RODOLFO G. NAVARRO v.

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Whether or not the provision in Article 9(2) of the Rules and
EDUARDO ERMITA, (D) Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991
valid.
G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011
HELD:
FACTS:
Yes, the Congress, recognizing the capacity and viability of
October 2, 2006, the President of the Republic approved into law Dinagat to become a full-fledged province, enacted R.A. No. 9355,
Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9355 (An Act Creating the Province of
following the exemption from the land area requirement, which,
Dinagat Islands). with respect to the creation of provinces, can only be found as an
December 3, 2006, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) express provision in the LGC-IRR. In effect, pursuant to its plenary
conducted the mandatory plebiscite for the ratification of the legislative powers, Congress breathed flesh and blood into that
creation of the province under the Local Government Code (LGC). exemption in Article 9(2) of the LGC-IRR and transformed it into
The plebiscite yielded 69,943 affirmative votes and 63,502 law when it enacted R.A. No. 9355 creating the Island Province of
negative votes. With the approval of the people from both the Dinagat.
mother province of Surigao del Norte and the Province of Dinagat
The land area, while considered as an indicator of viability of a
Islands (Dinagat).
local government unit, is not conclusive in showing that Dinagat
November 10, 2006, petitioners filed before this Court a petition cannot become a province, taking into account its average annual
for certiorari and prohibition challenging the constitutionality of income of P82,696,433.23 at the time of its creation, as certified
R.A. No. 9355. The Court dismissed the petition on technical by the Bureau of Local Government Finance, which is four times
grounds. Their motion for reconsideration was also denied. more than the minimum requirement of P20,000,000.00 for the
creation of a province. The delivery of basic services to its
Undaunted, petitioners filed another petition for certiorari seeking constituents has been proven possible and sustainable. Rather
to nullify R.A. No. 9355 for being unconstitutional. They alleged than looking at the results of the plebiscite and the May 10, 2010
that the creation of Dinagat as a new province, if uncorrected, elections as mere fait accompli circumstances which cannot
would perpetuate an illegal act of Congress, and would unjustly operate in favor of Dinagat’s existence as a province, they must
deprive the people of Surigao del Norte of a large chunk of the be seen from the perspective that Dinagat is ready and capable of
provincial territory, Internal Revenue Allocation (IRA), and rich becoming a province. This Court should not be instrumental in
resources from the area. They pointed out that when the law was stunting such capacity.
passed, Dinagat had a land area of 802.12 square kilometers only
and a population of only 106,951, failing to comply with Section Ratio legis est anima. The spirit rather than the letter of the law. A
10, Article X of the Constitution and of Section 461 of the LGC. statute must be read according to its spirit or intent, for what is
within the spirit is within the statute although it is not within its
May 12, 2010, movants-intervenors raised three (3) main letter, and that which is within the letter but not within the spirit is
arguments to challenge the above Resolution, namely: (1) that the not within the statute. Put a bit differently, that which is within the
passage of R.A. No. 9355 operates as an act of Congress intent of the lawmaker is as much within the statute as if within the
amending Section 461 of the LGC; (2) that the exemption from letter, and that which is within the letter of the statute is not within
territorial contiguity, when the intended province consists of two or the statute unless within the intent of the lawmakers. Withal,
more islands, includes the exemption from the application of the courts ought not to interpret and should not accept an
minimum land area requirement; and (3) that the Operative Fact interpretation that would defeat the intent of the law and its
Doctrine is applicable in the instant case. legislators.
July 20, 2010, the Court denied the Motion for Leave to Intervene Law Creating Dinagat Province Valid? (2011 update)
and to File and to Admit Intervenors’ Motion for Reconsideration
of the Resolution dated May 12, 2010 on the ground that the The National Statistics Office certified that Dinagat Islands’
allowance or disallowance of a motion to intervene is addressed population is 120,813. Its land area is 802.12 square kilometers
to the sound discretion of the Court, and that the appropriate time and its average annual income is P82,696,433.23, as certified by
to file the said motion was before and not after the resolution of the Bureau of Local Government Finance. On October 2, 2006,
this case. the President approved into law R.A. 9355 creating the Province
of Dinagat Islands. On December 3, 2006, the COMELEC
September 7, 2010, movants-intervenors filed a Motion for conducted the mandatory plebiscite for the ratification of the
Reconsideration of the July 20, 2010 Resolution, citing several creation of the province under the LGC which yielded 69,943
rulings of the Court, allowing intervention as an exception to affirmative votes and 63,502 negative votes. With the approval of
Section 2, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court that it should be filed at the people from both the mother province of Surigao del Norte and
any time before the rendition of judgment. They alleged that, prior the Province of Dinagat Islands (Dinagat), the President appointed
to the May 10, 2010 elections, their legal interest in this case was the interim set of provincial officials who took their oath of office
not yet existent. They averred that prior to the May 10, 2010 on January 26, 2007. Later, during the May 14, 2007 synchronized
elections, they were unaware of the proceedings in this case. elections, the Dinagatnons elected their new set of provincial
October 5, 2010, the Court issued an order for Entry of Judgment, officials who assumed office on July 1, 2007.
stating that the decision in this case had become final and Meanwhile, on November 10, 2006, petitioners Rodolfo G.
executory on May 18, 2010. Navarro and other former political leaders of Surigao del Norte,
ISSUE: filed before the SC a petition for certiorari and prohibition (G.R.
1
No. 175158) challenging the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9355 archipelago, there is a greater likelihood that islands or group of
alleging that that the creation of Dinagat as a new province, if islands would form part of the land area of a newly-created
uncorrected, would perpetuate an illegal act of Congress, and province than in most cities or municipalities. It is, therefore,
would unjustly deprive the people of Surigao del Norte of a large logical to infer that the genuine legislative policy decision was
chunk of the provincial territory, Internal Revenue Allocation (IRA), expressed in Section 442 (for municipalities) and Section 450 (for
and rich resources from the area. Is R.A. No. 9355 constitutional? component cities) of the LGC, but fellester.blogspot.com was
inadvertently omitted in Section 461 (for provinces). Thus, when
Suggested Answer:
the exemption was expressly provided in Article 9(2) of the LGC-
February 10, 2010 Ruling IRR, the inclusion was intended to correct the congressional
oversight in Section 461 of the LGC – and to reflect the true
No. The SC ruled that the population of 120,813 is below the Local legislative intent. It would, then, be in order for the Court to uphold
Government Code (LGC) minimum population requirement of the validity of Article 9(2) of the LGC-IRR.”
250,000 inhabitants. Neither did Dinagat Islands, with an
approximate land area of 802.12 square kilometers meet the LGC xxx“Consistent with the declared policy to provide local
minimum land area requirement of 2,000 square kilometers. The government units genuine and meaningful local autonomy,
Court reiterated its ruling that paragraph 2 of Article 9 of the Rules contiguity and minimum land area requirements for prospective
and Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code, local government units should be liberally construed in order to
which exempts proposed provinces composed of one or more achieve the desired results. The strict interpretation adopted by
islands from the land area requirement, was null and void as the the February 10, 2010 Decision could prove to be counter-
said exemption is not found in Sec. 461 of the LGC. “There is no productive, if not outright absurd, awkward, and impractical.
dispute that in case of discrepancy between the basic law and the Picture an intended province that consists of several
rules and regulations implementing the said law, the basic law municipalities and component cities which, in themselves, also
prevails, because the rules and regulations cannot go beyond the consist of islands. The component cities and municipalities which
terms and provisions of the basic law,” held the Court. (GR No. consist of islands are exempt from the minimum land area
180050, Navarro v. Ermita, May 12, 2010) requirement, pursuant to Sections 450 and 442, respectively, of
the LGC. Yet, the province would be made to comply with the
The Republic, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, minimum land area criterion of 2,000 square kilometers, even if it
and Dinagat filed their respective motions for reconsideration of consists of several islands. fellester.blogspot.com This would
the Decision. In its Resolution dated May 12, 2010, the Supreme mean that Congress has opted to assign a distinctive preference
Court denied the said motions. to create a province with contiguous land area over one composed
April 12, 2011 Ruling of islands — and negate the greater imperative of development of
self-reliant communities, rural progress, and the delivery of basic
Yes. In Navarro vs. Executive Secretary (G.R. no. 180050, April services to the constituency. This preferential option would prove
12, 2011), the Honorable Supreme Court ruled that Republic Act more difficult and burdensome if the 2,000-square-kilometer
No. 9355 is as VALID and CONSTITUTIONAL, and the territory of a province is scattered because the islands are
proclamation of the Province of Dinagat Islands and the election separated by bodies of water, as compared to one with a
of the officials thereof are declared VALID. contiguous land mass.”
The SC also ruled that the provision in Article 9(2) of the Rules xxx “What is more, the land area, while considered as an indicator
and Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code of of viability of a local government unit, is not conclusive in showing
1991 stating, “The land area requirement shall not apply where that Dinagat cannot become a province, taking into account its
the proposed province is composed of one (1) or more islands,” is average annual income of P82,696,433.23 at the time
declared VALID. fellester.blogspot.com of its creation, as certified by the Bureau of
Local Government Finance, which is four times more than the
According to the SC, “with respect to the creation of barangays,
minimum requirement of P20,000,000.00 for the creation of a
land area is not a requisite indicator of viability. However, with
province. The delivery of basic services to its constituents has
respect to the creation of municipalities, component cities, and
been proven possible and sustainable. Rather than looking at the
provinces, the three (3) indicators of viability and projected
results of the plebiscite and the May 10, 2010 elections as mere
capacity to provide services, i.e., income, population, and land
fait accompli circumstances which cannot operate in favor of
area, are provided for.”
Dinagat’s existence as a province, they must be seen from the
“But it must be pointed out that when the local government unit to perspective that Dinagat is ready and capable of becoming a
be created consists of one (1) or more islands, it is exempt from province.” (Navarro vs. Executive Secretary (G.R. no. 180050,
the land area requirement as expressly provided in Section 442 April 12, 2011)
and Section 450 of the LGC if the local government unit to be
xxx “What is more, the land area, while considered as an indicator
created is a municipality or a component city, respectively. This
of viability of a local government unit, is not conclusive in showing
exemption is absent in the enumeration of the requisites for the
that Dinagat cannot become a province, taking into account its
creation of a province under Section 461 of the LGC, although it
average annual income of P82,696,433.23 at the time
is expressly stated under Article 9(2) of the LGC-IRR.”
fellester.blogspot.com of its creation, as certified by the Bureau of
xxx “There appears neither rhyme nor reason why this exemption Local Government Finance, which is four times more than the
should apply to cities and municipalities, but not to provinces. In minimum requirement of P20,000,000.00 for the creation of a
fact, considering the physical configuration of the Philippine province. The delivery of basic services to its constituents has

2
been proven possible and sustainable. Rather than looking at the amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any
results of the plebiscite and the May 10, 2010 elections as mere branch or instru-mentality of the Government.
fait accompli circumstances which cannot operate in favor of
Dinagat’s existence as a province, they must be seen from the ISSUES:
perspective that Dinagat is ready and capable of becoming a 1. Do the petitioners have standing in raising the constitutionality
province.” (Navarro vs. Executive Secretary (G.R. no. 180050, of RA 8528? – YES.
April 12, 2011)
2. Does the court has jurisdiction over the issue, or is it a political
MIRANDA VS AGUIRRE question? – YES.
G.R. No. 133064 September 16 1999 3. Is RA 8528 constitutional? – NO.
FACTS: RATIO:
1994, RA No. 7720 effected the conversion of the municipality of 1. On standing.
Santiago, Isabela, into an independent component city. July 4th,
RA No. 7720 was approved by the people of Santiago in a The petitioners have standing with regards to the issue, because
plebiscite. 1998, RA No. 8528 was enacted and it amended RA they sustain direct injury as a result of its enforcement. The mayor,
No. 7720 that practically downgraded the City of Santiago from an Mr. Miranda, will now be under administrative supervision of the
independent component city to a component city. Petitioners Provincial Governor. All the mayor’s executive orders are to be
assail the constitutionality of RA No. 8528 for the lack of provision reviewed. His powers as mayor are to be limited by the act. The
to submit the law for the approval of the people of Santiago in a other petitioners are to sustain direct injury as well. As residents
proper plebiscite. and voters in the city of Santiago, their right to be heard in the
conversation of their city is to be trampled by not holding a
Respondents defended the constitutionality of RA No. 8528 plebiscite with regards to the issue.
saying that the said act merely reclassified the City of Santiago
from an independent component city into a component city. It 2. On the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction.
allegedly did not involve any “creation, division, merger, abolition,
Under Sec 1 Art VIII of the 1987 Constitution, it is the duty of the
or substantial alteration of boundaries of local government units,”
court to settle controversies regarding department’s use of
therefore, a plebiscite of the people of Santiago is unnecessary.
discretion amounting to abuse of jurisdiction.
They also questioned the standing of petitioners to file the petition
and argued that the petition raises a political question over which 3. On the constitutionality of RA 8528.
the Court lacks jurisdiction.
The changes that will result in the downgrading of Santiago City
ISSUE: Whether or not the Court has jurisdiction over the petition from being an independent component city, to a component city
at bar. cannot be characterized as insubstantial: taxes collected from the
city will be shared with the province, resolutions and ordinances
RULING:
will have to be reviewed by Provincial Board, City Government’s
Yes. RA No. 8528 is declared unconstitutional. That Supreme share will be diluted since certain portions will accrue to the
Court has the jurisdiction over said petition because it involves not Provincial Government. Downgrading it, without the involvement
a political question but a justiciable issue, and of which only the of the people, will run against the spirit of Sec 10 Art X of the 1987
court could decide whether or not a law passed by the Congress Constitution.
is unconstitutional.
Having significant changes introduced to the political and social
That when an amendment of the law involves creation, merger, climate of the province would need a plebiscite for it to push
division, abolition or substantial alteration of boundaries of local through, according to Rule II Art 6 Par F1 of the Implementing
government units, a plebiscite in the political units directly affected Rules and Regulations of the Local Government Code, because
is mandatory. that gravity of changes already amount to a ‘conversion’. Even the
principal author of the Local Government Code of 1991 agrees
Petitioners are directly affected in the imple-mentation of RA No. that the plebiscite is absolute and mandatory, since it promotes
8528. Miranda was the mayor of Santiago City, Afiado was the autonomy to the local government units.
President of the Sangguniang Liga, together with 3 other
petitioners were all residents and voters in the City of Santiago. It DISSENTING OPINION:
is their right to be heard in the conversion of their city through a
Buena, J.:
plebiscite to be conducted by the COMELEC. Thus, denial of their
right in RA No. 8528 gives them proper standing to strike down 1. Conversion does not appear in the 1987 Constitution nor in
the law as unconstitutional. the Section 10, Chapter 2 of the Local Government Code.
Surprisingly, Rule II, Article 6, paragraph (f) (1) of the
Sec. 1 of Art. VIII of the Constitution states that: the judicial power
Implementing Rules of the Local Government Code included
shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as
conversion in the enumeration of the modes of changing the
may be established by law. Judicial power includes the duty of the
status of local government units.
courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights
which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine 2. A mere Rule and Regulation intended to implement the Local
whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion Government Code cannot expand the terms and provisions clearly
expressed in the basic law to be implemented.
3
3. During the deliberations in the Senate, the Committee on Local seeks to set aside the plebiscite conducted throughout the
Government decided to withdraw the proposed amendment that Municipality of Labo and prays that a new plebiscite be
required plebiscite. The Court thus not require a plebiscite if undertaken. It is the contention of petitioner that the plebiscite was
Congress did not require it. a complete failure and that the results obtained were invalid and
illegal because the plebiscite, as mandated by COMELEC, should
4. The Court must consider the ramifications of declaration of
have been conducted only in the political unit or units affected, i.e.
unconstitutionality of Republic Act No. 8528 on Republic Act No.
the 12barangays comprising the new Municipality of Tulay-Na-
6726 (1989) and Republic Act No. 6843 (1990), respectively
Lupa namely Tulay-Na-Lupa, Lugui, San Antonio, Mabilo
allowing the voters of the City of Oroquieta (Misamis Oriental) and
I,Napaod, Benit, Bayan-Bayan, Matanlang, Pag-Asa, Maot, and
San Carlos City (Pangasinan) to vote and be voted for any of the
Calabasa. Petitioner stresses that the plebiscite should not have
respective provincial offices, in effect downgrading them from
included the remaining area of the mother unit of the Municipality
independent component cities to component cities. The resulting
of Labo, Camarines Norte.
confusion on the political structures of the local government units
involved would surely be disastrous to the order and stability of In support of his stand, petitioner argues that where a local unit is
these cities. to be segregated from a parent unit, only the voters of the unit to
be segregated should be included in the plebiscite.
5. Every law has in its favor, the presumption of constitutionality
and in case of doubt, the Court must exert every effort to prevent ISSUE:
the invalidation of the law and the nullification of the will of the
Was the plebiscite conducted in the areas comprising the
legislature that enacted it and the executive that approved it.
proposed Municipality of Tulay-Na-Lupa and the remaining areas
Issue: Whether or not the Court has jurisdiction on juticiable and of the mother Municipality of Labo valid?
political question.
Yes. When the law states that the plebiscite shall be conducted
Decision: Petition is granted. Republic Act No. 8528 is declared "in the political units directly affected," it means that residents of
unconstitutional and the writ of prohibition is hereby issued the political entity who would be economically dislocated by the
commanding the respondents to desist from implementing said separation of a portion thereof have a right to vote in said
law. plebiscite. Evidently, what is contemplated by the phase "political
units directly affected," is the plurality of political units which would
The plea that the court back off from assuming jurisdiction over participate in the plebiscite. Logically, those to be included in such
the petition at bar on the ground that it involves a political question political areas are the inhabitants of the 12 barangays of the
has to be brushed aside. This plea has long lost its appeal proposed Municipality of Tulay-Na-Lupa as well as those living in
especially in light of Section 1 of Article VIII of the 1987 the parent Municipality of Labo, Camarines Norte. Thus, it was
Constitution which defines judicial power as including the duty of concluded that respondent COMELEC did not commit grave
the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights abuse of discretion in promulgating the resolution.
which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine
whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion Summary:
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any
A plebiscite for a newly created municipality was conducted and
branch or instrumentality of the government. To be sure, the cut
the voters rejected its creation. The governor questioned the result
between a political and justiciable issue has been made by this
and challenged the inclusion of the voters of the mother
Court in many cases.
municipality in the plebiscite.
G.R. No. 103328 October 19, 1992
Rule of Law:
HON. ROY A. PADILLA, JR., In his capacity as Governor of
the Province of Camarines Norte vs. COMMISSION ON No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created,
ELECTIONS, divided, merged, abolished or its boundary substantially altered,
except in accordance with the criteria established in the local
FACTS:
government code and subject to the approval by the majority of
Republic Act No. 7155 creates the Municipality of Tulay-Na-Lupa the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly
in the Province of Camarines Norte to be composed of Barangays affected—Section 10, Article X, 1987 Constitution.
Tulay-Na-Lupa, Lugui, San Antonio, Mabilo I, Napaod, Benit,
Issues:
Bayan-Bayan, Matanlang, Pag-Asa, Maot, and Calabasa, all in
the Municipality of Labo, same province. Is the result of the plebiscite valid?
Pursuant to said law, the COMELEC issued a resolution for the
Ruling:
conduct of a plebiscite. The said resolution provides that the
plebiscite shall be held in the areas or units affected, namely the Yes. When the law states that the plebiscite shall be conducted
barangays comprising he proposed Municipality of Tulay-Na-Lupa "in the political units directly affected," it means that residents of
and the remaining areas of the mother Municipality of Labo, the political entity who would be economically dislocated by the
Camarines Norte. separation thereof have a right to vote in said plebiscite. What is
contemplated by the phrase "political units directly affected," is the
In the plebiscite held throughout the Municipality of Labo, majority
plurality of political units which would participate in the plebiscite.
of the votes cast were against the creation of the Municipality of
Logically, those to be included in such political areas are the
Tulay-Na-Lupa. Thus, petitioner as Governor of Camarines Norte,
4
inhabitants of the proposed Municipality of Tulay-Na-Lupa as well petitioners merely pose a hypothetical issue which has yet to ripen
as those living in the the parent Municipality of Labo, Camarines to an actual case or controversy.
Norte.
In Tobias vs Abalos, Court ruled that reapportionment of
Mariano v COMELEC legislative districts may be made through a special law, such as in
the charter of a new city.
G.R. No. 118577 March 7, 1995, 242 SCRA 211
Issue: Whether or not the addition of another legislative district in
FACTS:
Makati is unconstitutional
This is a petition for prohibition and declaratory relief filed by
Held: Reapportionment of legislative districts may be made
petitioners Juanito Mariano, Jr., Ligaya S. Bautista, Teresita
through a special law, such as in the charter of a new city. The
Tibay, Camilo Santos, Frankie Cruz, Ricardo Pascual, Teresita
Constitution clearly provides that Congress shall be composed of
Abang, Valentina Pitalvero, Rufino Caldoza, Florante Alba, and
not more than 250 members, unless otherwise fixed by law. As
Perfecto Alba. Of the petitioners, only Mariano, Jr., is a resident of
thus worded, the Constitution did not preclude Congress from
Makati. The others are residents of Ibayo Ususan, Taguig, Metro
increasing its membership by passing a law, other than a general
Manila. Suing as taxpayers, they assail sections 2, 51, and 52 of
reapportionment law. This is exactly what was done by Congress
Republic Act No. 7854 as unconstitutional.
in enacting RA 7854 and providing for an increase in Makati’s
ISSUE: legislative district. Moreover, to hold that reapportionment can
only be made through a general apportionment law, with a review
Whether or not there is an actual case or controversy to challenge of all the legislative districts allotted to each local government unit
the constitutionality of one of the questioned sections of R.A. No. nationwide, would create an inequitable situation where a new city
7854. or province created by Congress will be denied legislative
HELD: representation for an indeterminate period of time. The intolerable
situations will deprive the people of a new city or province a
The requirements before a litigant can challenge the particle of their sovereignty.
constitutionality of a law are well delineated. They are: 1) there
must be an actual case or controversy; (2) the question of Petitioner cannot insist that the addition of another legislative
constitutionality must be raised by the proper party; (3) the district in Makati is not in accord with Sec. 5(3), Art. VI of the
constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible Constitution for as of the 1990 census, the population of Makati
opportunity; and (4) the decision on the constitutional question stands at only 450,000. Said section provides that a city with a
must be necessary to the determination of the case itself. population of at least 250,000 shall have at least one
representative. Even granting that the population of Makati as of
Petitioners have far from complied with these requirements. The the 1990 census stood at 450,000, its legislative district may still
petition is premised on the occurrence of many contingent events, be increased since it has met the minimum population
i.e., that Mayor Binay will run again in this coming mayoralty requirement of 250,000.
elections; that he would be re-elected in said elections; and that
he would seek re-election for the same position in the 1998 Cawaling vs. COMELECG.R. No. 146319, October 26,
elections. Considering that these contingencies may or may not 2001Cawaling vs. Executive Secretary
happen, petitioners merely pose a hypothetical issue which has G.R. No. 146342, October 26, 2001
yet to ripen to an actual case or controversy. Petitioners who are
residents of Taguig (except Mariano) are not also the proper Facts: Before us are two (2) separate petitions challenging the
partiesto raise this abstract issue. Worse, they hoist this futuristic constitutionality of Republic Act No.8806 which created the City of
issue in a petition for declaratory relief over which this Court has Sorsogon and the validity of the plebiscite conducted pursuant
no jurisdiction. thereto.

Issue: Whether or not RA 7854 is unconstitutional. On August 16, 2000, former President Joseph E. Estrada signed
into law R.A. No. 8806, an "Act Creating The City Of Sorsogon By
Decision: Petition dismissed for lack of merit. The said delineation Merging The Municipalities Of Bacon And Sorsogon In The
did not change even by an inch the land area previously covered Province Of Sorsogon, And Appropriating Funds Therefor."
by Makati as a municipality. Section 2 did not add, subtract, divide, The COMELEC a plebiscite in the Municipalities of Bacon
or multiply the established land area of Makati. In language that and Sorsogon and submitted the matter for ratification proclaimed
cannot be any clearer, section 2 stated that, the city’s land area the creation of the City of Sorsogon as having been ratified and
“shall comprise the present territory of the municipality.” approved by the majority of the votes cast in the plebiscite.
The Court cannot entertain the challenge to the constitutionality of Invoking his right as a resident and taxpayer, the petitioner
Section 51. The requirements before a litigant can challenge the filed the present petition for certiorari seeking the annulment
constitutionality of a law are well delineated. They are: 1) there of the plebiscite on the following grounds:
must be an actual case or controversy; (2) the question of
constitutionality must be raised by the proper party; (3) the A. The December 16, 2000 plebiscite was conducted beyond the
constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible required 120-day period from the approval of R.A. 8806, in
opportunity; and (4) the decision on the constitutional question violation of Section 54 thereof; and
must be necessary to the determination of the case itself.
B. Respondent COMELEC failed to observe the legal
Considering that these contingencies may or may not happen,
requirement of twenty (20) day extensive information
5
campaign in the Municipalities of Bacon and Sorsogon before creation of an entirely new local government unit through a
conducting the plebiscite. division or a merger of existing local government units is
recognized under the Constitution, provided that such merger or
Petitioner instituted another petition declaring enjoin R.A.
division shall comply with the requirements prescribed by the
No. 8806 unconstitutional, contending, in essence, that:1. The
Code.
creation of Sorsogon City by merging two municipalities violates
Section 450(a) of the Local Government Code of 1991 (in relation AS TO THE COMPELLING REASON TO CREATE
to Section 10, Article X of the Constitution) which requires that SORSOGON CITY FROM BACON AND SORSOGON
only "a municipality or a cluster of barangays may be converted
This goes into the wisdom of the law which is something that we
into a component city"; and2. R.A. No. 8806 contains two (2)
do not litigate.
subjects, namely, the (a) creation of the City of Sorsogon and
the(b) abolition of the Municipalities of Bacon and Sorsogon, AS TO THE ONE BILL, ON TITLE RULE
thereby violating the "one subject-one bill "rule prescribed by
Section 26(1), Article VI of the Constitution. Contrary to petitioner's assertion, there is only one subject
embraced in the title of the law, that is, the creation of the City of
Petitioner contends that under Section 450(a) of the Code, a Sorsogon. The abolition/cessation of the corporate existence of
component city may be created only by converting "a municipality the Municipalities of Bacon and Sorsogon due to their merger is
or a cluster of barangays," not by merging two municipalities, as not a subject separate and distinct from the creation of Sorsogon
what R.A. No. 8806 has done. City. Such abolition/cessation was but the logical, natural and
inevitable consequence of the merger. Otherwise put, it is the
Issue: (1) WON a component city may be created by merging two
necessary means by which the City of Sorsogon was created.
municipalities.
Hence, the title of the law, "An Act Creating the City of
(2) WON there exist a "compelling" reason for merging the Sorsogon by Merging the Municipalities of Bacon and
Municipalities of Bacon and Sorsogon in order to create the City Sorsogon in the Province of Sorsogon, and Appropriating Funds
of Sorsogon Therefor," cannot be said to exclude the incidental effect of
abolishing the two municipalities, nor can it be considered to have
(3) WON R.A. No. 8806 violate the "one subject-one bill" rule
deprived the public of fair information on this consequence.
enunciated in Section 26 (1), Article VI of the Constitution
AS TO THE PLEBSICITECOMELEC pegged the period NOT
(4) WON R.A No 8806 is unconstitutional
FROM THE DATE OF APPROVAL of the law (Aug 16, 2000), but
Held: Yes. Petitioner's constricted reading of Section 450(a) of from the date of COMPLETION OF THE PUBLICATION PERIOD
the Code is erroneous. The phrase "A municipality or a cluster of (September 1, 2000).
barangays may be converted into a component city" is not a
This is because the same Act, RA 8806, states: SECTION 65.
criterion but simply one of the modes by which a city may be
Effectivity. — This Act shall take effect upon its publication in at
created. Section 10, Article X of the Constitution allows the merger
least two (2) newspapers of general and local circulation.
of local government units to create a province city, municipality or From said date, the conduct of the plebiscite was well within
barangay in accordance with the criteria established by the Code.
the 120day period. SC agreed with the COMELEC, and added the
the creation of an entirely new local government unit through a ratio by citing Section 10 of the LGC which provides:
division or a merger of existing local government units is
recognized under the Constitution, provided that such merger or "SECTION 10. Plebiscite Requirement. — No creation, division,
division shall comply with the requirements prescribed by the merger, abolition, or substantial alteration of boundaries of local
Code. government units shall take effect unless approved by a majority
of the votes cast in a plebiscite called for the purpose in the
ISSUES: 1. WON RA 8806 is unconstitutional – NO political unit or units directly affected. Such plebiscite shall be
2. WON the Plebiscite was a NULLITY – NO THE LGC AND conducted by the Commission on Elections within one hundred
THE CONSTITUTION RECOGNIZES MERGER AND twenty (120) days from the date of the effectivity of the law or
DIVISION AS A MODE OFCREATION OF A CITY ordinance affecting such action, unless said law or ordinance fixes
another date, ”The court cited the Ruling in TANADA v ANGARA
Petitioner's constricted reading of Section 450(a) of the Code is re. importance of publication for laws to take effect.
erroneous. The phrase "A municipality or a cluster of barangays
may be converted into a component city" is not a criterion The SC said that to give Section 54 a literal and strict interpretation
but simply one of the modes by which a city may be created. would in effect make the Act effective even before its publication,
Section 10, Article X of the Constitution, quoted earlier and which which scenario is precisely abhorred in Tañada.
petitioner cited in support of his posture, allows the merger of local AS TO THE LACK OF INFORMATION CAMPAIGN
government units to create a province city, municipality or
barangay in accordance with the criteria established by the Code. No sufficient proof was provided on this issue. Hence, the SC used
Thus, Section 8 of the Code distinctly provides: the presumption of regularity in favor of COMELEC.

"SECTION 8. Division and Merger. — Division and merger of FALLO: WHEREFORE, the instant petitions are DISMISSED for
existing local government units shall comply with the same lack of merit. Costs against petitioner
requirements herein prescribed for their creation… (may
requirements pa re. contiguous area, land area, population etc.
pero di ko na sinama kasi di importante sa issue)Verily, the
6