, such extension is reasonable and AZCUNA,
practicable and will furnish sufficient business to justify the TINGA,
construction and maintenance of the same and when the financial CHICO-NAZARIO,
condition of the said public service reasonably warrants the original GARCIA, and
expenditure required in making and operating such extension.(Emphasis VELASCO, JJ.
and underscoring supplied) HON. BAYANI F. FERNANDO,
The establishment, as well as the maintenance of vehicle parking areas or in his capacity as Chairman of the
passenger terminals, is generally considered a necessary service to be provided Metropolitan Manila Development
by provincial bus operators like respondents, hence, the investments they have Authority, and METROPOLITAN
poured into the acquisition or lease of suitable terminal sites. Eliminating the MANILA DEVELOPMENT Promulgated:
terminals would thus run counter to the provisions of the Public Service Act. AUTHORITY,
This Court commiserates with the MMDA for the roadblocks thrown in the way Respondents. November 16, 2006
of its efforts at solving the pestering problem of traffic congestion in Metro x--------------------------------------------------x
Manila. These efforts are commendable, to say the least, in the face of the
abominable traffic situation of our roads day in and day out. This Court can only
interpret, not change, the law, however. It needs only to be reiterated that it is R E S O L U T I O N
the DOTC as the primary policy, planning, programming, coordinating,
implementing, regulating and administrative entity to promote, develop and
regulate networks of transportation and communications which has the power CARPIO, J.:
to establish and administer a transportation project like the Project subject
of the case at bar. Petitioner Ernesto B. Francisco, Jr. (petitioner), as member of the Integrated
No matter how noble the intentions of the MMDA may be then, any plan, Bar of the Philippines and taxpayer, filed this original action for the issuance of
strategy or project which it is not authorized to implement cannot pass muster. the writs of Prohibition and Mandamus. Petitioner prays for the Prohibition writ
WHEREFORE, the Petition is, in light of the foregoing disquisition, DENIED. to enjoin respondents Bayani F. Fernando, Chairman of the Metropolitan Manila
E.O. No. 179 is declared NULL and VOID for being ultra vires. Development Authority (MMDA) and the MMDA (respondents) from further
SO ORDERED. implementing its wet flag scheme (Flag Scheme). [1] The Mandamus writ is to
EN BANC compel respondents to respect and uphold the x x x rights of pedestrians to due
process x x x and equal protection of the laws x x x.
ERNESTO B. FRANCISCO, JR., G.R. No. 166501 Petitioner contends that the Flag Scheme: (1) has no legal basis because
Petitioner, the MMDAs governing body, the Metro Manila Council, did not authorize it; (2)
Present: violates the Due Process Clause because it is a summary punishment for
jaywalking; (3) disregards the Constitutional protection against cruel, degrading,
PANGANIBAN, C.J., and inhuman punishment; and (4) violates pedestrian rights as it exposes
PUNO, pedestrians to various potential hazards.[2]
QUISUMBING, In their Comment, respondents sought the dismissal of the petition for
YNARES-SANTIAGO, petitioners lack of standing to litigate and for violation of the doctrine of
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, hierarchy of courts. Alternatively, respondents contended that the Flag Scheme
- versus - CARPIO, is a valid preventive measure against jaywalking.
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ,
CORONA, Petitioner filed a Reply, claiming that the Court should take cognizance of the
CARPIO MORALES, case as it raises issues of paramount and transcendental importance. Petitioner
CALLEJO, SR., also contended that he filed this petition directly with the Court because the
issues raised in the petition deserve the direct x x x intervention of the x x x unrestrained freedom of choice of forum from which to seek such relief.[10] We
[C]ourt x x x. relax this rule only in exceptional and compelling circumstances. [11] This is not the
case here.
We dismiss the petition.
WHEREFORE, we DISMISS the petition.
A citizen can raise a constitutional question only when (1) he can show that he SO ORDERED.
has personally suffered some actual or threatened injury because of the
allegedly illegal conduct of the government; (2) the injury is fairly traceable to
the challenged action; and (3) a favorable action will likely redress the injury. Republic of the Philippines
[3]
On the other hand, a party suing as a taxpayer must specifically show that he SUPREME COURT
has a sufficient interest in preventing the illegal expenditure of money raised by Manila
taxation and that he will sustain a direct injury as a result of the enforcement of
the questioned statute.[4] Petitioner meets none of the requirements under EN BANC
either category.
G.R. No. 89651 November 10, 1989
Nor is there merit to petitioners claim that the Court should relax the standing
requirement because of the transcendental importance of the issues the petition
DATU FIRDAUSI I.Y. ABBAS, DATU BLO UMPAR ADIONG, DATU
raises. As an exception to the standing requirement, the transcendental
MACALIMPOWAC DELANGALEN, CELSO PALMA, ALI MONTANA BABAO,
importance of the issues raised relates to the merits of the petition. [5] Thus, the
JULMUNIR JANNARAL, RASHID SABER, and DATU JAMAL ASHLEY
party invoking it must show, among others, the presence of a clear disregard of a
ABBAS, representing the other taxpayers of Mindanao, petitioners,
constitutional or statutory prohibition.[6]Petitioner has not shown such clear
vs.
constitutional or statutory violation.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, and HONORABLE GUILLERMO C.
CARAGUE, DEPARTMENT SECRETARY OF BUDGET AND
On the Flag Schemes alleged lack of legal basis, we note that all the cities and
MANAGEMENT, respondents.
municipalities within the MMDAs jurisdiction, [7] except Valenzuela City, have
each enacted anti-jaywalking ordinances or traffic management codes with
G.R. No. 89965 November 10, 1989
provisions for pedestrian regulation. Such fact serves as sufficient basis for
respondents implementation of schemes, or ways and means, to enforce the anti-
jaywalking ordinances and similar regulations. After all, the MMDA is an ATTY. ABDULLAH D. MAMA-O, petitioner,
administrative agency tasked with the implementation of rules and regulations vs.
enacted by proper authorities.[8] The absence of an anti-jaywalking ordinance HON. GUILLERMO CARAGUE, in his capacity as the Secretary of the
in Valenzuela Citydoes not detract from this conclusion absent any proof that Budget, and the COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondents.
respondents implemented the Flag Scheme in that city.
Further, the petition ultimately calls for a factual determination of whether the Abbas, Abbas, Amora, Alejandro-Abbas & Associates for petitioners in G.R. Nos.
Flag Scheme is a reasonable enforcement of anti-jaywalking ordinances and 89651 and 89965.
similar enactments. This Court is not a trier of facts. [9] The petition proffers
mere surmises and speculations on the potential hazards of the Flag Abdullah D. Mama-o for and in his own behalf in 89965.
Scheme. This Court cannot determine the reasonableness of the Flag Scheme
based on mere surmises and speculations.
Lastly, petitioner violated the doctrine of hierarchy of courts when he filed this
petition directly with us. This Courts jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari, CORTES, J.:
prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus, while concurrent with
the Regional Trial Courts and the Court of Appeals, does not give litigants
The present controversy relates to the plebiscite in thirteen (13) provinces and To effectuate this mandate, the Constitution further provides:
nine (9) cities in Mindanao and Palawan, 1 scheduled for November 19, 1989, in
implementation of Republic Act No. 6734, entitled "An Act Providing for an Sec. 16. The President shall exercise general supervision over
Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao." autonomous regions to ensure that the laws are faithfully
executed.
These consolidated petitions pray that the Court: (1) enjoin the Commission on
Elections (COMELEC) from conducting the plebiscite and the Secretary of Sec. 17. All powers, functions, and responsibilities not granted
Budget and Management from releasing funds to the COMELEC for that purpose; by this Constitution or by law to the autonomous regions shall
and (2) declare R.A. No. 6734, or parts thereof, unconstitutional . be vested in the National Government.
After a consolidated comment was filed by Solicitor General for the Sec. 18. The Congress shall enact an organic act for each
respondents, which the Court considered as the answer, the case was deemed autonomous region with the assistance and participation of the
submitted for decision, the issues having been joined. Subsequently, petitioner regional consultative commission composed of representatives
Mama-o filed a "Manifestation with Motion for Leave to File Reply on appointed by the President from a list of nominees from
Respondents' Comment and to Open Oral Arguments," which the Court noted. multisectoral bodies. The organic act shall define the basic
structure of government for the region consisting of the
The arguments against R.A. 6734 raised by petitioners may generally be executive and representative of the constituent political units.
categorized into either of the following: The organic acts shall likewise provide for special courts with
personal, family, and property law jurisdiction consistent with
(a) that R.A. 6734, or parts thereof, violates the Constitution, and the provisions of this Constitution and national laws.
(b) that certain provisions of R.A. No. 6734 conflict with the Tripoli Agreement. The creation of the autonomous region shall be effective when
approved by majority of the votes cast by the constituent units
The Tripoli Agreement, more specifically, the Agreement Between the in a plebiscite called for the purpose, provided that only the
government of the Republic of the Philippines of the Philippines and Moro provinces, cities, and geographic areas voting favorably in such
National Liberation Front with the Participation of the Quadripartie Ministerial plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous region.
Commission Members of the Islamic Conference and the Secretary General of
the Organization of Islamic Conference" took effect on December 23, 1976. It Sec. 19 The first Congress elected under this Constitution
provided for "[t]he establishment of Autonomy in the southern Philippines within shall, within eighteen months from the time of organization of
the realm of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of the both Houses, pass the organic acts for the autonomous regions
Philippines" and enumerated the thirteen (13) provinces comprising the "areas of in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras.
autonomy." 2
Sec. 20. Within its territorial jurisdiction and subject to the
In 1987, a new Constitution was ratified, which the for the first time provided provisions of this Constitution and national laws, the organic act
for regional autonomy, Article X, section 15 of the charter provides that of autonomous regions shall provide for legislative powers over:
"[t]here shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in the
Cordilleras consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas (1) Administrative organization;
sharing common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and
social structures, and other relevant characteristics within the framework of (2) Creation of sources of revenues;
this Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of
the Republic of the Philippines." (3) Ancestral domain and natural resources;
(4) Personal, family, and property relations; region in Muslim Mindanao. The standard for any inquiry into the validity of R.A.
No. 6734 would therefore be what is so provided in the Constitution. Thus, any
(5) Regional urban and rural planning conflict between the provisions of R.A. No. 6734 and the provisions of the
development; Tripoli Agreement will not have the effect of enjoining the implementation of
the Organic Act. Assuming for the sake of argument that the Tripoli Agreement
(6) Economic, social and tourism development; is a binding treaty or international agreement, it would then constitute part of
the law of the land. But as internal law it would not be superior to R.A. No. 6734,
(7) Educational policies; an enactment of the Congress of the Philippines, rather it would be in the same
class as the latter [SALONGA, PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 320 (4th ed.,
1974), citing Head Money Cases, 112 U.S. 580 (1884) and Foster v. Nelson, 2 Pet.
(8) Preservation and development of the
253 (1829)]. Thus, if at all, R.A. No. 6734 would be amendatory of the Tripoli
cultural heritage; and
Agreement, being a subsequent law. Only a determination by this Court that R.A.
No. 6734 contravened the Constitution would result in the granting of the reliefs
(9) Such other matters as may be authorized
sought. 3
by law for the promotion of the general
welfare of the people of the region.
2. The Court shall therefore only pass upon the constitutional questions which
have been raised by petitioners.
Sec. 21. The preservation of peace and order within the regions
shall be the responsibility of the local police agencies which
Petitioner Abbas argues that R.A. No. 6734 unconditionally creates an
shall be organized, maintained, supervised, and utilized in
autonomous region in Mindanao, contrary to the aforequoted provisions of the
accordance with applicable laws. The defense and security of
Constitution on the autonomous region which make the creation of such region
the region shall be the responsibility of the National
dependent upon the outcome of the plebiscite.
Government.
In support of his argument, petitioner cites Article II, section 1(1) of R.A. No.
Pursuant to the constitutional mandate, R.A. No. 6734 was enacted and signed
6734 which declares that "[t]here is hereby created the Autonomous Region in
into law on August 1, 1989.
Muslim Mindanao, to be composed of provinces and cities voting favorably in the
plebiscite called for the purpose, in accordance with Section 18, Article X of the
1. The Court shall dispose first of the second category of arguments raised by
Constitution." Petitioner contends that the tenor of the above provision makes
petitioners, i.e. that certain provisions of R.A. No. 6734 conflict with the
the creation of an autonomous region absolute, such that even if only two
provisions of the Tripoli Agreement.
provinces vote in favor of autonomy, an autonomous region would still be created
composed of the two provinces where the favorable votes were obtained.
Petitioners premise their arguments on the assumption that the Tripoli
Agreement is part of the law of the land, being a binding international agreement
The matter of the creation of the autonomous region and its composition needs
. The Solicitor General asserts that the Tripoli Agreement is neither a binding
to be clarified.
treaty, not having been entered into by the Republic of the Philippines with a
sovereign state and ratified according to the provisions of the 1973 or 1987
Firs, the questioned provision itself in R.A. No. 6734 refers to Section 18,
Constitutions, nor a binding international agreement.
Article X of the Constitution which sets forth the conditions necessary for the
creation of the autonomous region. The reference to the constitutional provision
We find it neither necessary nor determinative of the case to rule on the nature
cannot be glossed over for it clearly indicates that the creation of the
of the Tripoli Agreement and its binding effect on the Philippine Government
autonomous region shall take place only in accord with the constitutional
whether under public international or internal Philippine law. In the first place, it
requirements. Second, there is a specific provision in the Transitory Provisions
is now the Constitution itself that provides for the creation of an autonomous
(Article XIX) of the Organic Act, which incorporates substantially the same immediately upon its ratification by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite
requirements embodied in the Constitution and fills in the details, thus: held for the purpose ... Comparing this with the provision on the creation of the
autonomous region, which reads:
SEC. 13. The creation of the Autonomous Region in Muslim
Mindanao shall take effect when approved by a majority of the The creation of the autonomous region shall be effective when
votes cast by the constituent units provided in paragraph (2) of approved by majority of the votes cast by the constituent units
Sec. 1 of Article II of this Act in a plebiscite which shall be in a plebiscite called for the purpose, provided that only
held not earlier than ninety (90) days or later than one hundred provinces, cities and geographic areas voting favorably in such
twenty (120) days after the approval of this plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous region. [Art. X,
Act: Provided, That only the provinces and cities voting sec, 18, para, 2].
favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the Autonomous
Region in Muslim Mindanao. The provinces and cities which in it will readily be seen that the creation of the autonomous region is made to
the plebiscite do not vote for inclusion in the Autonomous depend, not on the total majority vote in the plebiscite, but on the will of the
Region shall remain the existing administrative determination, majority in each of the constituent units and the proviso underscores this. for if
merge the existing regions. the intention of the framers of the Constitution was to get the majority of the
totality of the votes cast, they could have simply adopted the same phraseology
Thus, under the Constitution and R.A. No 6734, the creation of the autonomous as that used for the ratification of the Constitution, i.e. "the creation of the
region shall take effect only when approved by a majority of the votes cast by autonomous region shall be effective when approved by a majority of the votes
the constituent units in a plebiscite, and only those provinces and cities where a cast in a plebiscite called for the purpose."
majority vote in favor of the Organic Act shall be included in the autonomous
region. The provinces and cities wherein such a majority is not attained shall not It is thus clear that what is required by the Constitution is a simple majority of
be included in the autonomous region. It may be that even if an autonomous votes approving the organic Act in individual constituent units and not a double
region is created, not all of the thirteen (13) provinces and nine (9) cities majority of the votes in all constituent units put together, as well as in the
mentioned in Article II, section 1 (2) of R.A. No. 6734 shall be included therein. individual constituent units.
The single plebiscite contemplated by the Constitution and R.A. No. 6734 will
therefore be determinative of (1) whether there shall be an autonomous region More importantly, because of its categorical language, this is also the sense in
in Muslim Mindanao and (2) which provinces and cities, among those enumerated which the vote requirement in the plebiscite provided under Article X, section 18
in R.A. No. 6734, shall compromise it. [See III RECORD OF THE must have been understood by the people when they ratified the Constitution.
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION 482-492 (1986)].
Invoking the earlier cited constitutional provisions, petitioner Mama-o, on the
As provided in the Constitution, the creation of the Autonomous region in Muslim other hand, maintains that only those areas which, to his view, share common and
Mindanao is made effective upon the approval "by majority of the votes cast by distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and
the constituent units in a plebiscite called for the purpose" [Art. X, sec. 18]. The other relevant characteristics should be properly included within the coverage
question has been raised as to what this majority means. Does it refer to a of the autonomous region. He insists that R.A. No. 6734 is unconstitutional
majority of the total votes cast in the plebiscite in all the constituent units, or a because only the provinces of Basilan, Sulu, Tawi-Tawi, Lanao del Sur, Lanao del
majority in each of the constituent units, or both? Norte and Maguindanao and the cities of Marawi and Cotabato, and not all of the
thirteen (13) provinces and nine (9) cities included in the Organic Act, possess
We need not go beyond the Constitution to resolve this question. such concurrence in historical and cultural heritage and other relevant
characteristics. By including areas which do not strictly share the same
If the framers of the Constitution intended to require approval by a majority of characteristics. By including areas which do not strictly share the same
all the votes cast in the plebiscite they would have so indicated. Thus, in Article characteristic as the others, petitioner claims that Congress has expanded the
XVIII, section 27, it is provided that "[t]his Constitution shall take effect
scope of the autonomous region which the constitution itself has prescribed to should there be any conflict between the Muslim Code [P.D. No. 1083] and the
be limited. Tribal Code (still be enacted) on the one had, and the national law on the other
hand, the Shari'ah courts created under the same Act should apply national law.
Petitioner's argument is not tenable. The Constitution lays down the standards Petitioners maintain that the islamic law (Shari'ah) is derived from the Koran,
by which Congress shall determine which areas should constitute the autonomous which makes it part of divine law. Thus it may not be subjected to any "man-
region. Guided by these constitutional criteria, the ascertainment by Congress of made" national law. Petitioner Abbas supports this objection by enumerating
the areas that share common attributes is within the exclusive realm of the possible instances of conflict between provisions of the Muslim Code and national
legislature's discretion. Any review of this ascertainment would have to go into law, wherein an application of national law might be offensive to a Muslim's
the wisdom of the law. This the Court cannot do without doing violence to the religious convictions.
separation of governmental powers. [Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil 139
(1936); Morfe v. Mutuc, G.R. No. L-20387, January 31, 1968, 22 SCRA 424]. As enshrined in the Constitution, judicial power includes the duty to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable.
After assailing the inclusion of non-Muslim areas in the Organic Act for lack of [Art. VIII, Sec. 11. As a condition precedent for the power to be exercised, an
basis, petitioner Mama-o would then adopt the extreme view that other non- actual controversy between litigants must first exist [Angara v. Electoral
Muslim areas in Mindanao should likewise be covered. He argues that since the Commission, supra; Tan v. Macapagal, G.R. No. L-34161, February 29, 1972, 43
Organic Act covers several non-Muslim areas, its scope should be further SCRA 677]. In the present case, no actual controversy between real litigants
broadened to include the rest of the non-Muslim areas in Mindanao in order for exists. There are no conflicting claims involving the application of national law
the other non-Muslim areas denies said areas equal protection of the law, and resulting in an alleged violation of religious freedom. This being so, the Court in
therefore is violative of the Constitution. this case may not be called upon to resolve what is merely a perceived potential
conflict between the provisions the Muslim Code and national law.
Petitioner's contention runs counter to the very same constitutional provision he
had earlier invoked. Any determination by Congress of what areas in Mindanao Petitioners also impugn the constitutionality of Article XIX, section 13 of R.A.
should compromise the autonomous region, taking into account shared historical No. 6734 which, among others, states:
and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and other relevant
characteristics, would necessarily carry with it the exclusion of other areas. As . . . Provided, That only the provinces and cities voting favorably
earlier stated, such determination by Congress of which areas should be covered in such plebiscite shall be included in the Autonomous Region in
by the organic act for the autonomous region constitutes a recognized legislative Muslim Mindanao. The provinces and cities which in the
prerogative, whose wisdom may not be inquired into by this Court. plebiscite do not vote for inclusion in the Autonomous Region
shall remain in the existing administrative regions: Provided,
Moreover, equal protection permits of reasonable classification [People v. Vera, however, that the President may, by administrative
65 Phil. 56 (1963); Laurel v. Misa, 76 Phil. 372 (1946); J.M. Tuason and Co. v. Land determination, merge the existing regions.
tenure Administration, G.R. No. L-21064, February 18, 1970, 31 SCRA 413].
In Dumlao v. Commission on Elections G.R. No. 52245, January 22, 1980, 95 SCRA According to petitioners, said provision grants the President the power to merge
392], the Court ruled that once class may be treated differently from another regions, a power which is not conferred by the Constitution upon the President.
where the groupings are based on reasonable and real distinctions. The That the President may choose to merge existing regions pursuant to the
guarantee of equal protection is thus not infringed in this case, the classification Organic Act is challenged as being in conflict with Article X, Section 10 of the
having been made by Congress on the basis of substantial distinctions as set Constitution which provides:
forth by the Constitution itself.
No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created,
Both petitions also question the validity of R.A. No. 6734 on the ground that it divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary substantially
violates the constitutional guarantee on free exercise of religion [Art. III, sec. altered, except in accordance with the criteria established in
5]. The objection centers on a provision in the Organic Act which mandates that the local government code and subject to approval by a majority
of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly Under the constitution, the creation of the autonomous region hinges only on the
affected. result of the plebiscite. if the Organic Act is approved by majority of the votes
cast by constituent units in the scheduled plebiscite, the creation of the
It must be pointed out that what is referred to in R.A. No. 6734 is the merger autonomous region immediately takes effect. The questioned provisions in R.A.
of administrative regions, i.e. Regions I to XII and the National Capital Region, No. 6734 requiring an oversight Committee to supervise the transfer do not
which are mere groupings of contiguous provinces for administrative purposes provide for a different date of effectivity. Much less would the organization of
[Integrated Reorganization Plan (1972), which was made as part of the law of the the Oversight Committee cause an impediment to the operation of the Organic
land by Pres. dec. No. 1, Pres. Dec. No. 742]. Administrative regions are not Act, for such is evidently aimed at effecting a smooth transition period for the
territorial and political subdivisions like provinces, cities, municipalities and regional government. The constitutional objection on this point thus cannot be
barangays [see Art. X, sec. 1 of the Constitution]. While the power to merge sustained as there is no bases therefor.
administrative regions is not expressly provided for in the Constitution, it is a
power which has traditionally been lodged with the President to facilitate the Every law has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality [Yu Cong Eng v.
exercise of the power of general supervision over local governments [see Art. X, Trinidad, 47 Phil. 387 (1925); Salas v. Jarencio, G.R. No. L-29788, August 30,
sec. 4 of the Constitution]. There is no conflict between the power of the 1979, 46 SCRA 734; Morfe v. Mutuc, supra; Peralta v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-
President to merge administrative regions with the constitutional provision 47771, March 11, 1978, 82 SCRA 30]. Those who petition this Court to declare a
requiring a plebiscite in the merger of local government units because the law, or parts thereof, unconstitutional must clearly establish the basis for such a
requirement of a plebiscite in a merger expressly applies only to provinces, declaration. otherwise, their petition must fail. Based on the grounds raised by
cities, municipalities or barangays, not to administrative regions. petitioners to challenge the constitutionality of R.A. No. 6734, the Court finds
that petitioners have failed to overcome the presumption. The dismissal of these
Petitioners likewise question the validity of provisions in the Organic Act which two petitions is, therefore, inevitable.
create an Oversight Committee to supervise the transfer to the autonomous
region of the powers, appropriations, and properties vested upon the regional WHEREFORE, the petitions are DISMISSED for lack of merit.
government by the organic Act [Art. XIX, Secs. 3 and 4]. Said provisions
mandate that the transfer of certain national government offices and their SO ORDERED.
properties to the regional government shall be made pursuant to a schedule
prescribed by the Oversight Committee, and that such transfer should be Republic of the Philippines
accomplished within six (6) years from the organization of the regional SUPREME COURT
government. Manila
MENDOZA, J.: (1) Misamis Occidental, at present part of Region X, will become
part of Region IX.
These suits challenge the validity of a provision of the Organic Act for the
Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (R.A. No. 6734), authorizing the (2) Oroquieta City, Tangub City and Ozamiz City, at present
President of the Philippines to "merge" by administrative determination the parts of Region X will become parts of Region IX.
regions remaining after the establishment of the Autonomous Region, and the
Executive Order issued by the President pursuant to such authority, "Providing (3) South Cotobato, at present a part of Region XI, will become
for the Reorganization of Administrative Regions in Mindanao." A temporary part of Region XII.
restraining order prayed for by the petitioners was issued by this Court on
January 29, 1991, enjoining the respondents from enforcing the Executive Order (4) General Santos City, at present part of Region XI, will
and statute in question. become part of Region XII.
The facts are as follows: (5) Lanao del Norte, at present part of Region XII, will become
part of Region IX.
Pursuant to Art. X, 18 of the 1987 Constitution, Congress passed R.A. No. 6734,
the Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, calling for a (6) Iligan City and Marawi City, at present part of Region XII,
plebiscite to be held in the provinces of Basilan, Cotobato, Davao del Sur, Lanao will become part of Region IX.
del Norte, Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, Palawan, South Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat,
Sulu, Tawi-Tawi, Zamboanga del Norte, and Zamboanga del Sur, and the cities of
Petitioners in G.R. No. 96754 are, or at least at the time of the filing of their
Cotabato, Dapitan, Dipolog, General Santos, Iligan, Marawi, Pagadian, Puerto
petition, members of Congress representing various legislative districts in South
Princesa and Zamboanga. In the ensuing plebiscite held on November 16, 1989,
Cotobato, Zamboanga del Norte, Basilan, Lanao del Norte and Zamboanga City. paragraph of Sec. 13, Art. XIX of R.A. 6734 and Ordinance
On November 12, 1990, they wrote then President Aquino protesting E.O. No. appended to the 1986 Constitution apportioning the seats of
429. They contended that the House of Representatives of Congress of the Philippines to
the different legislative districts in provinces and cities. 1
There is no law which authorizes the President to pick certain
provinces and cities within the existing regions some of which As their protest went unheeded, while Inauguration Ceremonies of the New
did not even take part in the plebiscite as in the case of the Administrative Region IX were scheduled on January 26, 1991, petitioners
province of Misamis Occidental and the cities of Oroquieta, brought this suit for certiorari and prohibition.
Tangub and Ozamiz and restructure them to new
administrative regions. On the other hand, the law (Sec. 13, On the other hand, the petitioner in G.R. No. 96673, Immanuel Jaldon, is a
Art. XIX, R.A. 6734) is specific to the point, that is, that "the resident of Zamboanga City, who is suing in the capacity of taxpayer and citizen
provinces and cities which in the plebiscite do not vote for of the Republic of the Philippines.
inclusion in the Autonomous Region shall remain in the existing
administrative regions." Petitioners in both cases contend that Art. XIX, 13 of R.A. No. 6734 is
unconstitutional because (1) it unduly delegates legislative power to the
The transfer of the provinces of Misamis Occidental from President by authorizing him to "merge [by administrative determination] the
Region X to Region IX; Lanao del Norte from Region XII to existing regions" or at any rate provides no standard for the exercise of the
Region IX, and South Cotobato from Region XI to Region XII power delegated and (2) the power granted is not expressed in the title of the
are alterations of the existing structures of governmental law.
units, in other words, reorganization. This can be gleaned from
Executive Order No. 429, thus In addition, petitioner in G.R. No. 96673 challenges the validity of E.O. No. 429
on the ground that the power granted by Art. XIX, 13 to the President is only
Whereas, there is an urgent need to to "merge regions IX and XII" but not to reorganize the entire administrative
reorganize the administrative regions in regions in Mindanao and certainly not to transfer the regional center of Region
Mindanao to guarantee the effective delivery IX from Zamboanga City to Pagadian City.
of field services of government agencies
taking into consideration the formation of the The Solicitor General defends the reorganization of regions in Mindanao by E.O.
Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. No. 429 as merely the exercise of a power "traditionally lodged in the
President," as held in Abbas v. Comelec, 2 and as a mere incident of his power of
With due respect to Her Excellency, we submit that while the general supervision over local governments and control of executive departments,
authority necessarily includes the authority to merge, the bureaus and offices under Art. X, 16 and Art. VII, 17, respectively, of the
authority to merge does not include the authority to Constitution.
reorganize. Therefore, the President's authority under RA
6734 to "merge existing regions" cannot be construed to He contends that there is no undue delegation of legislative power but only a
include the authority to reorganize them. To do so will violate grant of the power to "fill up" or provide the details of legislation because
the rules of statutory construction. Congress did not have the facility to provide for them. He cites by analogy the
case of Municipality of Cardona v. Municipality of Binangonan, 3 in which the
The transfer of regional centers under Executive Order 429 is power of the Governor-General to fix municipal boundaries was sustained on the
actually a restructuring (reorganization) of administrative ground that
regions. While this reorganization, as in Executive Order 429,
does not affect the apportionment of congressional [such power] is simply a transference of certain details with
representatives, the same is not valid under the penultimate respect to provinces, municipalities, and townships, many of
them newly created, and all of them subject to a more or less (e) Further development of the regionalization
rapid change both in development and centers of population, the process; and
proper regulation of which might require not only prompt action
but action of such a detailed character as not to permit the (f) Further rationalization of the functions of
legislative body, as such, to take it efficiently. and administrative relationships among
government entities.
The Solicitor General justifies the grant to the President of the power "to
merge the existing regions" as something fairly embraced in the title of R.A. No. For purposes of this Decree, the coverage of
6734, to wit, "An Act Providing for an Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in the continuing authority of the President to
Muslim Mindanao," because it is germane to it. reorganize shall be interpreted to encompass
all agencies, entities, instrumentalities, and
He argues that the power is not limited to the merger of those regions in which units of the National Government, including all
the provinces and cities which took part in the plebiscite are located but that it government owned or controlled corporations
extends to all regions in Mindanao as necessitated by the establishment of the as well as the entire range of the powers,
autonomous region. functions, authorities, administrative
relationships, acid related aspects pertaining
Finally, he invokes P.D. No. 1416, as amended by P.D. No. 1772 which provides: to these agencies, entities, instrumentalities,
and units.
1. The President of the Philippines shall have the continuing
authority to reorganize the National Government. In exercising 2. [T]he President may, at his discretion, take the following
this authority, the President shall be guided by generally actions:
acceptable principles of good government and responsive
national government, including but not limited to the following xxx xxx xxx
guidelines for a more efficient, effective, economical and
development-oriented governmental framework: f. Create, abolish, group, consolidate, merge,
or integrate entities, agencies,
(a) More effective planning implementation, instrumentalities, and units of the National
and review functions; Government, as well as expand, amend, change,
or otherwise modify their powers, functions
(b) Greater decentralization and and authorities, including, with respect to
responsiveness in decision-making process; government-owned or controlled corporations,
their corporate life, capitalization, and other
(c) Further minimization, if not, elimination, of relevant aspects of their charters.
duplication or overlapping of purposes,
functions, activities, and programs; g. Take such other related actions as may be
necessary to carry out the purposes and
(d) Further development of as standardized as objectives of this Decree.
possible ministerial, sub-ministerial and
corporate organizational structures; Considering the arguments of the parties, the issues are:
Accordingly, the Reorganization Commission prepared an Integrated With respect to the power to merge existing administrative regions, the
Reorganization Plan which divided the country into eleven administrative standard is to be found in the same policy underlying the grant to the President
regions. 6 By P.D. No. 1, the Plan was approved and made part of the law of the in R.A. No. 5435 of the power to reorganize the Executive Department, to wit:
land on September 24, 1972. P.D. No. 1 was twice amended in 1975, first by P.D. "to promote simplicity, economy and efficiency in the government to enable it to
No. 742 which "restructur[ed] the regional organization of Mindanao, Basilan, pursue programs consistent with national goals for accelerated social and
Sulu and Tawi-Tawi" and later by P.D. No. 773 which further "restructur[ed] the economic development and to improve the service in the transaction of the public
regional organization of Mindanao and divid[ed] Region IX into two sub-regions." business." 12 Indeed, as the original eleven administrative regions were
In 1978, P.D. No. 1555 transferred the regional center of Region IX from Jolo established in accordance with this policy, it is logical to suppose that in
to Zamboanga City. authorizing the President to "merge [by administrative determination] the
existing regions" in view of the withdrawal from some of those regions of the
Thus the creation and subsequent reorganization of administrative regions have provinces now constituting the Autonomous Region, the purpose of Congress was
been by the President pursuant to authority granted to him by law. In conferring to reconstitute the original basis for the organization of administrative regions.
on the President the power "to merge [by administrative determination] the
existing regions" following the establishment of the Autonomous Region in Nor is Art. XIX, 13 susceptible to charge that its subject is not embraced in
Muslim Mindanao, Congress merely followed the pattern set in previous the title of R.A. No. 6734. The constitutional requirement that "every bill passed
legislation dating back to the initial organization of administrative regions in by the Congress shall embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in the
title thereof" 13 has always been given a practical rather than a technical remain in the regions as designated upon the creation of the Autonomous Region,
construction. The title is not required to be an index of the content of the bill. they may nevertheless be regrouped with contiguous provinces forming other
It is a sufficient compliance with the constitutional requirement if the title regions as the exigency of administration may require.
expresses the general subject and all provisions of the statute are germane to
that subject. 14 Certainly the reorganization of the remaining administrative The regrouping is done only on paper. It involves no more than are definition or
regions is germane to the general subject of R.A. No. 6734, which is the redrawing of the lines separating administrative regions for the purpose of
establishment of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. facilitating the administrative supervision of local government units by the
President and insuring the efficient delivery of essential services. There will be
Finally, it is contended that the power granted to the President is limited to the no "transfer" of local governments from one region to another except as they
reorganization of administrative regions in which some of the provinces and may thus be regrouped so that a province like Lanao del Norte, which is at
cities which voted in favor of regional autonomy are found, because Art. XIX, present part of Region XII, will become part of Region IX.
13 provides that those which did not vote for autonomy "shall remain in the
existing administrative regions." More specifically, petitioner in G.R. No. 96673 The regrouping of contiguous provinces is not even analogous to a redistricting or
claims: to the division or merger of local governments, which all have political
consequences on the right of people residing in those political units to vote and
The questioned Executive Order No. 429 distorted and, in fact, to be voted for. It cannot be overemphasized that administrative regions are
contravened the clear intent of this provision by moving out or mere groupings of contiguous provinces for administrative purposes, not for
transferring certain political subdivisions (provinces/cities) out political representation.
of their legally designated regions. Aggravating this
unacceptable or untenable situation is EO No. 429's effecting Petitioners nonetheless insist that only those regions, in which the provinces and
certain movements on areas which did not even participate in cities which voted for inclusion in the Autonomous Region are located, can be
the November 19, 1989 plebiscite. The unauthorized action of "merged" by the President.
the President, as effected by and under the questioned EO No.
429, is shown by the following dispositions: (1) Misamis To be fundamental reason Art. XIX, 13 is not so limited. But the more
Occidental, formerly of Region X and which did not even fundamental reason is that the President's power cannot be so limited without
participate in the plebiscite, was moved from said Region X to neglecting the necessities of administration. It is noteworthy that the
Region IX; (2) the cities of Ozamis, Oroquieta, and Tangub, all petitioners do not claim that the reorganization of the regions in E.O. No. 429 is
formerly belonging to Region X, which likewise did not irrational. The fact is that, as they themselves admit, the reorganization of
participate in the said plebiscite, were transferred to Region administrative regions in E.O. No. 429 is based on relevant criteria, to wit: (1)
IX; (3) South Cotobato, from Region XI to Region XII; (4) contiguity and geographical features; (2) transportation and communication
General Santos City: from Region XI to Region XII; (5) Lanao facilities; (3) cultural and language groupings; (4) land area and population; (5)
del Norte, from Region XII to Region IX; and (6) the cities of existing regional centers adopted by several agencies; (6) socio-economic
Marawi and Iligan from Region XII to Region IX. All of the said development programs in the regions and (7) number of provinces and cities.
provinces and cities voted "NO", and thereby rejected their
entry into the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, as What has been said above applies to the change of the regional center from
provided under RA No. 6734. 15 Zamboanga City to Pagadian City. Petitioners contend that the determination of
provincial capitals has always been by act of Congress. But as, this Court said in
The contention has no merit. While Art. XIX, 13 provides that "The provinces Abbas, 16 administrative regions are mere "groupings of contiguous provinces for
and cities which do not vote for inclusion in the Autonomous Region shall remain administrative purposes, . . . [They] are not territorial and political subdivisions
in the existing administrative regions," this provision is subject to the like provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays." There is, therefore, no basis
qualification that "the President may by administrative determination merge the for contending that only Congress can change or determine regional centers. To
existing regions." This means that while non-assenting provinces and cities are to the contrary, the examples of P.D. Nos. 1, 742, 773 and 1555 suggest that the
power to reorganize administrative regions carries with it the power to REPRESENTATIVES, thru SPEAKER FELICIANO REYES, and
determine the regional center. BELMONTE, COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, thru PERLAS-BERNABE, JJ.
its Chairman, SIXTO BRILLANTES, JR.,
It may be that the transfer of the regional center in Region IX from Zamboanga PAQUITO OCHOA, JR., Office of the President Promulgated:
City to Pagadian City may entail the expenditure of large sums of money for the Executive Secretary, FLORENCIO ABAD, JR.,
construction of buildings and other infrastructure to house regional offices. Secretary of Budget, and ROBERTO TAN, October 18, 2011
That contention is addressed to the wisdom of the transfer rather than to its Treasurer of the Philippines,
legality and it is settled that courts are not the arbiters of the wisdom or Respondents.
expediency of legislation. In any event this is a question that we will consider x----------------------------------------------x
only if fully briefed and upon a more adequate record than that presented by BASARI D. MAPUPUNO,
petitioners. Petitioner,
WHEREFORE, the petitions for certiorari and prohibition are DISMISSED for
lack of merit. - versus -
SO ORDERED.
SIXTO BRILLANTES, in his capacity as Chairman G.R. No. 196305
of the Commission on Elections, FLORENCIO
Republic of the Philippines ABAD, JR. in his capacity as Secretary of the
Supreme Court Department of Budget and Management,
Manila PACQUITO OCHOA, JR., in his capacity as
Executive Secretary, JUAN PONCE ENRILE, in his
EN BANC capacity as Senate President, and FELICIANO
BELMONTE, in his capacity as Speaker of the
House of Representatives,
DATU MICHAEL ABAS KIDA, G.R. No. 196271 Respondents.
in his personal capacity, and in representation of x----------------------------------------------x
MAGUINDANAO FEDERATION OF AUTONOMOUS Present:
IRRIGATORS ASSOCIATION, INC., HADJI REP. EDCEL C. LAGMAN,
MUHMINA J. USMAN, JOHN ANTHONY L. LIM, CORONA, C.J., Petitioner,
JAMILON T. ODIN, ASRIN TIMBOL JAIYARI, CARPIO,
MUJIB M. KALANG, ALIH AL-SAIDI J. SAPI-E, VELASCO, JR.,
KESSAR DAMSIE ABDIL, and BASSAM ALUH LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, - versus -
SAUPI, BRION,
Petitioners, PERALTA,
BERSAMIN, PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR., in his capacity as the
DEL CASTILLO, Executive Secretary, and the COMMISSION ON
- versus - ABAD, ELECTIONS,
VILLARAMA, JR., Respondents.
PEREZ, x----------------------------------------------x G.R. No. 197221
SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES, represented by MENDOZA,
its President JUAN PONCE ENRILE, HOUSE OF SERENO, ALMARIM CENTI TILLAH, DATU
CASAN CONDING CANA, and PARTIDO
DEMOKRATIKO PILIPINO LAKAS NG BAYAN Respondents.
(PDP-LABAN), x----------------------------------------------x
Petitioners,
JACINTO V. PARAS,
Petitioner,
- versus -
- versus -
- versus -
x------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and THE OFFICE
OF THE PRESIDENT, through EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR., D E C I S I O N
Respondents. BRION, J.:
x----------------------------------------------x
LUIS BAROK BIRAOGO, On June 30, 2011, Republic Act (RA) No. 10153, entitled An Act
Petitioner, Providing for the Synchronization of the Elections in the Autonomous Region in
G.R. No. 197282 Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) with the National and Local Elections and for Other
Purposes was enacted. The law reset the ARMM elections from the 8th of August
- versus - 2011, to the second Monday of May 2013 and every three (3) years thereafter,
to coincide with the countrys regular national and local elections. The law as well
granted the President the power to appoint officers-in-charge ( OICs) for the
THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and Office of the Regional Governor, the Regional Vice-Governor, and the Members
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, of the Regional Legislative Assembly, who shall perform the functions pertaining
JR.,
to the said offices until the officials duly elected in the May 2013 elections shall favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous
have qualified and assumed office. region.
Even before its formal passage, the bills that became RA No. 10153 On August 1, 1989 or two years after the effectivity of the 1987
already spawned petitions against their validity; House Bill No. 4146 and Senate Constitution, Congress acted through Republic Act (RA) No. 6734 entitled An
Bill No. 2756 were challenged in petitions filed with this Court.These petitions Act Providing for an Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim
multiplied after RA No. 10153 was passed. Mindanao. A plebiscite was held on November 6, 1990 as required by Section
18(2), Article X of RA No. 6734, thus fully establishing the Autonomous Region
Factual Antecedents of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). The initially assenting provinces were Lanao del
Sur, Maguindanao, Sulu and Tawi-tawi. RA No. 6734 scheduled the first regular
The State, through Sections 15 to 22, Article X of the 1987 elections for the regional officials of the ARMM on a date not earlier than 60
Constitution, mandated the creation of autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao days nor later than 90 days after its ratification.
and the Cordilleras. Section 15 states:
RA No. 9054 (entitled An Act to Strengthen and Expand the Organic Act for
Section 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, Amending for the Purpose Republic
Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras consisting of provinces, Act No. 6734, entitled An Act Providing for the Autonomous Region in Muslim
cities, municipalities, and geographical areas sharing common Mindanao, as Amended) was the next legislative act passed. This law provided
and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and further refinement in the basic ARMM structure first defined in the original
social structures, and other relevant characteristics within the organic act, and reset the regular elections for the ARMM regional officials to
framework of this Constitution and the national sovereignty as the second Monday of September 2001.
well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines.
Congress passed the next law affecting ARMM RA No. 9140 [1] - on June
Section 18 of the Article, on the other hand, directed Congress to enact 22, 2001. This law reset the first regular elections originally scheduled under RA
an organic act for these autonomous regions to concretely carry into effect the No. 9054, to November 26, 2001. It likewise set the plebiscite to ratify RA No.
granted autonomy. 9054 to not later than August 15, 2001.
Section 18. The Congress shall enact an organic act for each RA No. 9054 was ratified in a plebiscite held on August 14, 2001.
autonomous region with the assistance and participation of the The province of Basilan and Marawi City voted to join ARMM on the same date.
regional consultative commission composed of representatives
appointed by the President from a list of nominees from RA No. 9333[2] was subsequently passed by Congress to reset the ARMM
multisectoral bodies. The organic act shall define the basic regional elections to the 2nd Monday of August 2005, and on the same date every
structure of government for the region consisting of the 3 years thereafter. Unlike RA No. 6734 and RA No. 9054, RA No. 9333 was not
executive department and legislative assembly, both of which ratified in a plebiscite.
shall be elective and representative of the constituent political
units. The organic acts shall likewise provide for special courts Pursuant to RA No. 9333, the next ARMM regional elections should have
with personal, family and property law jurisdiction consistent been held on August 8, 2011. COMELEC had begun preparations for these
with the provisions of this Constitution and national laws. elections and had accepted certificates of candidacies for the various regional
offices to be elected. But on June 30, 2011, RA No. 10153 was enacted, resetting
The creation of the autonomous region shall be the ARMM elections to May 2013, to coincide with the regular national and local
effective when approved by a majority of the votes cast by the elections of the country.
constituent units in a plebiscite called for the purpose, provided
that only provinces, cities, and geographic areas voting RA No. 10153 originated in the House of Representatives as House Bill
(HB) No. 4146, seeking the postponement of the ARMM elections scheduled
on August 8, 2011. On March 22, 2011, the House of Representatives passed HB Mandamus[9] against the COMELEC, docketed as G.R. No. 197280, to assail the
No. 4146, with one hundred ninety one (191) Members voting in its favor. constitutionality of RA No. 9140, RA No. 9333 and RA No. 10153.
After the Senate received HB No. 4146, it adopted its own version, Subsequently, Anak Mindanao Party-List, Minority Rights Forum Philippines, Inc.
Senate Bill No. 2756 (SB No. 2756), on June 6, 2011. Thirteen (13) Senators and Bangsamoro Solidarity Movement filed their own Motion for Leave to Admit
voted favorably for its passage. On June 7, 2011, the House of Representative their Motion for Intervention and Comment-in-Intervention dated July 18, 2011.
concurred with the Senate amendments, and on June 30, 2011, the President On July 26, 2011, the Court granted the motion. In the same Resolution, the
signed RA No. 10153 into law. Court ordered the consolidation of all the petitions relating to the
constitutionality of HB No. 4146, SB No. 2756, RA No. 9333, and RA No. 10153.
As mentioned, the early challenge to RA No. 10153 came through a
petition filed with this Court G.R. No. 196271[3] - assailing the Oral arguments were held on August 9, 2011 and August 16, 2011. Thereafter,
constitutionality of both HB No. 4146 and SB No. 2756, and challenging the the parties were instructed to submit their respective memoranda within twenty
validity of RA No. 9333 as well for non-compliance with the constitutional (20) days.
plebiscite requirement. Thereafter, petitioner Basari Mapupuno in G.R. No.
196305 filed another petition[4] also assailing the validity of RA No. 9333. On September 13, 2011, the Court issued a temporary restraining order enjoining
the implementation of RA No. 10153 and ordering the incumbent elective
With the enactment into law of RA No. 10153, the COMELEC stopped its officials of ARMM to continue to perform their functions should these cases not
preparations for the ARMM elections. The law gave rise as well to the filing of be decided by the end of their term on September 30, 2011.
the following petitions against its constitutionality:
The Arguments
a) Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition[5] filed by Rep. Edcel Lagman as a
member of the House of Representatives against Paquito Ochoa, Jr. (in The petitioners assailing RA No. 9140, RA No. 9333 and RA No. 10153 assert
his capacity as the Executive Secretary) and the COMELEC, docketed that these laws amend RA No. 9054 and thus, have to comply with the
as G.R. No. 197221; supermajority vote and plebiscite requirements prescribed under Sections 1 and
3, Article XVII of RA No. 9094 in order to become effective.
b) Petition for Mandamus and Prohibition[6] filed by Atty. Romulo
Macalintal as a taxpayer against the COMELEC, docketed as G.R. No. The petitions assailing RA No. 10153 further maintain that it is unconstitutional
197282; for its failure to comply with the three-reading requirement of Section 26(2),
Article VI of the Constitution. Also cited as grounds are the alleged violations of
c) Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus, Injunction and Preliminary the right of suffrage of the people of ARMM, as well as the failure to adhere to
Injunction[7] filed by Louis Barok Biraogo against the COMELEC and the elective and representative character of the executive and legislative
Executive Secretary Paquito N. Ochoa, Jr., docketed as G.R. No. departments of the ARMM. Lastly, the petitioners challenged the grant to the
197392; and President of the power to appoint OICs to undertake the functions of the
elective ARMM officials until the officials elected under the May 2013 regular
d) Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus[8] filed by Jacinto Paras as a elections shall have assumed office. Corrolarily, they also argue that the power
member of the House of Representatives against Executive Secretary of appointment also gave the President the power of control over the ARMM, in
Paquito Ochoa, Jr. and the COMELEC, docketed as G.R. No. 197454. complete violation of Section 16, Article X of the Constitution.
Petitioners Alamarim Centi Tillah and Datu Casan Conding Cana as The Issues
registered voters from the ARMM, with the Partido Demokratiko Pilipino Lakas
ng Bayan (a political party with candidates in the ARMM regional elections
scheduled for August 8, 2011), also filed a Petition for Prohibition and From the parties submissions, the following issues were recognized and argued
by the parties in the oral arguments of August 9 and 16, 2011:
I. Whether the 1987 Constitution mandates the We resolve to DISMISS the petitions and thereby UPHOLD the
synchronization of elections constitutionality of RA No. 10153 in toto.
II. Whether the passage of RA No. 10153 violates Section I. Synchronization as a recognized constitutional mandate
26(2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution
The respondent Office of the Solicitor General ( OSG) argues that the
III. Whether the passage of RA No. 10153 requires a Constitution mandates synchronization, and in support of this position, cites
supermajority vote and plebiscite Sections 1, 2 and 5, Article XVIII (Transitory Provisions) of the 1987
Constitution, which provides:
A. Does the postponement of the ARMM regular
elections constitute an amendment to Section 7,
Section 1. The first elections of Members of the Congress
Article XVIII of RA No. 9054?
under this Constitution shall be held on the second Monday of
May, 1987.
B. Does the requirement of a supermajority vote for
amendments or revisions to RA No. 9054 violate The first local elections shall be held on a date to be
Section 1 and Section 16(2), Article VI of the 1987 determined by the President, which may be simultaneous with
Constitution and the corollary doctrine on the election of the Members of the Congress. It shall include
irrepealable laws? the election of all Members of the city or municipal councils in
the Metropolitan Manila area.
C. Does the requirement of a plebiscite apply only in Section 2. The Senators, Members of the House of
the creation of autonomous regions under Representatives and the local officials first elected under this
paragraph 2, Section 18, Article X of the 1987 Constitution shall serve until noon of June 30, 1992.
Constitution?
Of the Senators elected in the election in 1992, the first
twelve obtaining the highest number of votes shall serve for six
IV. Whether RA No. 10153 violates the autonomy
year and the remaining twelve for three years.
granted to the ARMM
xxx
V. Whether the grant of the power to appoint OICs violates:
Section 5. The six-year term of the incumbent President and
Vice President elected in the February 7, 1986 election is, for
A. Section 15, Article X of the 1987 Constitution
purposes of synchronization of elections, hereby extended to
noon of June 30, 1992.
B. Section 16, Article X of the 1987 Constitution
The first regular elections for President and Vice-President
C. Section 18, Article X of the 1987 Constitution under this Constitution shall be held on the second Monday of
May, 1992.
VI. Whether the proposal to hold special elections is constitutional We agree with this position.
and legal.
While the Constitution does not expressly state that Congress has to
We shall discuss these issues in the order they are presented above. synchronize national and local elections, the clear intent towards this objective
can be gleaned from the Transitory Provisions (Article XVIII) of the
Constitution,[10] which show the extent to which the Constitutional Commission,
OUR RULING
by deliberately making adjustments to the terms of the incumbent officials, A basic rule in constitutional construction is that the words used should
sought to attain synchronization of elections.[11] be understood in the sense that they have in common use and given their
ordinary meaning, except when technical terms are employed, in which case the
The objective behind setting a common termination date for all elective significance thus attached to them prevails. [15] As this Court explained in People
officials, done among others through the shortening the terms of the twelve v. Derilo,[16] [a]s the Constitution is not primarily a lawyers document, its language
winning senators with the least number of votes, is to synchronize the holding of should be understood in the sense that it may have in common. Its words should
all future elections whether national or local to once every three years. [12] This be given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed.
intention finds full support in the discussions during the Constitutional
Commission deliberations.[13] Understood in its ordinary sense, the word local refers to something that
These Constitutional Commission exchanges, read with the provisions of primarily serves the needs of a particular limited district, often a community or
the Transitory Provisions of the Constitution, all serve as patent indicators of minor political subdivision.[17] Regional elections in the ARMM for the positions of
the constitutional mandate to hold synchronized national and local elections, governor, vice-governor and regional assembly representatives obviously fall
starting the second Monday of May, 1992 and for all the following elections. within this classification, since they pertain to the elected officials who will
serve within the limited region of ARMM.
This Court was not left behind in recognizing the synchronization of the
national and local elections as a constitutional mandate. In Osmea v. Commission From the perspective of the Constitution, autonomous regions are
on Elections,[14] we explained: considered one of the forms of local governments, as evident from Article X of
the Constitution entitled Local Government. Autonomous regions are established
It is clear from the aforequoted provisions of the 1987 and discussed under Sections 15 to 21 of this Article the article wholly devoted
Constitution that the terms of office of Senators, Members of to Local Government. That an autonomous region is considered a form of local
the House of Representatives, the local officials, the President government is also reflected in Section 1, Article X of the Constitution, which
and the Vice-President have been synchronized to end on the provides:
same hour, date and year noon of June 30, 1992.
Section 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the
It is likewise evident from the wording of the above-
Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities,
mentioned Sections that the term of synchronization is used
municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous
synonymously as the phrase holding simultaneously since this is
regions in Muslim Mindanao, and the Cordilleras as hereinafter
the precise intent in terminating their Office Tenure on the
provided.
same day or occasion. This common termination date will
synchronize future elections to once every three years (Bernas,
the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, Vol. II, p.
Thus, we find the contention that the synchronization mandated by the
605).
Constitution does not include the regional elections of the ARMM
That the election for Senators, Members of the House unmeritorious. We shall refer to synchronization in the course of our discussions
of Representatives and the local officials (under Sec. 2, Art. below, as this concept permeates the consideration of the various issues posed in
XVIII) will have to be synchronized with the election for this case and must be recalled time and again for its complete resolution.
President and Vice President (under Sec. 5, Art. XVIII) is
likewise evident from the x x x records of the proceedings in
the Constitutional Commission. [Emphasis supplied.] II. The Presidents Certification on the Urgency of RA No. 10153
Although called regional elections, the ARMM elections should be The petitioners in G.R. No. 197280 also challenge the validity of RA
included among the elections to be synchronized as it is a local election based on No. 10153 for its alleged failure to comply with Section 26(2), Article VI of the
the wording and structure of the Constitution. Constitution[18] which provides that before bills passed by either the House or
the Senate can become laws, they must pass through three readings on separate
days. The exception is when the President certifies to the necessity of the bills review because basic rights of individuals may be of
immediate enactment. hazard. But the factual basis of presidential certification of
bills, which involves doing away with procedural requirements
The Court, in Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance ,[19] explained the effect designed to insure that bills are duly considered by members
of the Presidents certification of necessity in the following manner: of Congress, certainly should elicit a different standard of
review. [Emphasis supplied.]
The presidential certification dispensed with the
requirement not only of printing but also that of reading the bill
on separate days. The phrase "except when the President
certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment, etc." in The House of Representatives and the Senate in the exercise of their
Art. VI, Section 26[2] qualifies the two stated conditions legislative discretion gave full recognition to the Presidents certification and
before a bill can become a law: [i] the bill has passed three promptly enacted RA No. 10153. Under the circumstances, nothing short of grave
readings on separate days and [ii] it has been printed in its final abuse of discretion on the part of the two houses of Congress can justify our
form and distributed three days before it is finally approved. intrusion under our power of judicial review.[21]
The Second Organic Act RA No. 9054 which lapsed into law on March Moreover, it would be noxious anathema to democratic
31, 2001, provided that the first elections would be held on the second Monday principles for a legislative body to have the ability to bind the
of September 2001. Thereafter, Congress passed RA No. 9140 [30] to reset the actions of future legislative body, considering that both
date of the ARMM elections. Significantly, while RA No. 9140 also scheduled the assemblies are regarded with equal footing, exercising as they do
plebiscite for the ratification of the Second Organic Act (RA No. 9054), the the same plenary powers. Perpetual infallibility is not one of the
attributes desired in a legislative body, and a legislature which the seemingly general terms of the Constitution and the obvious absurdity that
attempts to forestall future amendments or repeals of its would result if a plebiscite were to be required for every statutory amendment.
enactments labors under delusions of omniscience.
Section 18, Article X of the Constitution plainly states that The
xxx creation of the autonomous region shall be effective when approved by the
majority of the votes case by the constituent units in a plebiscite called for the
A state legislature has a plenary law-making power over all purpose. With these wordings as standard, we interpret the requirement to mean
subjects, whether pertaining to persons or things, within its that only amendments to, or revisions of, the Organic Act constitutionally-
territorial jurisdiction, either to introduce new laws or repeal the essential to the creation of autonomous regions i.e., those aspects specifically
old, unless prohibited expressly or by implication by the federal mentioned in the Constitution which Congress must provide for in the Organic
constitution or limited or restrained by its own. It cannot bind Act require ratification through a plebiscite. These amendments to the Organic
itself or its successors by enacting irrepealable laws except when Act are those that relate to: (a) the basic structure of the regional government;
so restrained. Every legislative body may modify or abolish the (b) the regions judicial system, i.e., the special courts with personal, family, and
acts passed by itself or its predecessors. This power of repeal property law jurisdiction; and, (c) the grant and extent of the legislative powers
may be exercised at the same session at which the original act was constitutionally conceded to the regional government under Section 20, Article X
passed; and even while a bill is in its progress and before it of the Constitution.[36]
becomes a law. This legislature cannot bind a future legislature
to a particular mode of repeal. It cannot declare in advance The date of the ARMM elections does not fall under any of the matters
the intent of subsequent legislatures or the effect of that the Constitution specifically mandated Congress to provide for in the
subsequent legislation upon existing statutes.[34] (Emphasis ours.) Organic Act. Therefore, even assuming that the supermajority votes and the
plebiscite requirements are valid, any change in the date of elections cannot be
construed as a substantial amendment of the Organic Act that would require
Thus, while a supermajority is not a total ban against a repeal, it is a compliance with these requirements.
limitation in excess of what the Constitution requires on the passage of bills and
is constitutionally obnoxious because it significantly constricts the future IV. The synchronization issue
legislators room for action and flexibility.
III. C. Section 3, Article XVII of RA No. 9054 excessively enlarged the As we discussed above, synchronization of national and local elections is
plebiscite requirement found in Section 18, Article X of the a constitutional mandate that Congress must provide for and this synchronization
Constitution must include the ARMM elections. On this point, an existing law in fact already
exists RA No. 7166 as the forerunner of the current RA No. 10153. RA No. 7166
The requirements of RA No. 9054 not only required an unwarranted already provides for the synchronization of local elections with the national and
supermajority, but enlarged as well the plebiscite requirement, as embodied in congressional elections. Thus, what RA No. 10153 provides is an old matter for
its Section 3, Article XVII of that Act. As we did on the supermajority local governments (with the exception
requirement, we find the enlargement of the plebiscite requirement required of barangay and Sanggunian Kabataan elections where the terms are not
under Section 18, Article X of the Constitution to be excessive to point of constitutionally provided) and is technically a reiteration of what is already
absurdity and, hence, a violation of the Constitution. reflected in the law, given that regional elections are in reality local elections by
express constitutional recognition.[37]
Section 18, Article X of the Constitution states that the plebiscite is
required only for the creation of autonomous regions and for determining which To achieve synchronization, Congress necessarily has to reconcile the
provinces, cities and geographic areas will be included in the autonomous regions. schedule of the ARMMs regular elections (which should have been held in August
While the settled rule is that amendments to the Organic Act have to comply 2011 based on RA No. 9333) with the fixed schedule of the national and local
with the plebiscite requirement in order to become effective, [35] questions on the elections (fixed by RA No. 7166 to be held in May 2013).
extent of the matters requiring ratification may unavoidably arise because of
During the oral arguments, the Court identified the three options open The constitutional provisions on autonomy specifically, Sections 15 to 21
to Congress in order to resolve this problem. These options are: (1) to allow the of Article X of the Constitution constitute express limitations on legislative
elective officials in the ARMM to remain in office in a hold over capacity, power as they define autonomy, its requirements and its parameters, thus
pursuant to Section 7(1), Article VII of RA No. 9054, until those elected in the limiting what is otherwise the unlimited power of Congress to legislate on the
synchronized elections assume office;[38] (2) to hold special elections in the governance of the autonomous region.
ARMM, with the terms of those elected to expire when those elected in the
synchronized elections assume office; or (3) to authorize the President to Of particular relevance to the issues of the present case are the
appoint OICs, pursuant to Section 3 of RA No. 10153, also until those elected in limitations posed by the prescribed basic structure of government i.e., that the
the synchronized elections assume office. government must have an executive department and a legislative assembly, both
of which must be elective and representative of the constituent political units;
As will be abundantly clear in the discussion below, Congress, in choosing national government, too, must not encroach on the legislative powers granted
to grant the President the power to appoint OICs, chose the correct option and under Section 20, Article X. Conversely and as expressly reflected in Section 17,
passed RA No. 10153 as a completely valid law. Article X, all powers and functions not granted by this Constitution or by law to
the autonomous regions shall be vested in the National Government.
V. The Constitutionality of RA No. 10153 The totality of Sections 15 to 21 of Article X should likewise serve as a
standard that Congress must observe in dealing with legislation touching on the
A. Basic Underlying Premises affairs of the autonomous regions. The terms of these sections leave no doubt
on what the Constitution intends the idea of self-rule or self-government, in
To fully appreciate the available options, certain underlying material particular, the power to legislate on a wide array of social, economic and
premises must be fully understood. The first is the extent of the powers of administrative matters. But equally clear under these provisions are the
Congress to legislate; the second is the constitutional mandate for the permeating principles of national sovereignty and the territorial integrity of the
synchronization of elections; and the third is on the concept of autonomy as Republic, as expressed in the above-quoted Section 17 and in Section 15. [44] In
recognized and established under the 1987 Constitution. other words, the Constitution and the supporting jurisprudence, as they now
stand, reject the notion of imperium et imperio[45] in the relationship between
The grant of legislative power to Congress is broad, general and the national and the regional governments.
comprehensive.[39] The legislative body possesses plenary power for all purposes
of civil government.[40] Any power, deemed to be legislative by usage and In relation with synchronization, both autonomy and the synchronization
tradition, is necessarily possessed by Congress, unless the Constitution has of national and local elections are recognized and established constitutional
lodged it elsewhere.[41] Except as limited by the Constitution, either expressly or mandates, with one being as compelling as the other. If their compelling force
impliedly, legislative power embraces all subjects and extends to all matters of differs at all, the difference is in their coverage; synchronization operates on
general concern or common interest.[42] and affects the whole country, while regional autonomy as the term suggests
directly carries a narrower regional effect although its national effect cannot be
The constitutional limitations on legislative power are either express or discounted.
implied. The express limitations are generally provided in some provisions of the
Declaration of Principles and State Policies (Article 2) and in the provisions Bill These underlying basic concepts characterize the powers and limitations
of Rights (Article 3). Other constitutional provisions (such as the initiative and of Congress when it acted on RA No. 10153. To succinctly describe the legal
referendum clause of Article 6, Sections 1 and 32, and the autonomy provisions situation that faced Congress then, its decision to synchronize the regional
of Article X) provide their own express limitations. The implied limitations are elections with the national, congressional and all other local elections (save
found in the evident purpose which was in view and the circumstances and for barangay and sangguniang kabataan elections) left it with the problem of how
historical events which led to the enactment of the particular provision as a part to provide the ARMM with governance in the intervening period between the
of organic law.[43] expiration of the term of those elected in August 2008 and the assumption to
office twenty-one (21) months away of those who will win in the synchronized
elections on May 13, 2013.
We rule out the first option holdover for those who were elected in
The problem, in other words, was for interim measures for this period, executive and legislative positions in the ARMM during the 2008-2011 term as an
consistent with the terms of the Constitution and its established supporting option that Congress could have chosen because a holdover violates Section 8,
jurisprudence, and with the respect due to the concept of autonomy. Interim Article X of the Constitution. This provision states:
measures, to be sure, is not a strange phenomenon in the Philippine legal
landscape. The Constitutions Transitory Provisions themselves collectively Section 8. The term of office of elective local
provide measures for transition from the old constitution to the new [46] and for officials, except barangay officials, which shall be determined
the introduction of new concepts. [47] As previously mentioned, the adjustment of by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for
elective terms and of elections towards the goal of synchronization first more than three consecutive terms. [emphases ours]
transpired under the Transitory Provisions. The adjustments, however, failed to
look far enough or deeply enough, particularly into the problems that
synchronizing regional autonomous elections would entail; thus, the present Since elective ARMM officials are local officials, they are covered and
problem is with us today. bound by the three-year term limit prescribed by the Constitution; they cannot
extend their term through a holdover. As this Court put in Osmea v. COMELEC:
[52]
The creation of local government units also represents instances when
interim measures are required. In the creation of Quezon del Sur [48] and Dinagat
Islands,[49] the creating statutes authorized the President to appoint an interim It is not competent for the legislature to extend the
governor, vice-governor and members of the sangguniang panlalawigan although term of officers by providing that they shall hold over until
these positions are essentially elective in character; the appointive officials their successors are elected and qualified where the
were to serve until a new set of provincial officials shall have been elected and constitution has in effect or by clear implication prescribed
qualified.[50] A similar authority to appoint is provided in the transition of a local the term and when the Constitution fixes the day on which the
government from a sub-province to a province.[51] official term shall begin, there is no legislative authority to
continue the office beyond that period, even though the
In all these, the need for interim measures is dictated by necessity; successors fail to qualify within the time.
out-of-the-way arrangements and approaches were adopted or used in order to
adjust to the goal or objective in sight in a manner that does not do violence to In American Jurisprudence it has been stated
the Constitution and to reasonably accepted norms. Under these limitations, the as follows:
choice of measures was a question of wisdom left to congressional discretion.
It has been broadly stated that the
To return to the underlying basic concepts, these concepts shall serve legislature cannot, by an act postponing the
as the guideposts and markers in our discussion of the options available to election to fill an office the term of which
Congress to address the problems brought about by the synchronization of the is limited by the Constitution, extend the
ARMM elections, properly understood as interim measures that Congress had to term of the incumbent beyond the period as
provide. The proper understanding of the options as interim measures assume limited by the Constitution. [Emphasis ours.]
prime materiality as it is under these terms that the passage of RA No.
10153 should be measured, i.e., given the constitutional objective of Independently of the Osmea ruling, the primacy of the Constitution as
synchronization that cannot legally be faulted, did Congress gravely abuse the supreme law of the land dictates that where the Constitution has itself made
its discretion or violate the Constitution when it addressed through RA No. a determination or given its mandate, then the matters so determined or
10153 the concomitant problems that the adjustment of elections mandated should be respected until the Constitution itself is changed by
necessarily brought with it? amendment or repeal through the applicable constitutional process. A necessary
corollary is that none of the three branches of government can deviate from the
B. Holdover Option is Unconstitutional constitutional mandate except only as the Constitution itself may allow. [53] If at
all, Congress may only pass legislation filing in details to fully operationalize the
constitutional command or to implement it by legislation if it is non-self- an available option where no express or implied legislative intent to the
executing; this Court, on the other hand, may only interpret the mandate if an contrary exists; it cannot apply where such contrary intent is evident.[61]
interpretation is appropriate and called for.[54]
Congress, in passing RA No. 10153, made it explicitly clear that it had
In the case of the terms of local officials, their term has been fixed clearly and the intention of suppressing the holdover rule that prevailed under RA No. 9054
unequivocally, allowing no room for any implementing legislation with respect to by completely removing this provision. The deletion is a policy decision that is
the fixed term itself and no vagueness that would allow an interpretation from wholly within the discretion of Congress to make in the exercise of its plenary
this Court. Thus, the term of three years for local officials should stay at three legislative powers; this Court cannot pass upon questions of wisdom, justice or
(3) years as fixed by the Constitution and cannot be extended by holdover by expediency of legislation,[62] except where an attendant unconstitutionality or
Congress. grave abuse of discretion results.
If it will be claimed that the holdover period is effectively another term C. The COMELEC has no authority to order special elections
mandated by Congress, the net result is for Congress to create a new term and
to appoint the occupant for the new term. This view like the extension of the Another option proposed by the petitioner in G.R. No. 197282 is for this
elective term is constitutionally infirm because Congress cannot do indirectly Court to compel COMELEC to immediately conduct special elections pursuant to
what it cannot do directly, i.e., to act in a way that would effectively extend the Section 5 and 6 of Batas Pambansa Bilang (BP) 881.
term of the incumbents. Indeed, if acts that cannot be legally done directly can The power to fix the date of elections is essentially legislative in nature,
be done indirectly, then all laws would be illusory. [55] Congress cannot also create as evident from, and exemplified by, the following provisions of the Constitution:
a new term and effectively appoint the occupant of the position for the new
term. This is effectively an act of appointment by Congress and an Section 8, Article VI, applicable to the legislature, provides:
unconstitutional intrusion into the constitutional appointment power of the
President.[56] Hence, holdover whichever way it is viewed is a constitutionally Section 8. Unless otherwise provided by law, the
infirm option that Congress could not have undertaken. regular election of the Senators and the Members of the House
of Representatives shall be held on the second Monday of May.
Jurisprudence, of course, is not without examples of cases where the question of [Emphasis ours]
holdover was brought before, and given the imprimatur of approval by, this
Court. The present case though differs significantly from past cases with Section 4(3), Article VII, with the same tenor but applicable solely to the
contrary rulings, particularly from Sambarani v. COMELEC,[57] Adap v. Comelec, President and Vice-President, states:
[58]
and Montesclaros v. Comelec,[59] where the Court ruled that the elective xxxx
officials could hold on to their positions in a hold over capacity.
Section 4. xxx Unless otherwise provided by law, the
All these past cases refer to elective barangay or sangguniang regular election for President and Vice-President shall be held
kabataan officials whose terms of office are not explicitly provided for on the second Monday of May. [Emphasis ours]
in the Constitution; the present case, on the other hand, refers to local elective
officials the ARMM Governor, the ARMM Vice-Governor, and the members of
the Regional Legislative Assembly whose terms fall within the three-year term while Section 3, Article X, on local government, provides:
limit set by Section 8, Article X of the Constitution. Because of their
constitutionally limited term, Congress cannot legislate an extension beyond the Section 3. The Congress shall enact a local
term for which they were originally elected. government code which shall provide for xxx the
qualifications, election, appointment and removal, term, salaries,
Even assuming that holdover is constitutionally permissible, and there powers and functions and duties of local officials[.] [Emphases
had been statutory basis for it (namely Section 7, Article VII of RA No. 9054) ours]
in the past,[60] we have to remember that the rule of holdover can only apply as
These provisions support the conclusion that no elections may be held on verified petition by any interested party, and after due notice
any other date for the positions of President, Vice President, Members of and hearing, whereby all interested parties are afforded equal
Congress and local officials, except when so provided by another Act of opportunity to be heard, shall postpone the election therein to
Congress, or upon orders of a body or officer to whom Congress may have a date which should be reasonably close to the date of the
delegated either the power or the authority to ascertain or fill in the details in election not held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to
the execution of that power.[63] elect but not later than thirty days after the cessation of the
cause for such postponement or suspension of the election or
Notably, Congress has acted on the ARMM elections by postponing the failure to elect.
scheduled August 2011 elections and setting another date May 13, 2011 for
regional elections synchronized with the presidential, congressional and other Section 6. Failure of election. - If, on account of force
local elections. By so doing, Congress itself has made a policy decision in the majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous
exercise of its legislative wisdom that it shall not call special elections as an causes the election in any polling place has not been held on
adjustment measure in synchronizing the ARMM elections with the other the date fixed, or had been suspended before the hour fixed
elections. by law for the closing of the voting, or after the voting and
during the preparation and the transmission of the election
After Congress has so acted, neither the Executive nor the Judiciary returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election
can act to the contrary by ordering special elections instead at the call of the results in a failure to elect, and in any of such cases the
COMELEC. This Court, particularly, cannot make this call without thereby failure or suspension of election would affect the result of the
supplanting the legislative decision and effectively legislating. To be sure, the election, the Commission shall, on the basis of a verified
Court is not without the power to declare an act of Congress null and void for petition by any interested party and after due notice and
being unconstitutional or for having been exercised in grave abuse of discretion. hearing, call for the holding or continuation of the election not
[64]
But our power rests on very narrow ground and is merely to annul a held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to elect on a date
contravening act of Congress; it is not to supplant the decision of Congress reasonably close to the date of the election not held, suspended
nor to mandate what Congress itself should have done in the exercise of its or which resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty
legislative powers. Thus, contrary to what the petition in G.R. No. 197282 urges, days after the cessation of the cause of such postponement or
we cannot compel COMELEC to call for special elections. suspension of the election or failure to elect. [Emphasis ours]
This provision classifies into four groups the officers that the President As we have already established in our discussion of the supermajority
can appoint. These are: and plebiscite requirements, the legal reality is that RA No. 10153 did not
amend RA No. 9054. RA No. 10153, in fact, provides only for
First, the heads of the executive departments; ambassadors; other synchronization of elections and for the interim measures that must in the
public ministers and consuls; officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, meanwhile prevail. And this is how RA No. 10153 should be read in the manner it
from the rank of colonel or naval captain; and other officers whose appointments was written and based on its unambiguous facial terms. [75]Aside from its order
are vested in the President in this Constitution; for synchronization, it is purely and simply an interim measure responding to
the adjustments that the synchronization requires.
Second, all other officers of the government whose appointments are
not otherwise provided for by law; Thus, the appropriate question to ask is whether the interim measure is
an unreasonable move for Congress to adopt, given the legal situation that the
Third, those whom the President may be authorized by law to synchronization unavoidably brought with it. In more concrete terms and based
appoint; and on the above considerations, given the plain unconstitutionality of providing for
a holdover and the unavailability of constitutional possibilities for lengthening
Fourth, officers lower in rank whose appointments the Congress may by or shortening the term of the elected ARMM officials, is the choice of the
law vest in the President alone.[74] Presidents power to appoint for a fixed and specific period as an interim
measure, and as allowed under Section 16, Article VII of the Constitution
Since the Presidents authority to appoint OICs emanates from RA No. an unconstitutional or unreasonable choice for Congress to make?
10153, it falls under the third group of officials that the President can appoint
pursuant to Section 16, Article VII of the Constitution. Thus, the assailed Admittedly, the grant of the power to the President under other
law facially rests on clear constitutional basis. situations or where the power of appointment would extend beyond the
adjustment period for synchronization would be to foster a government that is
If at all, the gravest challenge posed by the petitions to the authority not democratic and republican. For then, the peoples right to choose the leaders
to appoint OICs under Section 3 of RA No. 10153 is the assertion that the to govern them may be said to be systemically withdrawn to the point of
Constitution requires that the ARMM executive and legislative officials to be fostering an undemocratic regime. This is the grant that would frontally breach
elective and representative of the constituent political units. This requirement the elective and representative governance requirement of Section 18, Article X
indeed is an express limitation whose non-observance in the assailed law leaves of the Constitution.
the appointment of OICs constitutionally defective.
But this conclusion would not be true under the very limited
After fully examining the issue, we hold that this alleged constitutional circumstances contemplated in RA No. 10153 where the period is fixed and, more
problem is more apparent than real and becomes very real only if RA No. 10153 importantly, the terms of governance both under Section 18, Article X of the
were to be mistakenly read as a law that changes the elective and Constitution and RA No. 9054 will not systemically be touched nor affected at
representative character of ARMM positions. RA No. 10153, however, does not all. To repeat what has previously been said, RA No. 9054 will govern unchanged
in any way amend what the organic law of the ARMM (RA No. 9054) sets outs in and continuously, with full effect in accordance with the Constitution, save only
terms of structure of governance. What RA No. 10153 in fact only does is for the interim and temporary measures that synchronization of elections
to appoint officers-in-charge for the Office of the Regional Governor, Regional requires.
Vice Governor and Members of the Regional Legislative Assembly who shall
perform the functions pertaining to the said offices until the officials duly Viewed from another perspective, synchronization will temporarily
elected in the May 2013 elections shall have qualified and assumed office. This disrupt the election process in a local community, the ARMM, as well as the
power is far different from appointing elective ARMM officials for the communitys choice of leaders, but this will take place under a situation of
necessity and as an interim measure in the manner that interim measures have for special elections can occur only in accordance with the power already
been adopted and used in the creation of local government units [76] and the delegated by Congress to the COMELEC, as above discussed.
adjustments of sub-provinces to the status of provinces. [77] These measures, too,
are used in light of the wider national demand for the synchronization of Given that the incumbent ARMM elective officials cannot continue to
elections (considered vis--vis the regional interests involved). The adoption of act in a holdover capacity upon the expiration of their terms, and this Court
these measures, in other words, is no different from the exercise by Congress cannot compel the COMELEC to conduct special elections, the Court now has to
of the inherent police power of the State, where one of the essential tests is deal with the dilemma of a vacuum in governance in the ARMM.
the reasonableness of the interim measure taken in light of the given
circumstances. To emphasize the dire situation a vacuum brings, it should not be
forgotten that a period of 21 months or close to 2 years intervenes from the
Furthermore, the representative character of the chosen leaders need time that the incumbent ARMM elective officials terms expired and the time the
not necessarily be affected by the appointment of OICs as this requirement is new ARMM elective officials begin their terms in 2013. As the lessons of
really a function of the appointment process; only the elective aspect shall be our Mindanao history past and current teach us, many developments, some of
supplanted by the appointment of OICs. In this regard, RA No. 10153 them critical and adverse, can transpire in the countrys Muslim areas in this span
significantly seeks to address concerns arising from the appointments by of time in the way they transpired in the past.[78] Thus, it would be reckless to
providing, under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the assailed law, concrete terms in the assume that the presence of an acting ARMM Governor, an acting Vice-Governor
Appointment of OIC, the Manner and Procedure of Appointing OICs, and their and a fully functioning Regional Legislative Assembly can be done away with even
Qualifications. temporarily. To our mind, the appointment of OICs under the present
circumstances is an absolute necessity.
Based on these considerations, we hold that RA No. 10153 viewed in its
proper context is a law that is not violative of the Constitution (specifically, its Significantly, the grant to the President of the power to appoint OICs
autonomy provisions), and one that is reasonable as well under the circumstances. to undertake the functions of the elective members of the Regional Legislative
Assembly is neither novel nor innovative. We hark back to our earlier
VI. Other Constitutional Concerns pronouncement in Menzon v. Petilla, etc., et al.:[79]
Outside of the above concerns, it has been argued during the oral It may be noted that under Commonwealth Act No. 588
arguments that upholding the constitutionality of RA No. 10153 would set a and the Revised Administrative Code of 1987, the President is
dangerous precedent of giving the President the power to cancel elections empowered to make temporary appointments in certain public
anywhere in the country, thus allowing him to replace elective officials with offices, in case of any vacancy that may occur. Albeit both laws
OICs. deal only with the filling of vacancies in appointive positions.
This claim apparently misunderstands that an across-the-board However, in the absence of any contrary provision in the
cancellation of elections is a matter for Congress, not for the President, to Local Government Code and in the best interest of public
address. It is a power that falls within the powers of Congress in the exercise of service, we see no cogent reason why the procedure thus
its legislative powers. Even Congress, as discussed above, is limited in what it can outlined by the two laws may not be similarly applied in the
legislatively undertake with respect to elections. present case. The respondents contend that the provincial
board is the correct appointing power. This argument has no
If RA No. 10153 cancelled the regular August 2011 elections, it was for merit. As between the President who has supervision over local
a very specific and limited purpose the synchronization of elections. It was a governments as provided by law and the members of the board
temporary means to a lasting end the synchronization of elections. Thus, RA No. who are junior to the vice-governor, we have no problem ruling
10153 and the support that the Court gives this legislation are likewise clear and in favor of the President, until the law provides otherwise.
specific, and cannot be transferred or applied to any other cause for the A vacancy creates an anomalous situation and finds no
cancellation of elections. Any other localized cancellation of elections and call approbation under the law for it deprives the constituents of
their right of representation and governance in their own local Synchronization is an interest that is as constitutionally entrenched as regional
government. autonomy. They are interests that this Court should reconcile and give effect to,
in the way that Congress did in RA No. 10153 which provides the measure to
In a republican form of government, the majority rules transit to synchronized regional elections with the least disturbance on the
through their chosen few, and if one of them is incapacitated or interests that must be respected. Particularly, regional autonomy will be
absent, etc., the management of governmental affairs is, to respected instead of being sidelined, as the law does not in any way alter, change
that extent, may be hampered. Necessarily, there will be a or modify its governing features, except in a very temporary manner and only as
consequent delay in the delivery of basic services to the necessitated by the attendant circumstances.
people of Leyte if the Governor or the Vice-Governor is
missing.[80](Emphasis ours.) Elsewhere, it has also been argued that the ARMM elections should not be
synchronized with the national and local elections in order to maintain the
As in Menzon, leaving the positions of ARMM Governor, Vice Governor, autonomy of the ARMM and insulate its own electoral processes from the rough
and members of the Regional Legislative Assembly vacant for 21 months, or and tumble of nationwide and local elections. This argument leaves us far from
almost 2 years, would clearly cause disruptions and delays in the delivery of basic convinced of its merits.
services to the people, in the proper management of the affairs of the regional
government, and in responding to critical developments that may arise. When As heretofore mentioned and discussed, while autonomous regions are
viewed in this context, allowing the President in the exercise of his granted political autonomy, the framers of the Constitution never equated
constitutionally-recognized appointment power to appoint OICs is, in our autonomy with independence. The ARMM as a regional entity thus continues to
judgment, a reasonable measure to take. operate within the larger framework of the State and is still subject to the
national policies set by the national government, save only for those specific
B. Autonomy in the ARMM areas reserved by the Constitution for regional autonomous determination. As
reflected during the constitutional deliberations of the provisions on autonomous
It is further argued that while synchronization may be constitutionally regions:
mandated, it cannot be used to defeat or to impede the autonomy that the
Constitution granted to the ARMM. Phrased in this manner, one would presume Mr. Bennagen. xxx We do not see here a complete
that there exists a conflict between two recognized Constitutional mandates separation from the central government, but rather an
synchronization and regional autonomy such that it is necessary to choose one efficient working relationship between the autonomous region
over the other. and the central government. We see this as an effective
partnership, not a separation.
We find this to be an erroneous approach that violates a basic principle
in constitutional construction ut magis valeat quam pereat: that the Constitution Mr. Romulo. Therefore, complete autonomy is not really
is to be interpreted as a whole,[81] and one mandate should not be given thought of as complete independence.
importance over the other except where the primacy of one over the other is
clear.[82] We refer to the Courts declaration in Ang-Angco v. Castillo, et al., Mr. Ople. We define it as a measure of self-
[83]
thus: government within the larger political framework of the
nation.[84] [Emphasis supplied.]
A provision of the constitution should not be construed
in isolation from the rest. Rather, the constitution must be This exchange of course is fully and expressly reflected in the above-quoted
interpreted as a whole, and apparently, conflicting provisions Section 17, Article X of the Constitution, and by the express reservation under
should be reconciled and harmonized in a manner that may Section 1 of the same Article that autonomy shall be within the framework of
give to all of them full force and effect. [Emphasis this Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as the territorial integrity
supplied.] of the Republic of the Philippines.
Interestingly, the framers of the Constitution initially proposed to Courts power to enlarge or abridge laws; otherwise, the Court will be guilty of
remove Section 17 of Article X, believing it to be unnecessary in light of the usurping the exclusive prerogative of Congress. [89] The petitioners, in asking this
enumeration of powers granted to autonomous regions in Section 20, Article X of Court to compel COMELEC to hold special elections despite its lack of authority
the Constitution. Upon further reflection, the framers decided to reinstate the to do so, are essentially asking us to venture into the realm of judicial legislation,
provision in order to make it clear, once and for all, that these are the limits of which is abhorrent to one of the most basic principles of a republican and
the powers of the autonomous government. Those not enumerated are actually democratic government the separation of powers.
to be exercised by the national government[.][85] Of note is the Courts
pronouncement in Pimentel, Jr. v. Hon. Aguirre[86] which we quote: The petitioners allege, too, that we should act because Congress acted
with grave abuse of discretion in enacting RA No. 10153. Grave abuse of
Under the Philippine concept of local autonomy, the discretion is such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment that is patent
national government has not completely relinquished all its and gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or to a virtual refusal to
powers over local governments, including autonomous regions. perform a duty enjoined by law or to act at all in contemplation of the law as
Only administrative powers over local affairs are delegated to where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of
political subdivisions. The purpose of the delegation is to make passion and hostility.[90]
governance more directly responsive and effective at the local
levels. In turn, economic, political and social development at the We find that Congress, in passing RA No. 10153, acted strictly within its
smaller political units are expected to propel social and constitutional mandate. Given an array of choices, it acted within due
economic growth and development. But to enable the country constitutional bounds and with marked reasonableness in light of the necessary
to develop as a whole, the programs and policies effected adjustments that synchronization demands. Congress, therefore, cannot be
locally must be integrated and coordinated towards a accused of any evasion of a positive duty or of a refusal to perform its duty. We
common national goal. Thus, policy-setting for the entire thus find no reason to accord merit to the petitioners claims of grave abuse of
country still lies in the President and Congress. [Emphasis discretion.
ours.]
On the general claim that RA No. 10153 is unconstitutional, we can only
In other words, the autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be invoked reiterate the established rule that every statute is presumed valid. [91] Congress,
to defeat national policies and concerns. Since the synchronization of elections is thus, has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality of its acts, and the
not just a regional concern but a national one, the ARMM is subject to it; the party challenging the validity of a statute has the onerous task of rebutting this
regional autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be used to exempt the region presumption.[92] Any reasonable doubt about the validity of the law should be
from having to act in accordance with a national policy mandated by no less than resolved in favor of its constitutionality.[93]As this Court declared in Garcia v.
the Constitution. Executive Secretary:[94]
- versus -
x------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and THE OFFICE
OF THE PRESIDENT, through EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR., D E C I S I O N
Respondents. BRION, J.:
x----------------------------------------------x
LUIS BAROK BIRAOGO, On June 30, 2011, Republic Act (RA) No. 10153, entitled An Act
Petitioner, Providing for the Synchronization of the Elections in the Autonomous Region in
G.R. No. 197282 Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) with the National and Local Elections and for Other
Purposes was enacted. The law reset the ARMM elections from the 8th of August
- versus - 2011, to the second Monday of May 2013 and every three (3) years thereafter,
to coincide with the countrys regular national and local elections. The law as well
granted the President the power to appoint officers-in-charge ( OICs) for the
THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and Office of the Regional Governor, the Regional Vice-Governor, and the Members
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, of the Regional Legislative Assembly, who shall perform the functions pertaining
JR., to the said offices until the officials duly elected in the May 2013 elections shall
Respondents. have qualified and assumed office.
x----------------------------------------------x
Even before its formal passage, the bills that became RA No. 10153
JACINTO V. PARAS, already spawned petitions against their validity; House Bill No. 4146 and Senate
Petitioner, Bill No. 2756 were challenged in petitions filed with this Court.These petitions
multiplied after RA No. 10153 was passed.
- versus -
Factual Antecedents
elections for the regional officials of the ARMM on a date not earlier than 60
The State, through Sections 15 to 22, Article X of the 1987 days nor later than 90 days after its ratification.
Constitution, mandated the creation of autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao
and the Cordilleras. Section 15 states: RA No. 9054 (entitled An Act to Strengthen and Expand the Organic Act for
the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, Amending for the Purpose Republic
Section 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in Act No. 6734, entitled An Act Providing for the Autonomous Region in Muslim
Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras consisting of provinces, Mindanao, as Amended) was the next legislative act passed. This law provided
cities, municipalities, and geographical areas sharing common further refinement in the basic ARMM structure first defined in the original
and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and organic act, and reset the regular elections for the ARMM regional officials to
social structures, and other relevant characteristics within the the second Monday of September 2001.
framework of this Constitution and the national sovereignty as
well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines. Congress passed the next law affecting ARMM RA No. 9140 [1] - on June
22, 2001. This law reset the first regular elections originally scheduled under RA
Section 18 of the Article, on the other hand, directed Congress to enact No. 9054, to November 26, 2001. It likewise set the plebiscite to ratify RA No.
an organic act for these autonomous regions to concretely carry into effect the 9054 to not later than August 15, 2001.
granted autonomy.
RA No. 9054 was ratified in a plebiscite held on August 14, 2001.
Section 18. The Congress shall enact an organic act for each The province of Basilan and Marawi City voted to join ARMM on the same date.
autonomous region with the assistance and participation of the
regional consultative commission composed of representatives RA No. 9333[2] was subsequently passed by Congress to reset the ARMM
appointed by the President from a list of nominees from regional elections to the 2nd Monday of August 2005, and on the same date every
multisectoral bodies. The organic act shall define the basic 3 years thereafter. Unlike RA No. 6734 and RA No. 9054, RA No. 9333 was not
structure of government for the region consisting of the ratified in a plebiscite.
executive department and legislative assembly, both of which
shall be elective and representative of the constituent political Pursuant to RA No. 9333, the next ARMM regional elections should have
units. The organic acts shall likewise provide for special courts been held on August 8, 2011. COMELEC had begun preparations for these
with personal, family and property law jurisdiction consistent elections and had accepted certificates of candidacies for the various regional
with the provisions of this Constitution and national laws. offices to be elected. But on June 30, 2011, RA No. 10153 was enacted, resetting
the ARMM elections to May 2013, to coincide with the regular national and local
The creation of the autonomous region shall be elections of the country.
effective when approved by a majority of the votes cast by the
constituent units in a plebiscite called for the purpose, provided RA No. 10153 originated in the House of Representatives as House Bill
that only provinces, cities, and geographic areas voting (HB) No. 4146, seeking the postponement of the ARMM elections scheduled
favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous on August 8, 2011. On March 22, 2011, the House of Representatives passed HB
region. No. 4146, with one hundred ninety one (191) Members voting in its favor.
On August 1, 1989 or two years after the effectivity of the 1987 After the Senate received HB No. 4146, it adopted its own version,
Constitution, Congress acted through Republic Act (RA) No. 6734 entitled An Senate Bill No. 2756 (SB No. 2756), on June 6, 2011. Thirteen (13) Senators
Act Providing for an Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim voted favorably for its passage. On June 7, 2011, the House of Representative
Mindanao. A plebiscite was held on November 6, 1990 as required by Section concurred with the Senate amendments, and on June 30, 2011, the President
18(2), Article X of RA No. 6734, thus fully establishing the Autonomous Region signed RA No. 10153 into law.
of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). The initially assenting provinces were Lanao del
Sur, Maguindanao, Sulu and Tawi-tawi. RA No. 6734 scheduled the first regular
As mentioned, the early challenge to RA No. 10153 came through a Oral arguments were held on August 9, 2011 and August 16, 2011. Thereafter,
petition filed with this Court G.R. No. 196271[3] - assailing the the parties were instructed to submit their respective memoranda within twenty
constitutionality of both HB No. 4146 and SB No. 2756, and challenging the (20) days.
validity of RA No. 9333 as well for non-compliance with the constitutional
plebiscite requirement. Thereafter, petitioner Basari Mapupuno in G.R. No. On September 13, 2011, the Court issued a temporary restraining order enjoining
196305 filed another petition[4] also assailing the validity of RA No. 9333. the implementation of RA No. 10153 and ordering the incumbent elective
officials of ARMM to continue to perform their functions should these cases not
With the enactment into law of RA No. 10153, the COMELEC stopped its be decided by the end of their term on September 30, 2011.
preparations for the ARMM elections. The law gave rise as well to the filing of
the following petitions against its constitutionality: The Arguments
a) Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition[5] filed by Rep. Edcel Lagman as a The petitioners assailing RA No. 9140, RA No. 9333 and RA No. 10153 assert
member of the House of Representatives against Paquito Ochoa, Jr. (in that these laws amend RA No. 9054 and thus, have to comply with the
his capacity as the Executive Secretary) and the COMELEC, docketed supermajority vote and plebiscite requirements prescribed under Sections 1 and
as G.R. No. 197221; 3, Article XVII of RA No. 9094 in order to become effective.
b) Petition for Mandamus and Prohibition[6] filed by Atty. Romulo The petitions assailing RA No. 10153 further maintain that it is unconstitutional
Macalintal as a taxpayer against the COMELEC, docketed as G.R. No. for its failure to comply with the three-reading requirement of Section 26(2),
197282; Article VI of the Constitution. Also cited as grounds are the alleged violations of
the right of suffrage of the people of ARMM, as well as the failure to adhere to
c) Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus, Injunction and Preliminary the elective and representative character of the executive and legislative
Injunction[7] filed by Louis Barok Biraogo against the COMELEC and departments of the ARMM. Lastly, the petitioners challenged the grant to the
Executive Secretary Paquito N. Ochoa, Jr., docketed as G.R. No. President of the power to appoint OICs to undertake the functions of the
197392; and elective ARMM officials until the officials elected under the May 2013 regular
elections shall have assumed office. Corrolarily, they also argue that the power
d) Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus[8] filed by Jacinto Paras as a of appointment also gave the President the power of control over the ARMM, in
member of the House of Representatives against Executive Secretary complete violation of Section 16, Article X of the Constitution.
Paquito Ochoa, Jr. and the COMELEC, docketed as G.R. No. 197454.
The Issues
Petitioners Alamarim Centi Tillah and Datu Casan Conding Cana as
registered voters from the ARMM, with the Partido Demokratiko Pilipino Lakas
ng Bayan (a political party with candidates in the ARMM regional elections From the parties submissions, the following issues were recognized and argued
scheduled for August 8, 2011), also filed a Petition for Prohibition and by the parties in the oral arguments of August 9 and 16, 2011:
Mandamus[9] against the COMELEC, docketed as G.R. No. 197280, to assail the
constitutionality of RA No. 9140, RA No. 9333 and RA No. 10153. I. Whether the 1987 Constitution mandates the
synchronization of elections
Subsequently, Anak Mindanao Party-List, Minority Rights Forum Philippines, Inc.
and Bangsamoro Solidarity Movement filed their own Motion for Leave to Admit II. Whether the passage of RA No. 10153 violates Section
their Motion for Intervention and Comment-in-Intervention dated July 18, 2011. 26(2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution
On July 26, 2011, the Court granted the motion. In the same Resolution, the
Court ordered the consolidation of all the petitions relating to the III. Whether the passage of RA No. 10153 requires a
constitutionality of HB No. 4146, SB No. 2756, RA No. 9333, and RA No. 10153. supermajority vote and plebiscite
A. Does the postponement of the ARMM regular
elections constitute an amendment to Section 7,
Section 1. The first elections of Members of the Congress
Article XVIII of RA No. 9054?
under this Constitution shall be held on the second Monday of
May, 1987.
B. Does the requirement of a supermajority vote for
amendments or revisions to RA No. 9054 violate The first local elections shall be held on a date to be
Section 1 and Section 16(2), Article VI of the 1987 determined by the President, which may be simultaneous with
Constitution and the corollary doctrine on the election of the Members of the Congress. It shall include
irrepealable laws? the election of all Members of the city or municipal councils in
the Metropolitan Manila area.
C. Does the requirement of a plebiscite apply only in Section 2. The Senators, Members of the House of
the creation of autonomous regions under Representatives and the local officials first elected under this
paragraph 2, Section 18, Article X of the 1987 Constitution shall serve until noon of June 30, 1992.
Constitution?
Of the Senators elected in the election in 1992, the first
twelve obtaining the highest number of votes shall serve for six
IV. Whether RA No. 10153 violates the autonomy
year and the remaining twelve for three years.
granted to the ARMM
xxx
V. Whether the grant of the power to appoint OICs violates:
Section 5. The six-year term of the incumbent President and
Vice President elected in the February 7, 1986 election is, for
A. Section 15, Article X of the 1987 Constitution
purposes of synchronization of elections, hereby extended to
noon of June 30, 1992.
B. Section 16, Article X of the 1987 Constitution
The first regular elections for President and Vice-President
C. Section 18, Article X of the 1987 Constitution under this Constitution shall be held on the second Monday of
May, 1992.
VI. Whether the proposal to hold special elections is constitutional We agree with this position.
and legal.
While the Constitution does not expressly state that Congress has to
We shall discuss these issues in the order they are presented above. synchronize national and local elections, the clear intent towards this objective
can be gleaned from the Transitory Provisions (Article XVIII) of the
Constitution,[10] which show the extent to which the Constitutional Commission,
OUR RULING by deliberately making adjustments to the terms of the incumbent officials,
sought to attain synchronization of elections.[11]
We resolve to DISMISS the petitions and thereby UPHOLD the
constitutionality of RA No. 10153 in toto. The objective behind setting a common termination date for all elective
officials, done among others through the shortening the terms of the twelve
I. Synchronization as a recognized constitutional mandate winning senators with the least number of votes, is to synchronize the holding of
all future elections whether national or local to once every three years. [12] This
The respondent Office of the Solicitor General ( OSG) argues that the intention finds full support in the discussions during the Constitutional
Constitution mandates synchronization, and in support of this position, cites Commission deliberations.[13]
Sections 1, 2 and 5, Article XVIII (Transitory Provisions) of the 1987 These Constitutional Commission exchanges, read with the provisions of
Constitution, which provides: the Transitory Provisions of the Constitution, all serve as patent indicators of
the constitutional mandate to hold synchronized national and local elections, governor, vice-governor and regional assembly representatives obviously fall
starting the second Monday of May, 1992 and for all the following elections. within this classification, since they pertain to the elected officials who will
serve within the limited region of ARMM.
This Court was not left behind in recognizing the synchronization of the
national and local elections as a constitutional mandate. In Osmea v. Commission From the perspective of the Constitution, autonomous regions are
on Elections,[14] we explained: considered one of the forms of local governments, as evident from Article X of
the Constitution entitled Local Government. Autonomous regions are established
It is clear from the aforequoted provisions of the 1987 and discussed under Sections 15 to 21 of this Article the article wholly devoted
Constitution that the terms of office of Senators, Members of to Local Government. That an autonomous region is considered a form of local
the House of Representatives, the local officials, the President government is also reflected in Section 1, Article X of the Constitution, which
and the Vice-President have been synchronized to end on the provides:
same hour, date and year noon of June 30, 1992.
Section 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the
It is likewise evident from the wording of the above-
Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities,
mentioned Sections that the term of synchronization is used
municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous
synonymously as the phrase holding simultaneously since this is
regions in Muslim Mindanao, and the Cordilleras as hereinafter
the precise intent in terminating their Office Tenure on the
provided.
same day or occasion. This common termination date will
synchronize future elections to once every three years (Bernas,
the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, Vol. II, p.
Thus, we find the contention that the synchronization mandated by the
605).
Constitution does not include the regional elections of the ARMM
That the election for Senators, Members of the House unmeritorious. We shall refer to synchronization in the course of our discussions
of Representatives and the local officials (under Sec. 2, Art. below, as this concept permeates the consideration of the various issues posed in
XVIII) will have to be synchronized with the election for this case and must be recalled time and again for its complete resolution.
President and Vice President (under Sec. 5, Art. XVIII) is
likewise evident from the x x x records of the proceedings in
the Constitutional Commission. [Emphasis supplied.] II. The Presidents Certification on the Urgency of RA No. 10153
Although called regional elections, the ARMM elections should be The petitioners in G.R. No. 197280 also challenge the validity of RA
included among the elections to be synchronized as it is a local election based on No. 10153 for its alleged failure to comply with Section 26(2), Article VI of the
the wording and structure of the Constitution. Constitution[18] which provides that before bills passed by either the House or
the Senate can become laws, they must pass through three readings on separate
A basic rule in constitutional construction is that the words used should days. The exception is when the President certifies to the necessity of the bills
be understood in the sense that they have in common use and given their immediate enactment.
ordinary meaning, except when technical terms are employed, in which case the
significance thus attached to them prevails. [15] As this Court explained in People The Court, in Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance ,[19] explained the effect
v. Derilo,[16] [a]s the Constitution is not primarily a lawyers document, its language of the Presidents certification of necessity in the following manner:
should be understood in the sense that it may have in common. Its words should
be given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed. The presidential certification dispensed with the
requirement not only of printing but also that of reading the bill
Understood in its ordinary sense, the word local refers to something that on separate days. The phrase "except when the President
primarily serves the needs of a particular limited district, often a community or certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment, etc." in
minor political subdivision.[17] Regional elections in the ARMM for the positions of Art. VI, Section 26[2] qualifies the two stated conditions
before a bill can become a law: [i] the bill has passed three promptly enacted RA No. 10153. Under the circumstances, nothing short of grave
readings on separate days and [ii] it has been printed in its final abuse of discretion on the part of the two houses of Congress can justify our
form and distributed three days before it is finally approved. intrusion under our power of judicial review.[21]
This view that Congress thought it best to leave the determination of Section 16(2), Article VI of the Constitution provides that a majority of
the date of succeeding ARMM elections to legislative discretion finds support in each House shall constitute a quorum to do business. In other words, as long as
ARMMs recent history. majority of the members of the House of Representatives or the Senate are
present, these bodies have the quorum needed to conduct business and hold
To recall, RA No. 10153 is not the first law passed that rescheduled the session. Within a quorum, a vote of majority is generally sufficient to enact laws
ARMM elections. The First Organic Act RA No. 6734 not only did not fix the or approve acts.
date of the subsequent elections; it did not even fix the specific date of the
first ARMM elections,[24] leaving the date to be fixed in another legislative In contrast, Section 1, Article XVII of RA No. 9054 requires a vote of
enactment. Consequently, RA No. 7647,[25] RA No. 8176,[26] RA No. 8746,[27] RA no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the Members of the House of Representatives
No. 8753,[28] and RA No. 9012[29] were all enacted by Congress to fix the dates of and of the Senate, voting separately, in order to effectively amend RA No. 9054.
the ARMM elections. Since these laws did not change or modify any part or Clearly, this 2/3 voting requirement is higher than what the Constitution
provision of RA No. 6734, they were not amendments to this latter requires for the passage of bills, and served to restrain the plenary powers of
law. Consequently, there was no need to submit them to any plebiscite for Congress to amend, revise or repeal the laws it had passed. The Courts
ratification. pronouncement in City of Davao v. GSIS[33] on this subject best explains the
basis and reason for the unconstitutionality:
The Second Organic Act RA No. 9054 which lapsed into law on March
31, 2001, provided that the first elections would be held on the second Monday Moreover, it would be noxious anathema to democratic
of September 2001. Thereafter, Congress passed RA No. 9140 [30] to reset the principles for a legislative body to have the ability to bind the
date of the ARMM elections. Significantly, while RA No. 9140 also scheduled the actions of future legislative body, considering that both
plebiscite for the ratification of the Second Organic Act (RA No. 9054), the assemblies are regarded with equal footing, exercising as they do
new date of the ARMM regional elections fixed in RA No. 9140 was not the same plenary powers. Perpetual infallibility is not one of the
among the provisions ratified in the plebiscite held to approve RA No. 9054. attributes desired in a legislative body, and a legislature which
Thereafter, Congress passed RA No. 9333, [31] which further reset the date of attempts to forestall future amendments or repeals of its
the ARMM regional elections. Again, this law was not ratified through a enactments labors under delusions of omniscience.
plebiscite.
xxx
From these legislative actions, we see the clear intention of Congress to
treat the laws which fix the date of the subsequent ARMM elections as separate A state legislature has a plenary law-making power over all
and distinct from the Organic Acts. Congress only acted consistently with this subjects, whether pertaining to persons or things, within its
intent when it passed RA No. 10153 without requiring compliance with the territorial jurisdiction, either to introduce new laws or repeal the
old, unless prohibited expressly or by implication by the federal
constitution or limited or restrained by its own. It cannot bind Act require ratification through a plebiscite. These amendments to the Organic
itself or its successors by enacting irrepealable laws except when Act are those that relate to: (a) the basic structure of the regional government;
so restrained. Every legislative body may modify or abolish the (b) the regions judicial system, i.e., the special courts with personal, family, and
acts passed by itself or its predecessors. This power of repeal property law jurisdiction; and, (c) the grant and extent of the legislative powers
may be exercised at the same session at which the original act was constitutionally conceded to the regional government under Section 20, Article X
passed; and even while a bill is in its progress and before it of the Constitution.[36]
becomes a law. This legislature cannot bind a future legislature
to a particular mode of repeal. It cannot declare in advance The date of the ARMM elections does not fall under any of the matters
the intent of subsequent legislatures or the effect of that the Constitution specifically mandated Congress to provide for in the
subsequent legislation upon existing statutes.[34] (Emphasis ours.) Organic Act. Therefore, even assuming that the supermajority votes and the
plebiscite requirements are valid, any change in the date of elections cannot be
construed as a substantial amendment of the Organic Act that would require
Thus, while a supermajority is not a total ban against a repeal, it is a compliance with these requirements.
limitation in excess of what the Constitution requires on the passage of bills and
is constitutionally obnoxious because it significantly constricts the future IV. The synchronization issue
legislators room for action and flexibility.
III. C. Section 3, Article XVII of RA No. 9054 excessively enlarged the As we discussed above, synchronization of national and local elections is
plebiscite requirement found in Section 18, Article X of the a constitutional mandate that Congress must provide for and this synchronization
Constitution must include the ARMM elections. On this point, an existing law in fact already
exists RA No. 7166 as the forerunner of the current RA No. 10153. RA No. 7166
The requirements of RA No. 9054 not only required an unwarranted already provides for the synchronization of local elections with the national and
supermajority, but enlarged as well the plebiscite requirement, as embodied in congressional elections. Thus, what RA No. 10153 provides is an old matter for
its Section 3, Article XVII of that Act. As we did on the supermajority local governments (with the exception
requirement, we find the enlargement of the plebiscite requirement required of barangay and Sanggunian Kabataan elections where the terms are not
under Section 18, Article X of the Constitution to be excessive to point of constitutionally provided) and is technically a reiteration of what is already
absurdity and, hence, a violation of the Constitution. reflected in the law, given that regional elections are in reality local elections by
express constitutional recognition.[37]
Section 18, Article X of the Constitution states that the plebiscite is
required only for the creation of autonomous regions and for determining which To achieve synchronization, Congress necessarily has to reconcile the
provinces, cities and geographic areas will be included in the autonomous regions. schedule of the ARMMs regular elections (which should have been held in August
While the settled rule is that amendments to the Organic Act have to comply 2011 based on RA No. 9333) with the fixed schedule of the national and local
with the plebiscite requirement in order to become effective, [35] questions on the elections (fixed by RA No. 7166 to be held in May 2013).
extent of the matters requiring ratification may unavoidably arise because of
the seemingly general terms of the Constitution and the obvious absurdity that During the oral arguments, the Court identified the three options open
would result if a plebiscite were to be required for every statutory amendment. to Congress in order to resolve this problem. These options are: (1) to allow the
elective officials in the ARMM to remain in office in a hold over capacity,
Section 18, Article X of the Constitution plainly states that The pursuant to Section 7(1), Article VII of RA No. 9054, until those elected in the
creation of the autonomous region shall be effective when approved by the synchronized elections assume office;[38] (2) to hold special elections in the
majority of the votes case by the constituent units in a plebiscite called for the ARMM, with the terms of those elected to expire when those elected in the
purpose. With these wordings as standard, we interpret the requirement to mean synchronized elections assume office; or (3) to authorize the President to
that only amendments to, or revisions of, the Organic Act constitutionally- appoint OICs, pursuant to Section 3 of RA No. 10153, also until those elected in
essential to the creation of autonomous regions i.e., those aspects specifically the synchronized elections assume office.
mentioned in the Constitution which Congress must provide for in the Organic
As will be abundantly clear in the discussion below, Congress, in choosing under Section 20, Article X. Conversely and as expressly reflected in Section 17,
to grant the President the power to appoint OICs, chose the correct option and Article X, all powers and functions not granted by this Constitution or by law to
passed RA No. 10153 as a completely valid law. the autonomous regions shall be vested in the National Government.
The totality of Sections 15 to 21 of Article X should likewise serve as a
V. The Constitutionality of RA No. 10153 standard that Congress must observe in dealing with legislation touching on the
affairs of the autonomous regions. The terms of these sections leave no doubt
A. Basic Underlying Premises on what the Constitution intends the idea of self-rule or self-government, in
particular, the power to legislate on a wide array of social, economic and
To fully appreciate the available options, certain underlying material administrative matters. But equally clear under these provisions are the
premises must be fully understood. The first is the extent of the powers of permeating principles of national sovereignty and the territorial integrity of the
Congress to legislate; the second is the constitutional mandate for the Republic, as expressed in the above-quoted Section 17 and in Section 15. [44] In
synchronization of elections; and the third is on the concept of autonomy as other words, the Constitution and the supporting jurisprudence, as they now
recognized and established under the 1987 Constitution. stand, reject the notion of imperium et imperio[45] in the relationship between
the national and the regional governments.
The grant of legislative power to Congress is broad, general and
comprehensive.[39] The legislative body possesses plenary power for all purposes In relation with synchronization, both autonomy and the synchronization
of civil government.[40] Any power, deemed to be legislative by usage and of national and local elections are recognized and established constitutional
tradition, is necessarily possessed by Congress, unless the Constitution has mandates, with one being as compelling as the other. If their compelling force
lodged it elsewhere.[41] Except as limited by the Constitution, either expressly or differs at all, the difference is in their coverage; synchronization operates on
impliedly, legislative power embraces all subjects and extends to all matters of and affects the whole country, while regional autonomy as the term suggests
general concern or common interest.[42] directly carries a narrower regional effect although its national effect cannot be
discounted.
The constitutional limitations on legislative power are either express or
implied. The express limitations are generally provided in some provisions of the These underlying basic concepts characterize the powers and limitations
Declaration of Principles and State Policies (Article 2) and in the provisions Bill of Congress when it acted on RA No. 10153. To succinctly describe the legal
of Rights (Article 3). Other constitutional provisions (such as the initiative and situation that faced Congress then, its decision to synchronize the regional
referendum clause of Article 6, Sections 1 and 32, and the autonomy provisions elections with the national, congressional and all other local elections (save
of Article X) provide their own express limitations. The implied limitations are for barangay and sangguniang kabataan elections) left it with the problem of how
found in the evident purpose which was in view and the circumstances and to provide the ARMM with governance in the intervening period between the
historical events which led to the enactment of the particular provision as a part expiration of the term of those elected in August 2008 and the assumption to
of organic law.[43] office twenty-one (21) months away of those who will win in the synchronized
elections on May 13, 2013.
The constitutional provisions on autonomy specifically, Sections 15 to 21
of Article X of the Constitution constitute express limitations on legislative The problem, in other words, was for interim measures for this period,
power as they define autonomy, its requirements and its parameters, thus consistent with the terms of the Constitution and its established supporting
limiting what is otherwise the unlimited power of Congress to legislate on the jurisprudence, and with the respect due to the concept of autonomy. Interim
governance of the autonomous region. measures, to be sure, is not a strange phenomenon in the Philippine legal
landscape. The Constitutions Transitory Provisions themselves collectively
Of particular relevance to the issues of the present case are the provide measures for transition from the old constitution to the new [46] and for
limitations posed by the prescribed basic structure of government i.e., that the the introduction of new concepts. [47] As previously mentioned, the adjustment of
government must have an executive department and a legislative assembly, both elective terms and of elections towards the goal of synchronization first
of which must be elective and representative of the constituent political units; transpired under the Transitory Provisions. The adjustments, however, failed to
national government, too, must not encroach on the legislative powers granted look far enough or deeply enough, particularly into the problems that
synchronizing regional autonomous elections would entail; thus, the present Since elective ARMM officials are local officials, they are covered and
problem is with us today. bound by the three-year term limit prescribed by the Constitution; they cannot
extend their term through a holdover. As this Court put in Osmea v. COMELEC:
[52]
The creation of local government units also represents instances when
interim measures are required. In the creation of Quezon del Sur [48] and Dinagat
Islands,[49] the creating statutes authorized the President to appoint an interim It is not competent for the legislature to extend the
governor, vice-governor and members of the sangguniang panlalawigan although term of officers by providing that they shall hold over until
these positions are essentially elective in character; the appointive officials their successors are elected and qualified where the
were to serve until a new set of provincial officials shall have been elected and constitution has in effect or by clear implication prescribed
qualified.[50] A similar authority to appoint is provided in the transition of a local the term and when the Constitution fixes the day on which the
government from a sub-province to a province.[51] official term shall begin, there is no legislative authority to
continue the office beyond that period, even though the
In all these, the need for interim measures is dictated by necessity; successors fail to qualify within the time.
out-of-the-way arrangements and approaches were adopted or used in order to
adjust to the goal or objective in sight in a manner that does not do violence to In American Jurisprudence it has been stated
the Constitution and to reasonably accepted norms. Under these limitations, the as follows:
choice of measures was a question of wisdom left to congressional discretion.
It has been broadly stated that the
To return to the underlying basic concepts, these concepts shall serve legislature cannot, by an act postponing the
as the guideposts and markers in our discussion of the options available to election to fill an office the term of which
Congress to address the problems brought about by the synchronization of the is limited by the Constitution, extend the
ARMM elections, properly understood as interim measures that Congress had to term of the incumbent beyond the period as
provide. The proper understanding of the options as interim measures assume limited by the Constitution. [Emphasis ours.]
prime materiality as it is under these terms that the passage of RA No.
10153 should be measured, i.e., given the constitutional objective of Independently of the Osmea ruling, the primacy of the Constitution as
synchronization that cannot legally be faulted, did Congress gravely abuse the supreme law of the land dictates that where the Constitution has itself made
its discretion or violate the Constitution when it addressed through RA No. a determination or given its mandate, then the matters so determined or
10153 the concomitant problems that the adjustment of elections mandated should be respected until the Constitution itself is changed by
necessarily brought with it? amendment or repeal through the applicable constitutional process. A necessary
corollary is that none of the three branches of government can deviate from the
B. Holdover Option is Unconstitutional constitutional mandate except only as the Constitution itself may allow. [53] If at
all, Congress may only pass legislation filing in details to fully operationalize the
We rule out the first option holdover for those who were elected in constitutional command or to implement it by legislation if it is non-self-
executive and legislative positions in the ARMM during the 2008-2011 term as an executing; this Court, on the other hand, may only interpret the mandate if an
option that Congress could have chosen because a holdover violates Section 8, interpretation is appropriate and called for.[54]
Article X of the Constitution. This provision states:
In the case of the terms of local officials, their term has been fixed clearly and
Section 8. The term of office of elective local unequivocally, allowing no room for any implementing legislation with respect to
officials, except barangay officials, which shall be determined the fixed term itself and no vagueness that would allow an interpretation from
by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for this Court. Thus, the term of three years for local officials should stay at three
more than three consecutive terms. [emphases ours] (3) years as fixed by the Constitution and cannot be extended by holdover by
Congress.
If it will be claimed that the holdover period is effectively another term C. The COMELEC has no authority to order special elections
mandated by Congress, the net result is for Congress to create a new term and
to appoint the occupant for the new term. This view like the extension of the Another option proposed by the petitioner in G.R. No. 197282 is for this
elective term is constitutionally infirm because Congress cannot do indirectly Court to compel COMELEC to immediately conduct special elections pursuant to
what it cannot do directly, i.e., to act in a way that would effectively extend the Section 5 and 6 of Batas Pambansa Bilang (BP) 881.
term of the incumbents. Indeed, if acts that cannot be legally done directly can The power to fix the date of elections is essentially legislative in nature,
be done indirectly, then all laws would be illusory. [55] Congress cannot also create as evident from, and exemplified by, the following provisions of the Constitution:
a new term and effectively appoint the occupant of the position for the new
term. This is effectively an act of appointment by Congress and an Section 8, Article VI, applicable to the legislature, provides:
unconstitutional intrusion into the constitutional appointment power of the
President.[56] Hence, holdover whichever way it is viewed is a constitutionally Section 8. Unless otherwise provided by law, the
infirm option that Congress could not have undertaken. regular election of the Senators and the Members of the House
of Representatives shall be held on the second Monday of May.
Jurisprudence, of course, is not without examples of cases where the question of [Emphasis ours]
holdover was brought before, and given the imprimatur of approval by, this
Court. The present case though differs significantly from past cases with Section 4(3), Article VII, with the same tenor but applicable solely to the
contrary rulings, particularly from Sambarani v. COMELEC,[57] Adap v. Comelec, President and Vice-President, states:
[58]
and Montesclaros v. Comelec,[59] where the Court ruled that the elective xxxx
officials could hold on to their positions in a hold over capacity.
Section 4. xxx Unless otherwise provided by law, the
All these past cases refer to elective barangay or sangguniang regular election for President and Vice-President shall be held
kabataan officials whose terms of office are not explicitly provided for on the second Monday of May. [Emphasis ours]
in the Constitution; the present case, on the other hand, refers to local elective
officials the ARMM Governor, the ARMM Vice-Governor, and the members of
the Regional Legislative Assembly whose terms fall within the three-year term while Section 3, Article X, on local government, provides:
limit set by Section 8, Article X of the Constitution. Because of their
constitutionally limited term, Congress cannot legislate an extension beyond the Section 3. The Congress shall enact a local
term for which they were originally elected. government code which shall provide for xxx the
qualifications, election, appointment and removal, term, salaries,
Even assuming that holdover is constitutionally permissible, and there powers and functions and duties of local officials[.] [Emphases
had been statutory basis for it (namely Section 7, Article VII of RA No. 9054) ours]
in the past,[60] we have to remember that the rule of holdover can only apply as
an available option where no express or implied legislative intent to the These provisions support the conclusion that no elections may be held on
contrary exists; it cannot apply where such contrary intent is evident.[61] any other date for the positions of President, Vice President, Members of
Congress and local officials, except when so provided by another Act of
Congress, in passing RA No. 10153, made it explicitly clear that it had Congress, or upon orders of a body or officer to whom Congress may have
the intention of suppressing the holdover rule that prevailed under RA No. 9054 delegated either the power or the authority to ascertain or fill in the details in
by completely removing this provision. The deletion is a policy decision that is the execution of that power.[63]
wholly within the discretion of Congress to make in the exercise of its plenary
legislative powers; this Court cannot pass upon questions of wisdom, justice or Notably, Congress has acted on the ARMM elections by postponing the
expediency of legislation,[62] except where an attendant unconstitutionality or scheduled August 2011 elections and setting another date May 13, 2011 for
grave abuse of discretion results. regional elections synchronized with the presidential, congressional and other
local elections. By so doing, Congress itself has made a policy decision in the
exercise of its legislative wisdom that it shall not call special elections as an causes the election in any polling place has not been held on
adjustment measure in synchronizing the ARMM elections with the other the date fixed, or had been suspended before the hour fixed
elections. by law for the closing of the voting, or after the voting and
during the preparation and the transmission of the election
After Congress has so acted, neither the Executive nor the Judiciary returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election
can act to the contrary by ordering special elections instead at the call of the results in a failure to elect, and in any of such cases the
COMELEC. This Court, particularly, cannot make this call without thereby failure or suspension of election would affect the result of the
supplanting the legislative decision and effectively legislating. To be sure, the election, the Commission shall, on the basis of a verified
Court is not without the power to declare an act of Congress null and void for petition by any interested party and after due notice and
being unconstitutional or for having been exercised in grave abuse of discretion. hearing, call for the holding or continuation of the election not
[64]
But our power rests on very narrow ground and is merely to annul a held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to elect on a date
contravening act of Congress; it is not to supplant the decision of Congress reasonably close to the date of the election not held, suspended
nor to mandate what Congress itself should have done in the exercise of its or which resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty
legislative powers. Thus, contrary to what the petition in G.R. No. 197282 urges, days after the cessation of the cause of such postponement or
we cannot compel COMELEC to call for special elections. suspension of the election or failure to elect. [Emphasis ours]
Based on these considerations, we hold that RA No. 10153 viewed in its Significantly, the grant to the President of the power to appoint OICs
proper context is a law that is not violative of the Constitution (specifically, its to undertake the functions of the elective members of the Regional Legislative
autonomy provisions), and one that is reasonable as well under the circumstances. Assembly is neither novel nor innovative. We hark back to our earlier
pronouncement in Menzon v. Petilla, etc., et al.:[79]
VI. Other Constitutional Concerns
It may be noted that under Commonwealth Act No. 588
Outside of the above concerns, it has been argued during the oral and the Revised Administrative Code of 1987, the President is
arguments that upholding the constitutionality of RA No. 10153 would set a empowered to make temporary appointments in certain public
dangerous precedent of giving the President the power to cancel elections offices, in case of any vacancy that may occur. Albeit both laws
anywhere in the country, thus allowing him to replace elective officials with deal only with the filling of vacancies in appointive positions.
OICs. However, in the absence of any contrary provision in the
This claim apparently misunderstands that an across-the-board Local Government Code and in the best interest of public
cancellation of elections is a matter for Congress, not for the President, to service, we see no cogent reason why the procedure thus
address. It is a power that falls within the powers of Congress in the exercise of outlined by the two laws may not be similarly applied in the
its legislative powers. Even Congress, as discussed above, is limited in what it can present case. The respondents contend that the provincial
legislatively undertake with respect to elections. board is the correct appointing power. This argument has no
merit. As between the President who has supervision over local
If RA No. 10153 cancelled the regular August 2011 elections, it was for governments as provided by law and the members of the board
a very specific and limited purpose the synchronization of elections. It was a who are junior to the vice-governor, we have no problem ruling
temporary means to a lasting end the synchronization of elections. Thus, RA No. in favor of the President, until the law provides otherwise.
10153 and the support that the Court gives this legislation are likewise clear and A vacancy creates an anomalous situation and finds no
specific, and cannot be transferred or applied to any other cause for the approbation under the law for it deprives the constituents of
cancellation of elections. Any other localized cancellation of elections and call their right of representation and governance in their own local
for special elections can occur only in accordance with the power already government.
delegated by Congress to the COMELEC, as above discussed.
In a republican form of government, the majority rules
Given that the incumbent ARMM elective officials cannot continue to through their chosen few, and if one of them is incapacitated or
act in a holdover capacity upon the expiration of their terms, and this Court absent, etc., the management of governmental affairs is, to
cannot compel the COMELEC to conduct special elections, the Court now has to that extent, may be hampered. Necessarily, there will be a
deal with the dilemma of a vacuum in governance in the ARMM. consequent delay in the delivery of basic services to the
people of Leyte if the Governor or the Vice-Governor is
To emphasize the dire situation a vacuum brings, it should not be missing.[80](Emphasis ours.)
forgotten that a period of 21 months or close to 2 years intervenes from the
time that the incumbent ARMM elective officials terms expired and the time the
As in Menzon, leaving the positions of ARMM Governor, Vice Governor, autonomy of the ARMM and insulate its own electoral processes from the rough
and members of the Regional Legislative Assembly vacant for 21 months, or and tumble of nationwide and local elections. This argument leaves us far from
almost 2 years, would clearly cause disruptions and delays in the delivery of basic convinced of its merits.
services to the people, in the proper management of the affairs of the regional
government, and in responding to critical developments that may arise. When As heretofore mentioned and discussed, while autonomous regions are
viewed in this context, allowing the President in the exercise of his granted political autonomy, the framers of the Constitution never equated
constitutionally-recognized appointment power to appoint OICs is, in our autonomy with independence. The ARMM as a regional entity thus continues to
judgment, a reasonable measure to take. operate within the larger framework of the State and is still subject to the
national policies set by the national government, save only for those specific
B. Autonomy in the ARMM areas reserved by the Constitution for regional autonomous determination. As
reflected during the constitutional deliberations of the provisions on autonomous
It is further argued that while synchronization may be constitutionally regions:
mandated, it cannot be used to defeat or to impede the autonomy that the
Constitution granted to the ARMM. Phrased in this manner, one would presume Mr. Bennagen. xxx We do not see here a complete
that there exists a conflict between two recognized Constitutional mandates separation from the central government, but rather an
synchronization and regional autonomy such that it is necessary to choose one efficient working relationship between the autonomous region
over the other. and the central government. We see this as an effective
partnership, not a separation.
We find this to be an erroneous approach that violates a basic principle
in constitutional construction ut magis valeat quam pereat: that the Constitution Mr. Romulo. Therefore, complete autonomy is not really
is to be interpreted as a whole,[81] and one mandate should not be given thought of as complete independence.
importance over the other except where the primacy of one over the other is
clear.[82] We refer to the Courts declaration in Ang-Angco v. Castillo, et al., Mr. Ople. We define it as a measure of self-
[83]
thus: government within the larger political framework of the
nation.[84] [Emphasis supplied.]
A provision of the constitution should not be construed
in isolation from the rest. Rather, the constitution must be This exchange of course is fully and expressly reflected in the above-quoted
interpreted as a whole, and apparently, conflicting provisions Section 17, Article X of the Constitution, and by the express reservation under
should be reconciled and harmonized in a manner that may Section 1 of the same Article that autonomy shall be within the framework of
give to all of them full force and effect. [Emphasis this Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as the territorial integrity
supplied.] of the Republic of the Philippines.
Synchronization is an interest that is as constitutionally entrenched as regional Interestingly, the framers of the Constitution initially proposed to
autonomy. They are interests that this Court should reconcile and give effect to, remove Section 17 of Article X, believing it to be unnecessary in light of the
in the way that Congress did in RA No. 10153 which provides the measure to enumeration of powers granted to autonomous regions in Section 20, Article X of
transit to synchronized regional elections with the least disturbance on the the Constitution. Upon further reflection, the framers decided to reinstate the
interests that must be respected. Particularly, regional autonomy will be provision in order to make it clear, once and for all, that these are the limits of
respected instead of being sidelined, as the law does not in any way alter, change the powers of the autonomous government. Those not enumerated are actually
or modify its governing features, except in a very temporary manner and only as to be exercised by the national government[.][85] Of note is the Courts
necessitated by the attendant circumstances. pronouncement in Pimentel, Jr. v. Hon. Aguirre[86] which we quote:
Elsewhere, it has also been argued that the ARMM elections should not be Under the Philippine concept of local autonomy, the
synchronized with the national and local elections in order to maintain the national government has not completely relinquished all its
powers over local governments, including autonomous regions. perform a duty enjoined by law or to act at all in contemplation of the law as
Only administrative powers over local affairs are delegated to where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of
political subdivisions. The purpose of the delegation is to make passion and hostility.[90]
governance more directly responsive and effective at the local
levels. In turn, economic, political and social development at the We find that Congress, in passing RA No. 10153, acted strictly within its
smaller political units are expected to propel social and constitutional mandate. Given an array of choices, it acted within due
economic growth and development. But to enable the country constitutional bounds and with marked reasonableness in light of the necessary
to develop as a whole, the programs and policies effected adjustments that synchronization demands. Congress, therefore, cannot be
locally must be integrated and coordinated towards a accused of any evasion of a positive duty or of a refusal to perform its duty. We
common national goal. Thus, policy-setting for the entire thus find no reason to accord merit to the petitioners claims of grave abuse of
country still lies in the President and Congress. [Emphasis discretion.
ours.]
On the general claim that RA No. 10153 is unconstitutional, we can only
In other words, the autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be invoked reiterate the established rule that every statute is presumed valid. [91] Congress,
to defeat national policies and concerns. Since the synchronization of elections is thus, has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality of its acts, and the
not just a regional concern but a national one, the ARMM is subject to it; the party challenging the validity of a statute has the onerous task of rebutting this
regional autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be used to exempt the region presumption.[92] Any reasonable doubt about the validity of the law should be
from having to act in accordance with a national policy mandated by no less than resolved in favor of its constitutionality.[93]As this Court declared in Garcia v.
the Constitution. Executive Secretary:[94]
RESOLUTION
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N.
OCHOA, JR., and the COMMISSION ON BRION, J.:
ELECTIONS,
Respondents.
x-----------------------------------------x We resolve: (a) the motion for reconsideration filed by petitioners Datu
MINORITY RIGHTS FORUM, PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 197392 Michael Abas Kida, et al. in G.R. No. 196271; (b) the motion for reconsideration
INC., filed by petitioner Rep. Edcel Lagman in G.R. No. 197221; (c) the ex abundante ad
Respondents-Intervenor. cautelam motion for reconsideration filed by petitioner Basari Mapupuno in G.R.
No. 196305; (d) the motion for reconsideration filed by petitioner Atty. Romulo
Macalintal in G.R. No. 197282; (e) the motion for reconsideration filed by
petitioners Almarim Centi Tillah, Datu Casan Conding Cana and Partido
Demokratiko Pilipino Lakas ng Bayan in G.R. No. 197280; (f) the manifestation and
motion filed by petitioners Almarim Centi Tillah, et al. in G.R. No. 197280; and (g)
the very urgent motion to issue clarificatory resolution that the temporary
restraining order (TRO) is still existing and effective.
G.R. No. 197454 These motions assail our Decision dated October 18, 2011, where we
upheld the constitutionality of Republic Act (RA) No. 10153. Pursuant to the
Present: constitutional mandate of synchronization, RA No. 10153 postponed the regional
CORONA, C.J., elections in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao ( ARMM) (which were
CARPIO, scheduled to be held on the second Monday of August 2011) to the second
VELASCO, JR., Monday of May 2013 and recognized the Presidents power to appoint officers-in-
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, charge (OICs) to temporarily assume these positions upon the expiration of the
BRION, terms of the elected officials.
The Motions for Reconsideration AND REPRESENTATIVE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN ARMM
The petitioners in G.R. No. 196271 raise the following grounds in support of their INDUBITABLY PRECLUDES THE APPOINTMENT BY
motion: THE PRESIDENT OF OFFICERS-IN-CHARGE (OICs),
ALBEIT MOMENTARY OR TEMPORARY, FOR THE
I. THE HONORABLE COURT ERRED IN POSITIONS OF ARMM GOVERNOR, VICE
CONCLUDING THAT THE ARMM ELECTIONS ARE GOVERNOR AND MEMBERS OF THE REGIONAL
LOCAL ELECTIONS, CONSIDERING THAT THE ASSEMBLY.
CONSTITUTION GIVES THE ARMM A SPECIAL
STATUS AND IS SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM III. THE PRESIDENTS APPOINTING POWER IS
ORDINARY LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS. LIMITED TO APPOINTIVE OFFICIALS AND DOES
NOT EXTEND TO ELECTIVE OFFICIALS EVEN AS
II. R.A. 10153 AND R.A. 9333 AMEND THE ORGANIC THE PRESIDENT IS ONLY VESTED WITH
ACT. SUPERVISORY POWERS OVER THE ARMM, THEREBY
NEGATING THE AWESOME POWER TO APPOINT
III. THE SUPERMAJORITY PROVISIONS OF THE AND REMOVE OICs OCCUPYING ELECTIVE
ORGANIC ACT (R.A. 9054) ARE NOT IRREPEALABLE POSITIONS.
LAWS.
IV. THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT PROSCRIBE
IV. SECTION 3, ARTICLE XVII OF R.A. 9054 DOES THE HOLDOVER OF ARMM ELECTED OFFICIALS
NOT VIOLATE SECTION 18, ARTICLE X OF THE PENDING THE ELECTION AND QUALIFICATION OF
CONSTITUTION. THEIR SUCCESSORS.
V. BALANCE OF INTERESTS TILT IN FAVOR OF V. THE RULING IN OSMENA DOES NOT APPLY TO
THE DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLE[.][1] ARMM ELECTED OFFICIALS WHOSE TERMS OF
OFFICE ARE NOT PROVIDED FOR BY THE
CONSTITUTION BUT PRESCRIBED BY THE
The petitioner in G.R. No. 197221 raises similar grounds, arguing that: ORGANIC ACTS.
xxxx
The petitioner in G.R. No. 196305 further asserts that:
V. THE HONORABLE COURT COMMITTED A
SERIOUS ERROR IN DECLARING THE HOLD-OVER
I. BEFORE THE COURT MAY CONSTRUE OR OF ARMM ELECTIVE OFFICIALS
INTERPRET A STATUTE, IT IS A CONDITION SINE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
QUA NON THAT THERE BE DOUBT OR AMBIGUITY
IN ITS LANGUAGE. xxxx
THE TRANSITORY PROVISIONS HOWEVER ARE CLEAR AND VI. THE HONORABLE COURT COMMITTED A
UNAMBIGUOUS: THEY REFER TO THE 1992 SERIOUS ERROR IN UPHOLDING THE
ELECTIONS AND TURN-OVER OF ELECTIVE APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS-IN-CHARGE. [3] (italics
OFFICIALS. and underscoring supplied)
IN THUS RECOGNIZING A SUPPOSED INTENT OF
THE FRAMERS, AND APPLYING THE SAME TO
ELECTIONS 20 YEARS AFTER, THE HONORABLE The petitioner in G.R. No. 197282 contends that:
SUPREME COURT MAY HAVE
VIOLATED THE FOREMOST RULE IN STATUTORY
CONSTRUCTION. A.
THE HONORABLE COURT ERRED IN RULING THAT THE d) if the choice is between elective officials continuing to hold
APPOINTMENT BY THE PRESIDENT OF OICs FOR THE their offices even after their terms are over and non-elective
ARMM REGIONAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT VIOLATIVE OF individuals getting into the vacant elective positions by
THE CONSTITUTION. appointment as OICs, the holdover option is the better choice;
(d) Does the COMELEC have the power to call for special
Finally, the petitioners in G.R. No. 197280 argue that: elections in ARMM?
a) the Constitutional mandate of synchronization does not (e) Does granting the President the power to appoint OICs
apply to the ARMM elections; violate the elective and representative nature of ARMM
regional legislative and executive offices?
b) RA No. 10153 negates the basic principle of republican
democracy which, by constitutional mandate, guides the (f) Does the appointment power granted to the President
governance of the Republic; exceed the Presidents supervisory powers over autonomous
regions?
To fully appreciate the constitutional intent behind these provisions, we
The Courts Ruling refer to the discussions of the Constitutional Commission:
We deny the motions for lack of merit. MR. MAAMBONG. For purposes of identification, I will now
read a section which we will temporarily indicate as Section 14.
Synchronization mandate includes ARMM elections It reads: THE SENATORS, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES AND THE LOCAL OFFICIALS ELECTED
The Court was unanimous in holding that the Constitution mandates the IN THE FIRST ELECTION SHALL SERVE FOR FIVE YEARS,
synchronization of national and local elections. While the Constitution does not TO EXPIRE AT NOON OF JUNE 1992.
expressly instruct Congress to synchronize the national and local elections, the
intention can be inferred from the following provisions of the Transitory This was presented by Commissioner Davide, so may we ask that
Provisions (Article XVIII) of the Constitution, which state: Commissioner Davide be recognized.
Section 1. The first elections of Members of the Congress THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rodrigo). Commissioner Davide
under this Constitution shall be held on the second Monday of is recognized.
May, 1987.
MR. DAVIDE. Before going to the proposed amendment, I would
The first local elections shall be held on a date to be only state that in view of the action taken by the Commission on
determined by the President, which may be simultaneous with Section 2 earlier, I am formulating a new proposal. It will read
the election of the Members of the Congress. It shall include as follows: THE SENATORS, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF
the election of all Members of the city or municipal councils in REPRESENTATIVES AND THE LOCAL OFFICIALS FIRST
the Metropolitan Manila area. ELECTED UNDER THIS CONSTITUTION SHALL SERVE
UNTIL NOON OF JUNE 30, 1992.
Section 2. The Senators, Members of the House of
Representatives, and the local officials first elected under this I proposed this because of the proposed section of the Article
Constitution shall serve until noon of June 30, 1992. on Transitory Provisions giving a term to the incumbent
President and Vice-President until 1992. Necessarily then, since
Of the Senators elected in the elections in 1992, the first the term provided by the Commission for Members of the
twelve obtaining the highest number of votes shall serve for six Lower House and for local officials is three years, if there will
years and the remaining twelve for three years. be an election in 1987, the next election for said officers will
be in 1990, and it would be very close to 1992. We could never
xxxx attain, subsequently, any synchronization of election which is
once every three years.
Section 5. The six-year term of the incumbent President and
Vice-President elected in the February 7, 1986 election is, for So under my proposal we will be able to begin actual
purposes of synchronization of elections, hereby extended to synchronization in 1992, and consequently, we should not have
noon of June 30, 1992. a local election or an election for Members of the Lower House
in 1990 for them to be able to complete their term of three
The first regular elections for the President and Vice-President years each. And if we also stagger the Senate, upon the first
under this Constitution shall be held on the second Monday of election it will result in an election in 1993 for the Senate alone,
May, 1992. and there will be an election for 12 Senators in 1990. But for
the remaining 12 who will be elected in 1987, if their term is
for six years, their election will be in 1993. So, consequently we
will have elections in 1990, in 1992 and in 1993. The later Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer.
election will be limited to only 12 Senators and of course to the
local officials and the Members of the Lower House. But, xxxx
definitely, thereafter we can never have an election once every
three years, therefore defeating the very purpose of the MR. GUINGONA. What will be synchronized, therefore, is the
Commission when we adopted the term of six years for the election of the incumbent President and Vice-President in 1992.
President and another six years for the Senators with the
possibility of staggering with 12 to serve for six years and 12 MR. DAVIDE. Yes.
for three years insofar as the first Senators are
concerned. And so my proposal is the only way to effect the MR. GUINGONA. Not the reverse. Will the committee not
first synchronized election which would mean, necessarily, a synchronize the election of the Senators and local officials with
bonus of two years to the Members of the Lower House and the election of the President?
a bonus of two years to the local elective officials.
MR. DAVIDE. It works both ways, Mr. Presiding Officer. The
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rodrigo). What does the attempt here is on the assumption that the provision of the
committee say? Transitory Provisions on the term of the incumbent President
and Vice-President would really end in 1992.
MR. DE CASTRO. Mr. Presiding Officer.
MR. GUINGONA. Yes.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rodrigo). Commissioner de
Castro is recognized. MR. DAVIDE. In other words, there will be a single election
in 1992 for all, from the President up to the municipal
MR. DE CASTRO. Thank you. officials.[5] (emphases and underscoring ours)
To reiterate, Article X of the Constitution, entitled Local Government, To be sure, the fact that the ARMM possesses more powers than other
clearly shows the intention of the Constitution to classify autonomous regions, provinces, cities, or municipalities is not enough reason to treat the ARMM
such as the ARMM, as local governments. We refer to Section 1 of this Article, regional elections differently from the other local elections. Ubi lex non
which provides: distinguit nec nos distinguire debemus. When the law does not distinguish, we
must not distinguish.[10]
Section 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the
Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities, RA No. 10153 does not amend RA No. 9054
municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous
regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras as hereinafter The petitioners are adamant that the provisions of RA No. 10153, in postponing
provided. the ARMM elections, amend RA No. 9054.
We cannot agree with their position.
The inclusion of autonomous regions in the enumeration of political A thorough reading of RA No. 9054 reveals that it fixes the schedule
subdivisions of the State under the heading Local Government indicates quite for only the first ARMM elections;[11] it does not provide the date for the
clearly the constitutional intent to consider autonomous regions as one of the succeeding regular ARMM elections. In providing for the date of the regular
forms of local governments. ARMM elections, RA No. 9333 and RA No. 10153 clearly do not amend RA No.
9054 since these laws do not change or revise any provision in RA No. 9054. In
That the Constitution mentions only the national government and the fixing the date of the ARMM elections subsequent to the first election, RA No.
local governments, and does not make a distinction between the local government 9333 and RA No. 10153 merely filled the gap left in RA No. 9054.
and the regional government, is particularly revealing, betraying as it does the
intention of the framers of the Constitution to consider the autonomous regions We reiterate our previous observations:
not as separate forms of government, but as political units which, while having
more powers and attributes than other local government units, still remain under This view that Congress thought it best to leave the
the category of local governments. Since autonomous regions are classified as determination of the date of succeeding ARMM elections to
local governments, it follows that elections held in autonomous regions are also legislative discretion finds support in ARMMs recent history.
considered as local elections.
To recall, RA No. 10153 is not the first law passed that
rescheduled the ARMM elections. The First Organic Act RA
No. 6734 not only did not fix the date of the subsequent omission at the time of enactment, whether careless or calculated, cannot be
elections; it did not even fix the specific date of the first judicially supplied however later wisdom may recommend the inclusion. [13] Courts
ARMM elections, leaving the date to be fixed in another are not authorized to insert into the law what they think should be in it or to
legislative enactment. Consequently, RA No. 7647, RA No. supply what they think the legislature would have supplied if its attention had
8176, RA No. 8746, RA No. 8753, and RA No. 9012 were all been called to the omission.[14] Providing for lapses within the law falls within the
enacted by Congress to fix the dates of the ARMM exclusive domain of the legislature, and courts, no matter how well-meaning, have
elections. Since these laws did not change or modify any part or no authority to intrude into this clearly delineated space.
provision of RA No. 6734, they were not amendments to this
latter law. Consequently, there was no need to submit them to Since RA No. 10153 does not amend, but merely fills in the gap in RA No.
any plebiscite for ratification. 9054, there is no need for RA No. 10153 to comply with the amendment
requirements set forth in Article XVII of RA No. 9054.
The Second Organic Act RA No. 9054 which lapsed
into law on March 31, 2001, provided that the first elections Supermajority vote requirement makes RA No. 9054 an irrepealable law
would be held on the second Monday of September 2001.
Thereafter, Congress passed RA No. 9140 to reset the date of Even assuming that RA No. 10153 amends RA No. 9054, however, we
the ARMM elections. Significantly, while RA No. 9140 also have already established that the supermajority vote requirement set forth in
scheduled the plebiscite for the ratification of the Second Section 1, Article XVII of RA No. 9054[15] is unconstitutional for violating the
Organic Act (RA No. 9054), the new date of the ARMM principle that Congress cannot pass irrepealable laws.
regional elections fixed in RA No. 9140 was not among the
provisions ratified in the plebiscite held to approve RA No. The power of the legislature to make laws includes the power to amend and
9054. Thereafter, Congress passed RA No. 9333, which further repeal these laws. Where the legislature, by its own act, attempts to limit its
reset the date of the ARMM regional elections. Again, this law power to amend or repeal laws, the Court has the duty to strike down such act
was not ratified through a plebiscite. for interfering with the plenary powers of Congress. As we explained
in Duarte v. Dade:[16]
From these legislative actions, we see the clear
intention of Congress to treat the laws which fix the date of A state legislature has a plenary law-making power over all
the subsequent ARMM elections as separate and distinct from subjects, whether pertaining to persons or things, within its
the Organic Acts. Congress only acted consistently with this territorial jurisdiction, either to introduce new laws or repeal
intent when it passed RA No. 10153 without requiring the old, unless prohibited expressly or by implication by the
compliance with the amendment prerequisites embodied in federal constitution or limited or restrained by its own. It
Section 1 and Section 3, Article XVII of RA No. 9054. cannot bind itself or its successors by enacting irrepealable
[12]
(emphases supplied) laws except when so restrained. Every legislative body may
modify or abolish the acts passed by itself or its predecessors.
This power of repeal may be exercised at the same session at
The petitioner in G.R. No. 196305 contends, however, that there is no which the original act was passed; and even while a bill is in its
lacuna in RA No. 9054 as regards the date of the subsequent ARMM elections. progress and before it becomes a law. This legislature cannot
In his estimation, it can be implied from the provisions of RA No. 9054 that the bind a future legislature to a particular mode of repeal. It
succeeding elections are to be held three years after the date of the first cannot declare in advance the intent of subsequent
ARMM regional elections. legislatures or the effect of subsequent legislation upon
existing statutes. [emphasis ours]
We find this an erroneous assertion. Well-settled is the rule that the
court may not, in the guise of interpretation, enlarge the scope of a statute and
include therein situations not provided nor intended by the lawmakers. An
Under our Constitution, each House of Congress has the power to undergo the plebiscite requirement before becoming effective, this would lead
approve bills by a mere majority vote, provided there is quorum. [17] In requiring to impractical and illogical results hampering the ARMMs progress by impeding
all laws which amend RA No. 9054 to comply with a higher voting requirement Congress from enacting laws that timely address problems as they arise in the
than the Constitution provides (2/3 vote), Congress, which enacted RA No. 9054, region, as well as weighing down the ARMM government with the costs that
clearly violated the very principle which we sought to establish in Duarte. To unavoidably follow the holding of a plebiscite.
reiterate, the act of one legislature is not binding upon, and cannot tie the hands
of, future legislatures.[18] Interestingly, the petitioner in G.R. No. 197282 posits that RA No.
10153, in giving the President the power to appoint OICs to take the place of the
We also highlight an important point raised by Justice Antonio T. Carpio elective officials of the ARMM, creates a fundamental change in the basic
in his dissenting opinion, where he stated: Section 1, Article XVII of RA 9054 structure of the government, and thus requires compliance with the plebiscite
erects a high vote threshold for each House of Congress to surmount, requirement embodied in RA No. 9054.
effectively and unconstitutionally, taking RA 9054 beyond the reach of Congress
amendatory powers. One Congress cannot limit or reduce the plenary legislative Again, we disagree.
power of succeeding Congresses by requiring a higher vote threshold than what
the Constitution requires to enact, amend or repeal laws. No law can be passed The pertinent provision in this regard is Section 3 of RA No. 10153,
fixing such a higher vote threshold because Congress has no power, by which reads:
ordinary legislation, to amend the Constitution.[19]
Section 3. Appointment of Officers-in-Charge. The President
Plebiscite requirement in RA No. 9054 overly broad shall appoint officers-in-charge for the Office of the Regional
Governor, Regional Vice Governor and Members of the Regional
Similarly, we struck down the petitioners contention that the plebiscite Legislative Assembly who shall perform the functions pertaining
requirement[20] applies to all amendments of RA No. 9054 for being an to the said offices until the officials duly elected in the May
unreasonable enlargement of the plebiscite requirement set forth in the 2013 elections shall have qualified and assumed office.
Constitution.
We cannot see how the above-quoted provision has changed the basic
Section 18, Article X of the Constitution provides that [t]he creation of structure of the ARMM regional government. On the contrary, this provision
the autonomous region shall be effective when approved by majority of the votes clearly preserves the basic structure of the ARMM regional government when it
cast by the constituent units in a plebiscite called for the purpose[.] We recognizes the offices of the ARMM regional government and directs the OICs
interpreted this to mean that only amendments to, or revisions of, the Organic who shall temporarily assume these offices to perform the functions pertaining
Act constitutionally-essential to the creation of autonomous regions i.e., those to the said offices.
aspects specifically mentioned in the Constitution which Congress must provide
for in the Organic Act[21] require ratification through a plebiscite. We stand by Unconstitutionality of the holdover provision
this interpretation.
The petitioners are one in defending the constitutionality of Section 7(1),
The petitioners argue that to require all amendments to RA No. 9054 to Article VII of RA No. 9054, which allows the regional officials to remain in their
comply with the plebiscite requirement is to recognize that sovereignty resides positions in a holdover capacity. The petitioners essentially argue that the
primarily in the people. ARMM regional officials should be allowed to remain in their respective positions
until the May 2013 elections since there is no specific provision in the
While we agree with the petitioners underlying premise that sovereignty Constitution which prohibits regional elective officials from performing their
ultimately resides with the people, we disagree that this legal reality duties in a holdover capacity.
necessitates compliance with the plebiscite requirement for allamendments to
RA No. 9054. For if we were to go by the petitioners interpretation of Section The pertinent provision of the Constitution is Section 8, Article X which
18, Article X of the Constitution that all amendments to the Organic Act have to provides:
Even assuming that a holdover is constitutionally permissible, and there
Section 8. The term of office of elective local officials, had been statutory basis for it (namely Section 7, Article VII of RA No.
except barangay officials, which shall be determined by 9054), the rule of holdover can only apply as an available option where no express
law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for or implied legislative intent to the contrary exists; it cannot apply where such
more than three consecutive terms. [emphases ours] contrary intent is evident.[23]
Congress, in passing RA No. 10153 and removing the holdover option, has
On the other hand, Section 7(1), Article VII of RA No. 9054 provides: made it clear that it wants to suppress the holdover rule expressed in RA No.
9054. Congress, in the exercise of its plenary legislative powers, has clearly
Section 7. Terms of Office of Elective Regional Officials. (1) acted within its discretion when it deleted the holdover option, and this Court
Terms of Office. The terms of office of the Regional Governor, has no authority to question the wisdom of this decision, absent any evidence of
Regional Vice Governor and members of the Regional Assembly unconstitutionality or grave abuse of discretion. It is for the legislature and the
shall be for a period of three (3) years, which shall begin at executive, and not this Court, to decide how to fill the vacancies in the ARMM
noon on the 30th day of September next following the day of regional government which arise from the legislature complying with the
the election and shall end at noon of the same date three (3) constitutional mandate of synchronization.
years thereafter. The incumbent elective officials of the
autonomous region shall continue in effect until their COMELEC has no authority to hold special elections
successors are elected and qualified.
Neither do we find any merit in the contention that the Commission on Elections
(COMELEC) is sufficiently empowered to set the date of special elections in the
The clear wording of Section 8, Article X of the Constitution expresses ARMM. To recall, the Constitution has merely empowered the COMELEC to
the intent of the framers of the Constitution to categorically set a limitation on enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an
the period within which all elective local officials can occupy their offices. We election.[24] Although the legislature, under the Omnibus Election Code ( Batas
have already established that elective ARMM officials are also local officials; Pambansa Bilang [BP] 881), has granted the COMELEC the power to postpone
they are, thus, bound by the three-year term limit prescribed by the elections to another date, this power is confined to the specific terms and
Constitution. It, therefore, becomes irrelevant that the Constitution does not circumstances provided for in the law. Specifically, this power falls within the
expressly prohibit elective officials from acting in a holdover capacity. Short of narrow confines of the following provisions:
amending the Constitution, Congress has no authority to extend the three-
year term limit by inserting a holdover provision in RA No. 9054. Thus, the Section 5. Postponement of election. - When for any serious
term of three years for local officials should stay at three (3) years, as fixed by cause such as violence, terrorism, loss or destruction of
the Constitution, and cannot be extended by holdover by Congress. election paraphernalia or records, force majeure, and other
analogous causes of such a nature that the holding of a free,
orderly and honest election should become impossible in any
Admittedly, we have, in the past, recognized the validity of holdover political subdivision, the Commission, motu proprio or upon a
provisions in various laws. One significant difference between the present case verified petition by any interested party, and after due notice
and these past cases[22] is that while these past cases all refer to and hearing, whereby all interested parties are afforded equal
elective barangay or sangguniang kabataan officials whose terms of office opportunity to be heard, shall postpone the election therein to
are not explicitly provided for in the Constitution, the present case refers to a date which should be reasonably close to the date of the
local elective officials - the ARMM Governor, the ARMM Vice Governor, and the election not held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to
members of the Regional Legislative Assembly - whose terms fall within the elect but not later than thirty days after the cessation of the
three-year term limit set by Section 8, Article X of the Constitution. cause for such postponement or suspension of the election or
failure to elect.
Section 6. Failure of election. - If, on account of force
majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous Presidents authority to appoint OICs
causes the election in any polling place has not been held on
the date fixed, or had been suspended before the hour fixed The petitioner in G.R. No. 197221 argues that the Presidents power to
by law for the closing of the voting, or after the voting and appoint pertains only to appointive positions and cannot extend to positions held
during the preparation and the transmission of the election by elective officials.
returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election
results in a failure to elect, and in any of such cases the The power to appoint has traditionally been recognized as executive in
failure or suspension of election would affect the result of the nature.[25] Section 16, Article VII of the Constitution describes in broad strokes
election, the Commission shall, on the basis of a verified the extent of this power, thus:
petition by any interested party and after due notice and
hearing, call for the holding or continuation of the election not Section 16. The President shall nominate and, with the consent
held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to elect on a date of the Commission on Appointments, appoint the heads of the
reasonably close to the date of the election not held, suspended executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers
or which resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty and consuls, or officers of the armed forces from the rank of
days after the cessation of the cause of such postponement or colonel or naval captain, and other officers whose appointments
suspension of the election or failure to elect. [emphases and are vested in him in this Constitution. He shall also appoint all
underscoring ours] other officers of the Government whose appointments are
not otherwise provided for by law, and those whom he may
be authorized by law to appoint. The Congress may, by law,
As we have previously observed in our assailed decision, both Section 5 vest the appointment of other officers lower in rank in the
and Section 6 of BP 881 address instances where elections have already been President alone, in the courts, or in the heads of departments,
scheduled to take place but do not occur or had to be suspended because agencies, commissions, or boards. [emphasis ours]
of unexpected and unforeseen circumstances, such as violence, fraud, terrorism,
and other analogous circumstances.
The 1935 Constitution contained a provision similar to the one quoted
above. Section 10(3), Article VII of the 1935 Constitution provides:
In contrast, the ARMM elections were postponed by law, in furtherance
of the constitutional mandate of synchronization of national and local elections. (3) The President shall nominate and with the consent of the
Obviously, this does not fall under any of the circumstances contemplated by Commission on Appointments, shall appoint the heads of the
Section 5 or Section 6 of BP 881. executive departments and bureaus, officers of the Army from
the rank of colonel, of the Navy and Air Forces from the rank
More importantly, RA No. 10153 has already fixed the date for the next of captain or commander, and all other officers of the
ARMM elections and the COMELEC has no authority to set a different election Government whose appointments are not herein otherwise
date. provided for, and those whom he may be authorized by law
to appoint; but the Congress may by law vest the appointment
Even assuming that the COMELEC has the authority to hold special elections, and of inferior officers, in the President alone, in the courts, or in
this Court can compel the COMELEC to do so, there is still the problem of having the heads of departments. [emphasis ours]
to shorten the terms of the newly elected officials in order to synchronize the
ARMM elections with the May 2013 national and local elections. Obviously,
neither the Court nor the COMELEC has the authority to do this, amounting as it The main distinction between the provision in the 1987 Constitution and its
does to an amendment of Section 8, Article X of the Constitution, which limits counterpart in the 1935 Constitution is the sentence construction; while in the
the term of local officials to three years. 1935 Constitution, the various appointments the President can make are
enumerated in a single sentence, the 1987 Constitution enumerates the various The petitioners also jointly assert that RA No. 10153, in granting the
appointments the President is empowered to make and divides the enumeration in President the power to appoint OICs in elective positions, violates Section 16,
two sentences. The change in style is significant; in providing for this change, Article X of the Constitution,[30] which merely grants the President the power of
the framers of the 1987 Constitution clearly sought to make a distinction supervision over autonomous regions.
between the first group of presidential appointments and the second group of
presidential appointments, as made evident in the following exchange: This is an overly restrictive interpretation of the Presidents
appointment power. There is no incompatibility between the Presidents power of
MR. FOZ. Madame President x x x I propose to put a period (.) supervision over local governments and autonomous regions, and the power
after captain and x x x delete and all and substitute it with HE granted to the President, within the specific confines of RA No. 10153, to
SHALL ALSO APPOINT ANY. appoint OICs.
MR. REGALADO. Madam President, the Committee accepts the The power of supervision is defined as the power of a superior officer to see to
proposed amendment because it makes it clear that those other it that lower officers perform their functions in accordance with law. [31] This is
officers mentioned therein do not have to be confirmed by the distinguished from the power of control or the power of an officer to alter or
Commission on Appointments.[26] modify or set aside what a subordinate officer had done in the performance of
his duties and to substitute the judgment of the former for the latter. [32]
The first group of presidential appointments, specified as the heads of the The petitioners apprehension regarding the Presidents alleged power of
executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, or control over the OICs is rooted in their belief that the Presidents appointment
officers of the Armed Forces, and other officers whose appointments are power includes the power to remove these officials at will. In this way, the
vested in the President by the Constitution, pertains to the appointive officials petitioners foresee that the appointed OICs will be beholden to the President,
who have to be confirmed by the Commission on Appointments. and act as representatives of the President and not of the people.
Section 3 of RA No. 10153 expressly contradicts the petitioners
The second group of officials the President can appoint are all other supposition. The provision states:
officers of the Government whose appointments are not otherwise provided for
by law, and those whom he may be authorized by law to appoint. [27] The second Section 3. Appointment of Officers-in-Charge. The President
sentence acts as the catch-all provision for the Presidents appointment power, in shall appoint officers-in-charge for the Office of the Regional
recognition of the fact that the power to appoint is essentially executive in Governor, Regional Vice Governor and Members of the Regional
nature.[28] The wide latitude given to the President to appoint is further Legislative Assembly who shall perform the functions pertaining
demonstrated by the recognition of the Presidents power to appoint to the said offices until the officials duly elected in the May
officials whose appointments are not even provided for by law . In other 2013 elections shall have qualified and assumed office.
words, where there are offices which have to be filled, but the law does not
provide the process for filling them, the Constitution recognizes the power of
the President to fill the office by appointment. The wording of the law is clear. Once the President has appointed the
OICs for the offices of the Governor, Vice Governor and members of the
Any limitation on or qualification to the exercise of the Presidents Regional Legislative Assembly, these same officials will remain in office until
appointment power should be strictly construed and must be clearly stated in they are replaced by the duly elected officials in the May 2013 elections.
order to be recognized.[29] Given that the President derives his power to appoint Nothing in this provision even hints that the President has the power to recall
OICs in the ARMM regional government from law, it falls under the classification the appointments he already made. Clearly, the petitioners fears in this regard
of presidential appointments covered by the second sentence of Section 16, are more apparent than real.
Article VII of the Constitution; the Presidents appointment power thus rests on
clear constitutional basis. RA No. 10153 as an interim measure
We reiterate once more the importance of considering RA No. 10153 not The grant to the President of the power to appoint OICs in place of the
in a vacuum, but within the context it was enacted in. In the first place, Congress elective members of the Regional Legislative Assembly is neither novel nor
enacted RA No. 10153 primarily to heed the constitutional mandate to innovative. The power granted to the President, via RA No. 10153, to appoint
synchronize the ARMM regional elections with the national and local elections. To members of the Regional Legislative Assembly is comparable to the power
do this, Congress had to postpone the scheduled ARMM elections for another granted by BP 881 (the Omnibus Election Code) to the President to fill any
date, leaving it with the problem of how to provide the ARMM with governance vacancy for any cause in the Regional Legislative Assembly (then called
in the intervening period, between the expiration of the term of those elected the Sangguniang Pampook).[34]
in August 2008 and the assumption to office twenty-one (21) months away of
those who will win in the synchronized elections on May 13, 2013. Executive is not bound by the principle of judicial courtesy
In our assailed Decision, we already identified the three possible The petitioners in G.R. No. 197280, in their Manifestation and Motion dated
solutions open to Congress to address the problem created by synchronization December 21, 2011, question the propriety of the appointment by the President
(a) allow the incumbent officials to remain in office after the expiration of their of Mujiv Hataman as acting Governor and Bainon Karon as acting Vice Governor
terms in a holdover capacity; (b) call for special elections to be held, and shorten of the ARMM. They argue that since our previous decision was based on a close
the terms of those to be elected so the next ARMM regional elections can be vote of 8-7, and given the numerous motions for reconsideration filed by the
held on May 13, 2013; or (c) recognize that the President, in the exercise of his parties, the President, in recognition of the principle of judicial courtesy, should
appointment powers and in line with his power of supervision over the ARMM, can have refrained from implementing our decision until we have ruled with finality
appoint interim OICs to hold the vacated positions in the ARMM regional on this case.
government upon the expiration of their terms. We have already established the
unconstitutionality of the first two options, leaving us to consider the last We find the petitioners reasoning specious.
available option.
Firstly, the principle of judicial courtesy is based on the hierarchy of courts and
In this way, RA No. 10153 is in reality an interim measure, enacted to applies only to lower courts in instances where, even if there is no writ of
respond to the adjustment that synchronization requires. Given the context, we preliminary injunction or TRO issued by a higher court, it would be proper for a
have to judge RA No. 10153 by the standard of reasonableness in responding to lower court to suspend its proceedings for practical and ethical considerations.
[35]
the challenges brought about by synchronizing the ARMM elections with the In other words, the principle of judicial courtesy applies where there is a
national and local elections. In other words, given the plain unconstitutionality strong probability that the issues before the higher court would be rendered
of providing for a holdover and the unavailability of constitutional moot and moribund as a result of the continuation of the proceedings in the
possibilities for lengthening or shortening the term of the elected ARMM lower court or court of origin. [36] Consequently, this principle cannot be applied to
officials, is the choice of the Presidents power to appoint for a fixed and the President, who represents a co-equal branch of government. To suggest
specific period as an interim measure, and as allowed under Section 16, otherwise would be to disregard the principle of separation of powers, on which
Article VII of the Constitution an unconstitutional or unreasonable choice our whole system of government is founded upon.
for Congress to make?[33] Secondly, the fact that our previous decision was based on a slim vote of 8-7
does not, and cannot, have the effect of making our ruling any less effective or
We admit that synchronization will temporarily disrupt the election binding. Regardless of how close the voting is, so long as there is concurrence of
process in a local community, the ARMM, as well as the communitys choice of the majority of the members of the en banc who actually took part in the
leaders. However, we have to keep in mind that the adoption of this measure is a deliberations of the case,[37] a decision garnering only 8 votes out of 15 members
matter of necessity in order to comply with a mandate that the Constitution is still a decision of the Supreme Court en banc and must be respected as such.
itself has set out for us. Moreover, the implementation of the provisions of RA The petitioners are, therefore, not in any position to speculate that, based on
No. 10153 as an interim measure is comparable to the interim measures the voting, the probability exists that their motion for reconsideration may be
traditionally practiced when, for instance, the President appoints officials granted.[38]
holding elective offices upon the creation of new local government units.
Similarly, the petitioner in G.R. No. 197282, in his Very Urgent Motion to Issue As a final point, we wish to address the bleak picture that the petitioner
Clarificatory Resolution, argues that since motions for reconsideration were in G.R. No. 197282 presents in his motion, that our Decision has virtually given
filed by the aggrieved parties challenging our October 18, 2011 decision in the the President the power and authority to appoint 672,416 OICs in the event that
present case, the TRO we initially issued on September 13, 2011 should remain the elections of barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan officials are postponed or
subsisting and effective. He further argues that any attempt by the Executive cancelled.
to implement our October 18, 2011 decision pending resolution of the motions for
reconsideration borders on disrespect if not outright insolence [39] to this Court. We find this speculation nothing short of fear-mongering.
In support of this theory, the petitioner cites Samad v. COMELEC, This argument fails to take into consideration the unique factual and
[40]
where the Court held that while it had already issued a decision lifting the legal circumstances which led to the enactment of RA No. 10153. RA No. 10153
TRO, the lifting of the TRO is not yet final and executory, and can also be the was passed in order to synchronize the ARMM elections with the national and
subject of a motion for reconsideration. The petitioner also cites the minute local elections. In the course of synchronizing the ARMM elections with the
resolution issued by the Court in Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, [41] where the national and local elections, Congress had to grant the President the power to
Court reproached the Commissioner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue for appoint OICs in the ARMM, in light of the fact that: (a) holdover by the
manifesting its intention to implement the decision of the Court, noting that the incumbent ARMM elective officials is legally impermissible; and (b) Congress
Court had not yet lifted the TRO previously issued.[42] cannot call for special elections and shorten the terms of elective local officials
We agree with the petitioner that the lifting of a TRO can be included as a for less than three years.
subject of a motion for reconsideration filed to assail our decision. It does not
follow, however, that the TRO remains effective until after we have issued a Unlike local officials, as the Constitution does not prescribe a term limit
final and executory decision, especially considering the clear wording of the for barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan officials, there is no legal proscription
dispositive portion of our October 18, 2011 decision, which states: which prevents these specific government officials from continuing in a holdover
capacity should some exigency require the postponement
WHEREFORE, premises considered, we DISMISS the of barangay or Sangguniang Kabataan elections. Clearly, these fears have neither
consolidated petitions assailing the validity of RA No. 10153 for legal nor factual basis to stand on.
lack of merit, and UPHOLD the constitutionality of this law. We
likewise LIFT the temporary restraining order we issued in For the foregoing reasons, we deny the petitioners motions for reconsideration.
our Resolution of September 13, 2011. No costs.
[43]
(emphases ours) WHEREFORE, premises considered, we DENY with FINALITY the
motions for reconsideration for lack of merit and UPHOLD the constitutionality
of RA No. 10153.
In this regard, we note an important distinction between Tolentino and
the present case. While it may be true that Tolentino and the present case are SO ORDERED.
similar in that, in both cases, the petitions assailing the challenged laws were
EN BANC
dismissed by the Court, an examination of the dispositive portion of the decision
in Tolentino reveals that the Court did not categorically lift the TRO. In sharp [G.R. No. 93054 : December 4, 1990.]
contrast, in the present case, we expressly lifted the TRO issued on September
192 SCRA 100
13, 2011. There is, therefore, no legal impediment to prevent the President from
exercising his authority to appoint an acting ARMM Governor and Vice Governor Cordillera Regional Assembly Member ALEXANDER P. ORDILLO, (Banaue),
as specifically provided for in RA No. 10153. Ifugao Provincial Board Member CORAZON MONTINIG, (Mayoyao), Former
Vice-Mayor MARTIN UDAN (Banaue), Municipal Councilors MARTIN GANO,
Conclusion (Lagawe), and TEODORO HEWE, (Hingyon), Barangay Councilman PEDRO W.
DULAG (Lamut); Aguinaldo residents SANDY B. CHANGIWAN, and DONATO
TIMAGO; Lamut resident REY ANTONIO; Kiangan residents ORLANDO
PUGUON, and REYNAND DULDULAO; Lagawe residents TOMAS ". . . [A]nd considering the proviso in Sec. 13(A) that only the provinces and city
KIMAYONG, GREGORIO DANGO, GEORGE B. BAYWONG, and VICENTE voting favorably shall be included in the CAR, the province of Ifugao being the
LUNAG; Hingyon residents PABLO M. DULNUAN and CONSTANCIO GANO; only province which voted favorably then, alone, legally and validly constitutes
Mayoyao residents PEDRO M. BAOANG, LEONARDO IGADNA, and the CAR." (Rollo, p. 7)
MAXIMO IGADNA; and Banaue residents PUMA-A CULHI, LATAYON
As a result of this, on March 8, 1990, Congress enacted Republic Act No. 6861
BUTTIG, MIGUEL PUMELBAN, ANDRES ORDILLO, FEDERICO MARIANO,
setting the elections in the Cordillera Autonomous Region of Ifugao on the first
SANDY BINOMNGA, GABRIEL LIMMANG, ROMEO TONGALI, RUBEN
Monday of March 1991.: nad
BAHATAN, MHOMDY GABRIEL, and NADRES GHAMANG ,
Petitioners, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS; The Honorable Even before the issuance of the COMELEC resolution, the Executive Secretary
FRANKLIN M. DRILON, Secretary of Justice; Hon. CATALINO on February 5, 1990 issued a Memorandum granting authority to wind up the
MACARAIG, Executive Secretary; The Cabinet Officer for Regional affairs of the Cordillera Executive Board and the Cordillera Regional Assembly
Development; Hon. GUILLERMO CARAGUE, Secretary of Budget and created under Executive Order No. 220.
Management; and Hon. ROSALINA S. CAJUCOM, OIC, National Treasurer ,
On March 9, 1990, the petitioner filed a petition with COMELEC to declare the
Respondents.
non-ratification of the Organic Act for the Region. The COMELEC merely noted
said petition.
D E C I S I O N On March 30, 1990, the President issued Administrative Order No. 160 declaring
among others that the Cordillera Executive Board and Cordillera Regional
Assembly and all the offices created under Executive Order No. 220 were
GUTIERREZ, JR., J.: abolished in view of the ratification of the Organic Act.- nad
The petitioners maintain that there can be no valid Cordillera Autonomous Region
in only one province as the Constitution and Republic Act No. 6766 require that
The question raised in this petition is whether or not the province of Ifugao,
the said Region be composed of more than one constituent unit.
being the only province which voted favorably for the creation of the Cordillera
Autonomous Region can, alone, legally and validly constitute such Region. The petitioners, then, pray that the Court: (1) declare null and void COMELEC
resolution No. 2259, the memorandum of the Secretary of Justice, the
The antecedent facts that gave rise to this petition are as follows:
memorandum of the Executive Secretary, Administrative Order No. 160, and
On January 30, 1990, the people of the provinces of Benguet, Mountain Province, Republic Act No. 6861 and prohibit and restrain the respondents from
Ifugao, Abra and Kalinga-Apayao and the city of Baguio cast their votes in a implementing the same and spending public funds for the purpose and (2) declare
plebiscite held pursuant to Republic Act No. 6766 entitled "An Act Providing for Executive Order No. 220 constituting the Cordillera Executive Board and the
an Organic Act for the Cordillera Autonomous Region." Cordillera Regional Assembly and other offices to be still in force and effect
until another organic law for the Autonomous Region shall have been enacted by
The official Commission on Elections (COMELEC) results of the plebiscite
Congress and the same is duly ratified by the voters in the constituent units. We
showed that the creation of the Region was approved by a majority of 5,889
treat the Comments of the respondents as an answer and decide the case.
votes in only the Ifugao Province and was overwhelmingly rejected by 148,676
votes in the rest of the provinces and city above-mentioned. This petition is meritorious.
Consequently, the COMELEC, on February 14, 1990, issued Resolution No. 2259 The sole province of Ifugao cannot validly constitute the Cordillera Autonomous
stating that the Organic Act for the Region has been approved and/or ratified Region.
by majority of the votes cast only in the province of Ifugao. On the same date,
It is explicit in Article X, Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution that:
the Secretary of Justice issued a memorandum for the President reiterating the
COMELEC resolution and provided: "Section 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim
Mindanao and in the Cordillera consisting of provinces, cities,
municipalities and geographical areas sharing common and distinctive
historical and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and districts apportioned among provinces and the cities composing the Autonomous
other relevant characteristics within the framework of this Constitution Region. chanrobles virtual law library
and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the
If we follow the respondent's position, the members of such Cordillera Assembly
Republic of the Philippines." (Emphasis Supplied)
shall then be elected only from the province of Ifugao creating an awkward
The keywords provinces, cities, municipalities and geographical areas connote predicament of having two legislative bodies the Cordillera Assembly and the
that "region" is to be made up of more than one constituent unit. The term Sangguniang Panlalawigan exercising their legislative powers over the province
"region" used in its ordinary sense means two or more provinces. This is of Ifugao. And since Ifugao is one of the smallest provinces in the Philippines,
supported by the fact that the thirteen (13) regions into which the Philippines is population-wise, it would have too many government officials for so few people.:-
divided for administrative purposes are groupings of contiguous provinces. cralaw
(Integrated Reorganization Plan (1972), which was made as part of the law of the
Article XII, Section 10 of the law creates a Regional Planning and Development
land by P.D. No. 1; P.D. No. 742) Ifugao is a province by itself. To become part of
Board composed of the Cordillera Governor, all the provincial governors and city
a region, it must join other provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical
mayors or their representatives, two members of the Cordillera Assembly, and
areas. It joins other units because of their common and distinctive historical and
members representing the private sector. The Board has a counterpart in the
cultural heritage, economic and social structures and other relevant
provincial level called the Provincial Planning and Development Coordinator. The
characteristics. The Constitutional requirements are not present in this case.-
Board's functions (Article XII, Section 10, par. 2, Republic Act No. 6766) are
nad
almost similar to those of the Provincial Coordinator's (Title Four, Chapter 3,
The well-established rule in statutory construction that the language of the Article 10, Section 220 (4), Batas Pambansa Blg. 337 Local Government Code).
Constitution, as much as possible should be understood in the sense it has in If it takes only one person in the provincial level to perform such functions while
common use and that the words used in constitutional provisions are to be given on the other hand it takes an entire Board to perform almost the same tasks in
their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed, must then, the regional level, it could only mean that a larger area must be covered at the
be applied in this case. (See Baranda v. Gustilo, 165 SCRA 757, 770, [1988]; J.M. regional level. The respondent's theory of the Autonomous Region being made up
Tuason & Co., Inc. v. Land Tenure Administration, 31 SCRA 413, 422-423 [1970]). of a single province must, therefore, fail.
Aside from the 1987 Constitution, a reading of the provisions of Republic Act Article XXI, Section 13 (B) (c) alloting the huge amount of Ten Million Pesos
No. 6766 strengthens the petitioner's position that the Region cannot be (P10,000,000.00) to the Regional Government for its initial organizational
constituted from only one province. requirements cannot be construed as funding only a lone and small province.
Article III, Sections 1 and 2 of the Statute provide that the Cordillera These sections of Republic Act No. 6766 show that a one province Cordillera
Autonomous Region is to be administered by the Cordillera government consisting Autonomous Region was never contemplated by the law creating it.
of the Regional Government and local government units. It further provides that:
The province of Ifugao makes up only 11% of the total population of the areas
"SECTION 2. The Regional Government shall exercise powers and enumerated in Article I, Section 2 (b) of Republic Act No. 6766 which include
functions necessary for the proper governance and development of all Benguet, Mountain Province, Abra, Kalinga-Apayao and Baguio City. It has the
provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangay or ili within the second smallest number of inhabitants from among the provinces and city above
Autonomous Region . . ." mentioned. The Cordillera population is distributed in round figures as follows:
Abra, 185,000; Benguet, 486,000; Ifugao, 149,000; Kalinga-Apayao, 214,000;
From these sections, it can be gleaned that Congress never intended that a
Mountain Province, 116,000; and Baguio City, 183,000; Total population of these
single province may constitute the autonomous region. Otherwise, we would be
five provinces and one city; 1,332,000 according to the 1990 Census (Manila
faced with the absurd situation of having two sets of officials, a set of
Standard, September 30, 1990, p. 14).
provincial officials and another set of regional officials exercising their
executive and legislative powers over exactly the same small area. There are other provisions of Republic Act No. 6766 which are either violated or
which cannot be complied with. Section 16 of Article V calls for a Regional
Article V, Sections 1 and 4 of Republic Act 6766 vest the legislative power in the
Commission on Appointments with the Speaker as Chairman and are (6) members
Cordillera Assembly whose members shall be elected from regional assembly
coming from different provinces and cities in the Region. Under the
respondents' view, the Commission would have a Chairman and only one member. Cordillera and in Muslim Mindanao and (2) which provinces and cities, among
It would never have a quorum. Section 3 of Article VI calls for cabinet members, those enumerated in the two Republic Acts, shall comprise said Autonomous
as far as practicable, to come from various provinces and cities of the Region. Regions. (See III, Record of the Constitutional Commission, 487-492 [1986]).
Section 1 of Article VII creates a system of tribal courts for the various
The Abbas case established the rule to follow on which provinces and cities shall
indigenous cultural communities of the Region. Section 9 of Article XV requires
comprise the autonomous region in Muslim Mindanao which is, consequently, the
the development of a common regional language based upon the various languages
same rule to follow with regard to the autonomous region in the Cordillera.
and dialects in the region which regional language in turn is expected to enrich
However, there is nothing in the Abbas decision which deals with the issue on
the national language.
whether an autonomous region, in either Muslim Mindanao or Cordillera could
The entirety of Republic Act No. 6766 creating the Cordillera Autonomous exist despite the fact that only one province or one city is to constitute
Region is infused with provisions which rule against the sole province of Ifugao it.chanrobles virtual law library
constituting the Region.:-cralaw
Stated in another way, the issue in this case is whether the sole province of
To contemplate the situation envisioned by the respondent would not only violate Ifugao can validly and legally constitute the Cordillera Autonomous Region. The
the letter and intent of the Constitution and Republic Act No. 6766 but would issue is not whether the province of Ifugao is to be included in the Cordillera
also be impractical and illogical. Autonomous Region. It is the first issue which the Court answers in the instant
case.
Our decision in Abbas, et al. v. COMELEC, (G.R. No. 89651, November 10, 1969),
is not applicable in the case at bar contrary to the view of the Secretary of WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby GRANTED. Resolution No. 2259 of the
Justice. Commission on Elections, insofar as it upholds the creation of an autonomous
region, the February 14, 1990 memorandum of the Secretary of Justice, the
The Abbas case laid down the rate on the meaning of majority in the phrase "by
February 5, 1990 memorandum of the Executive Secretary, Administrative
majority of the votes cast by the constituent units called for the purpose" found
Order No. 160, and Republic Act No. 6861 are declared null and void while
in the Constitution, Article X, Section 18. It stated:
Executive Order No. 220 is declared to be still in force and effect until properly
x x x repealed or amended.
". . . [I]t is thus clear that what is required by the Constitution is simple SO ORDERED.
majority of votes approving the Organic Act in individual constituent
units and not a double majority of the votes in all constituent units put Republic of the Philippines
together, as well as in the individual constituent units." SUPREME COURT
This was the pronouncement applied by the Secretary of Justice in arriving at Manila
his conclusion stated in his Memorandum for the President that:
EN BANC
x x x
". . . [i]t is believed that the creation of the Cordillera Autonomous G.R. No. 79956 January 29, 1990
Region (CAR) as mandated by R.A. No. 6766 became effective upon its
approval by the majority of the votes cast in the province of Ifugao. CORDILLERA BROAD COALITION, petitioner,
And considering the proviso in Section 13 (a) that only the provinces and vs.
city voting favorably shall be included in the CAR, the province of COMMISSION ON AUDIT, respondent.
Ifugao being the only province which voted favorably can, alone,
legally and validly constitute the CAR." (Rollo. p. 40). G.R. No. 82217 January 29, 1990
The plebiscites mandated by the Constitution and Republic Act No. 6766 for the
Cordillera and Republic Act No. 6734 for the Autonomous Region in Muslim LILIA YARANON and BONA BAUTISTA, assisted by their spouses, BRAULIO
Mindanao determine (1) whether there shall be an autonomous region in the D. YARANON and DEMETRIO D. BAUTISTA, JR., respectively; JAMES BRETT
and SINAI C. HAMADA, petitioners, sectoral bodies. The organic act shall define the basic
vs. structure of government for the region consisting of the
THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT, HON. CATALINO MACARAIG, Executive executive department and legislative assembly, both of which
Secretary, HON. VICENTE JAYME, Secretary of Finance, HON. GUILLERMO N. shall be elective and representative of the constituent political
CARAGUE, Secretary of Budget and Management, and HON. ROSALINA S. units. The organic acts shall likewise provide for special courts
CAJUCOM, OIC National Treasurer, respondents. with personal, family and property law jurisdiction consistent
with the provisions of this Constitution and national laws.
Sec. 17. All powers, functions, and responsibilities not granted (6) Economic, social and tourism development ;
Constitution or by law to the autonomous regions shall be
vested in the National Government. (7) Educational policies;
Sec. 18. The Congress shall enact an organic act for each (8) Preservation and development of the cultural heritage; and
autonomous region with the assistance and participation of the
regional consultative commission composed of representatives (9) Such other matters as may be authorized by law for the
appointed by the President from a list of nominees from multi- promotion of the general welfare of the people of the region.
Sec. 21. The preservation of peace and order within the regions administrative functions and undertake consultations and
shall be the responsibility of the local police agencies which studies leading to a draft organic act for the Cordilleras.
shall be organized, maintained, supervised, and utilized in
accordance with applicable laws. The defense and security of Par. 3- Have representatives from the Cordillera panel join the
the regions shall be the responsibility of the National study group of the R.P. Panel in drafting the Executive Order.
Government.
Pursuant to the above joint agreement, E.O. 220 was drafted by
A study of E.O. No. 220 would be incomplete Without reference to its historical a panel of the Philippine government and of the representatives
background. of the Cordillera people.
In April 1986, just after the EDSA Revolution, Fr. Conrado M. On July 15, 1987, President Corazon C. Aquino signed the joint
Balweg, S.V.D., broke off on ideological grounds from the draft into law, known now as E.O. 220. [Rejoinder G.R. No.
Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its military arm 82217, pp. 2-3].
the New People's Army. (NPA).
Executive Order No. 220, issued by the President in the exercise of her
After President Aquino was installed into office by People legislative powers under Art. XVIII, sec. 6 of the 1987 Constitution, created the
Power, she advocated a policy of national reconciliation. She Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) , which covers the provinces of Abra,
called on all revolutionary forces to a peace dialogue. The CPLA Benguet, Ifugao, Kalinga-Apayao and Mountain Province and the City of Baguio
heeded this call of the President. After the preliminary [secs. 1 and 2]. It was created to accelerate economic and social growth in the
negotiations, President Aquino and some members of her region and to prepare for the establishment of the autonomous region in the
Cabinet flew to Mt. Data in the Mountain Province on Cordilleras [sec. 3]. Its main function is to coordinate the planning and
September 13, 1986 and signed with Fr. Conrado M. Balweg (As implementation of programs and services in the region, particularly, to
Commander of the CPLA and Ama Mario Yag-ao (as President of coordinate with the local government units as well as with the executive
Cordillera Bodong Administration, the civil government of the departments of the National Government in the supervision of field offices and
CPLA a ceasefire agreement that signified the cessation of in identifying, planning, monitoring, and accepting projects and activities in the
hostilities (WHEREAS No. 7, E.O. 220). region [sec. 5]. It shall also monitor the implementation of all ongoing national
and local government projects in the region [sec. 20]. The CAR shall have a
The parties arrived at an agreement in principle: the Cordillera Cordillera Regional Assembly as a policy-formulating body and a Cordillera
people shall not undertake their demands through armed and Executive Board as an implementing arm [secs. 7, 8 and 10]. The CAR and the
violent struggle but by peaceful means, such as political Assembly and Executive Board shall exist until such time as the autonomous
negotiations. The negotiations shall be a continuing process until regional government is established and organized [sec. 17].
the demands of the Cordillera people shall have been
substantially granted. Explaining the rationale for the issuance of E.O. No. 220, its last "Whereas"
clause provides:
On March 27, 1987, Ambassador Pelaez [Acting as Chief
Negotiator of the government], in pursuance of the September WHEREAS, pending the convening of the first Congress and the
13, 1986 agreement, flew to the Mansion House, Baguio City, enactment of the organic act for a Cordillera autonomous
and signed with Fr. Balweg (as Chairman of the Cordillera panel) region, there is an urgent need, in the interest of national
a joint agreement, paragraphs 2 and 3 of which state: security and public order, for the President to reorganize
immediately the existing administrative structure in the
Par. 2- Work together in drafting an Executive Order to create Cordilleras to suit it to the existing political realities therein
a preparatory body that could perform policy-making and and the Government's legitimate concerns in the areas, without
attempting to pre-empt the constitutional duty of the first 1. A reading of E.O. No. 220 will easily reveal that what it actually envisions is
Congress to undertake the creation of an autonomous region on the consolidation and coordination of the delivery of services of line
a permanent basis. departments and agencies of the National Government in the areas covered by
the administrative region as a step preparatory to the grant of autonomy to the
During the pendency of this case, Republic Act No. 6766 entitled "An Act Cordilleras. It does not create the autonomous region contemplated in the
Providing for an Organic Act for the Cordillera Autonomous Region," was enacted Constitution. It merely provides for transitory measures in anticipation of the
and signed into law. The Act recognizes the CAR and the offices and agencies enactment of an organic act and the creation of an autonomous region. In short,
created under E.O. No. 220 and its transitory nature is reinforced in Art. XXI it prepares the ground for autonomy. This does not necessarily conflict with the
of R.A. No. 6766, to wit: provisions of the Constitution on autonomous regions, as we shall show later.
SEC. 3. The Cordillera Executive Board, the Cordillera Region The Constitution outlines a complex procedure for the creation of an autonomous
Assembly as well as all offices and agencies created under region in the Cordilleras. A regional consultative commission shall first be
Execute Order No. 220 shall cease to exist immediately upon created. The President shall then appoint the members of a regional consultative
the ratification of this Organic Act. commission from a list of nominees from multi-sectoral bodies. The commission
shall assist the Congress in preparing the organic act for the autonomous region.
All funds, properties and assets of the Cordillera Executive The organic act shall be passed by the first Congress under the 1987
Board and the Cordillera Regional Assembly shall automatically Constitution within eighteen months from the time of its organization and
be transferred to the Cordillera Autonomous Government. enacted into law. Thereafter there shall be held a plebiscite for the approval of
the organic act [Art. X, sec. 18]. Only then, after its approval in the plebiscite,
I shall the autonomous region be created.
It is well-settled in our jurisprudence that respect for the inherent and stated Undoubtedly, all of these will take time. The President, in 1987 still exercising
powers and prerogatives of the law-making body, as well as faithful adherence to legislative powers, as the first Congress had not yet convened, saw it fit to
the principle of separation of powers, require that its enactment be accorded provide for some measures to address the urgent needs of the Cordilleras in the
the presumption of constitutionality. Thus, in any challenge to the meantime that the organic act had not yet been passed and the autonomous
constitutionality of a statute, the burden of clearly and unequivocally proving its region created. These measures we find in E.O. No. 220. The steps taken by the
unconstitutionality always rests upon the challenger. Conversely, failure to so President are obviously perceived by petitioners, particularly petitioner Yaranon
prove will necessarily defeat the challenge. who views E.O. No. 220 as capitulation to the Cordillera People's Liberation Army
(CPLA) of Balweg, as unsound, but the Court cannot inquire into the wisdom of
the measures taken by the President, We can only inquire into whether or not
We shall be guided by these principles in considering these consolidated
the measures violate the Constitution. But as we have seen earlier, they do not.
petitions.
2. Moreover, the transitory nature of the CAR does not necessarily mean that it
In these cases, petitioners principally argue that by issuing E.O. No. 220 the
is, as petitioner Cordillera Broad Coalition asserts, "the interim autonomous
President, in the exercise of her legislative powers prior to the convening of the
region in the Cordilleras" [Petition, G.R. No. 79956, p. 25].
first Congress under the 1987 Constitution, has virtually pre-empted Congress
from its mandated task of enacting an organic act and created an autonomous
region in the Cordilleras. We have carefully studied the Constitution and E.O. No. The Constitution provides for a basic structure of government in the autonomous
220 and we have come to the conclusion that petitioners' assertions are region composed of an elective executive and legislature and special courts with
unfounded. Events subsequent to the issuance of E.O. No. 220 also bear out this personal, family and property law jurisdiction [Art. X, sec. 18]. Using this as a
conclusion. guide, we find that E.O. No. 220 did not establish an autonomous regional
government. It created a region, covering a specified area, for administrative
purposes with the main objective of coordinating the planning and implementation
of programs and services [secs. 2 and 5]. To determine policy, it created a II
representative assembly, to convene yearly only for a five-day regular session,
tasked with, among others, identifying priority projects and development A collateral issue raised by petitioners is the nature of the CAR: whether or not
programs [sec. 9]. To serve as an implementing body, it created the Cordillera it is a territorial and political subdivision. The Constitution provides in Article X:
Executive Board composed of the Mayor of Baguio City, provincial governors and
representatives of the Cordillera Bodong Administration, ethno-linguistic groups Section 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the
and non-governmental organizations as regular members and all regional directors Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities,
of the line departments of the National Government as ex-officio members and municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous
headed by an Executive Director [secs. 10 and 11]. The bodies created by E.O. regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras as hereinafter
No. 220 do not supplant the existing local governmental structure, nor are they provided.
autonomous government agencies. They merely constitute the mechanism for an
"umbrella" that brings together the existing local governments, the agencies of xxx xxx xxx
the National Government, the ethno-linguistic groups or tribes, and non-
governmental organizations in a concerted effort to spur development in the
Sec. 10. No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be
Cordilleras.
created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary
substantially altered, except in accordance with the criteria
The creation of the CAR for purposes of administrative coordination is established in the local government code and subject to
underscored by the mandate of E.O. No. 220 for the President and appropriate approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the
national departments and agencies to make available sources of funds for political units directly affected.
priority development programs and projects recommended by the CAR [sec. 21]
and the power given to the President to call upon the appropriate executive
We have seen earlier that the CAR is not the autonomous region in the
departments and agencies of the National Government to assist the CAR [sec.
Cordilleras contemplated by the Constitution, Thus, we now address petitioners'
24].
assertion that E. 0. No. 220 contravenes the Constitution by creating a new
territorial and political subdivision.
3. Subsequent to the issuance of E.O. No. 220, the Congress, after it was
convened, enacted Republic Act No. 6658 which created the Cordillera Regional
After carefully considering the provisions of E.O. No. 220, we find that it did
Consultative Commission. The President then appointed its members. The
not create a new territorial and political subdivision or merge existing ones into a
commission prepared a draft organic act which became the basis for the
larger subdivision.
deliberations of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The result was
Republic Act No. 6766, the organic act for the Cordillera autonomous region,
1. Firstly, the CAR is not a public corporation or a territorial and political
which was signed into law on October 23, 1989. A plebiscite for the approval of
subdivision. It does not have a separate juridical personality, unlike provinces,
the organic act, to be conducted shortly, shall complete the process outlined in
cities and municipalities. Neither is it vested with the powers that are normally
the Constitution.
granted to public corporations, e.g. the power to sue and be sued, the power to
own and dispose of property, the power to create its own sources of revenue,
In the meantime, E.O. No. 220 had been in force and effect for more than two
etc. As stated earlier, the CAR was created primarily to coordinate the planning
years and we find that, despite E.O. No. 220, the autonomous region in the
and implementation of programs and services in the covered areas.
Cordilleras is still to be created, showing the lack of basis of petitioners'
assertion. Events have shown that petitioners' fear that E.O. No. 220 was a
The creation of administrative regions for the purpose of expediting the
"shortcut" for the creation of the autonomous region in the Cordilleras was
delivery of services is nothing new. The Integrated Reorganization Plan of 1972,
totally unfounded.
which was made as part of the law of the land by virtue of Presidential Decree
No. 1, established eleven (11) regions, later increased to twelve (12), with
Clearly, petitioners' principal challenge has failed.
definite regional centers and required departments and agencies of the
Executive Branch of the National Government to set up field offices therein. It must be clarified that the constitutional guarantee of local autonomy in the
The functions of the regional offices to be established pursuant to the Constitution [Art. X, sec. 2] refers to the administrative autonomy of local
Reorganization Plan are: (1) to implement laws, policies, plans, programs, rules and government units or, cast in more technical language, the decentralization of
regulations of the department or agency in the regional areas; (2) to provide government authority [Villegas v. Subido, G.R. No. L-31004, January 8, 1971, 37
economical, efficient and effective service to the people in the area; (3) to SCRA 1]. Local autonomy is not unique to the 1987 Constitution, it being
coordinate with regional offices of other departments, bureaus and agencies in guaranteed also under the 1973 Constitution [Art. II, sec. 10]. And while there
the area; (4) to coordinate with local government units in the area; and (5) to was no express guarantee under the 1935 Constitution, the Congress enacted the
perform such other functions as may be provided by law. [See Part II, chap. III, Local Autonomy Act (R.A. No. 2264) and the Decentralization Act (R.A. No.
art. 1, of the Reorganization Plan]. 5185), which ushered the irreversible march towards further enlargement of
local autonomy in the country [Villegas v. Subido, supra.]
We can readily see that the CAR is in the same genre as the administrative
regions created under the Reorganization Plan, albeit under E.O. No. 220 the On the other hand, the creation of autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and
operation of the CAR requires the participation not only of the line departments the Cordilleras, which is peculiar to the 1987 Constitution contemplates the
and agencies of the National Government but also the local governments, ethno- grant of political autonomy and not just administrative autonomy these regions.
linguistic groups and non-governmental organizations in bringing about the Thus, the provision in the Constitution for an autonomous regional government
desired objectives and the appropriation of funds solely for that purpose. with a basic structure consisting of an executive department and a legislative
assembly and special courts with personal, family and property law jurisdiction in
2. Then, considering the control and supervision exercised by the President over each of the autonomous regions [Art. X, sec. 18].
the CAR and the offices created under E.O. No. 220, and considering further
the indispensable participation of the line departments of the National As we have said earlier, the CAR is a mere transitory coordinating agency that
Government, the CAR may be considered more than anything else as a regional would prepare the stage for political autonomy for the Cordilleras. It fills in the
coordinating agency of the National Government, similar to the regional resulting gap in the process of transforming a group of adjacent territorial and
development councils which the President may create under the Constitution political subdivisions already enjoying local or administrative autonomy into an
[Art. X, sec. 14]. These councils are "composed of local government officials, autonomous region vested with political autonomy.
regional heads of departments and other government offices, and
representatives from non-governmental organizations within the region for Anent petitioners' objection, we note the obvious failure to show how the
purposes of administrative decentralization to strengthen the autonomy of the creation of the CAR has actually diminished the local autonomy of the covered
units therein and to accelerate the economic and social growth and development provinces and city. It cannot be over-emphasized that pure speculation and a
of the units in the region." [Ibid.] In this wise, the CAR may be considered as a resort to probabilities are insufficient to cause the invalidation of E.O. No. 220.
more sophisticated version of the regional development council.
WHEREFORE, the petitions are DISMISSED for lack of merit.
III
SO ORDERED.
Finally, petitioners incidentally argue that the creation of the CAR contravened
the constitutional guarantee of the local autonomy for the provinces (Abra, EN BANC
Benguet, Ifugao, Kalinga-Apayao and Mountain Province) and city (Baguio City)
which compose the CAR.
HERMOSISIMA, JR., J.: On February 23, 1994, or a little less than a month after HB No. 8817 was
transmitted to the Senate, the Senate Committee on Local Government
Of main concern to the petitioners is whether Republic Act No. 7720, just
conducted public hearings on SB No. 1243. On March 1, 1994, the said committee
recently passed by Congress and signed by the President into law, is
submitted Committee Report No. 378 on HB No. 8817, with the recommendation
constitutionally infirm.
that it be approved without amendment, taking into consideration the reality
Indeed, in this Petition for Prohibition with prayer for Temporary that H.B. No. 8817 was on all fours with SB No. 1243. Senator Heherson T.
Restraining Order and Preliminary Prohibitory Injunction, petitioners assail the Alvarez, one of the herein petitioners, indicated his approval thereto by signing
validity of Republic Act No. 7720, entitled, An Act Converting the Municipality said report as member of the Committee on Local Government.
of Santiago, Isabela into an Independent Component City to be known as the City
On March 3, 1994, Committee Report No. 378 was passed by the Senate on
of Santiago, mainly because the Act allegedly did not originate exclusively in the
Second Reading and was approved on Third Reading on March 14, 1994. On March
House of Representatives as mandated by Section 24, Article VI of the 1987
22, 1994, the House of Representatives, upon being apprised of the action of the
Constitution.
Senate, approved the amendments proposed by the Senate.
Also, petitioners claim that the Municipality of Santiago has not met the
The enrolled bill, submitted to the President on April 12, 1994, was signed
minimum average annual income required under Section 450 of the Local
by the Chief Executive on May 5, 1994 as Republic Act No. 7720. When a
Government Code of 1991 in order to be converted into a component city.
plebiscite on the Act was held on July 13, 1994, a great majority of the
Undisputed is the following chronicle of the metamorphosis of House Bill registered voters of Santiago voted in favor of the conversion of Santiago into a
No. 8817 into Republic Act No. 7720: city.
On April 18, 1993, HB No. 8817, entitled An Act Converting The question as to the validity of Republic Act No. 7720 hinges on the
the Municipality of Santiago into an Independent Component City to be known as following twin issues: (I) Whether or not the Internal Revenue Allotments
the City of Santiago, was filed in the House of Representatives with (IRAs) are to be included in the computation of the average annual income of a
Representative Antonio Abaya as principal author. Other sponsors included municipality for purposes of its conversion into an independent component city,
Representatives Ciriaco Alfelor, Rodolfo Albano, Santiago Respicio and Faustino and (II) Whether or not, considering that the Senate passed SB No. 1243, its
Dy. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Local Government and the own version of HB No. 8817, Republic Act No. 7720 can be said to have
House Committee on Appropriations on May 5, 1993. originated in the House of Representatives.
I It is true that for a municipality to be converted into a component city, it
must, among others, have an average annual income of at least Twenty Million
The annual income of a local
Pesos for the last two (2) consecutive years based on 1991 constant prices. 1Such
government unit includes the IRAs
income must be duly certified by the Department of Finance.2
-----------------------------------------------------------
Resolution of the controversy regarding compliance by
Petitioners claim that Santiago could not qualify into a component city the Municipality of Santiago with the aforecited income requirement hinges on a
because its average annual income for the last two (2) consecutive years based correlative and contextual explication of the meaning of internal revenue
on 1991 constant prices falls below the required annual income of Twenty Million allotments (IRAs) vis-a-vis the notion of income of a local government unit and
Pesos (P20,000,000.00) for its conversion into a city, petitioners having the principles of local autonomy and decentralization underlying the
computed Santiagos average annual income in the following manner: institutionalization and intensified empowerment of the local government system.
Indeed, what the Constitution simply means is that the initiative for filing
revenue, tariff, or tax bills, bills authorizing an increase of the public debt,
private bills and bills of local application must come from the House of
Representatives on the theory that, elected as they are from the districts, the
members of the House can be expected to be more sensitive to the local needs
and problems. On the other hand, the senators, who are elected at large, are
expected to approach the same problems from the national perspective. Both
views are thereby made to bear on the enactment of such laws.
Nor does the Constitution prohibit the filing in the Senate of a substitute bill in
anticipation of its receipt of the bill from the House, so long as action by the
Senate as a body is withheld pending receipt of the House bill. x x x 18
III