M o n d a y, O c t o b e r 1 5 , 2 0 1 2

OCCENA VS. COMELEC

SAMUEL OCCENA VS. COMELEC G.R. NO. L-34150 APRIL 2, 1981 FACTS: Petitioner Samuel Occena and Ramon A. Gozales instituted a prohibiting proceedings against the validity of three batasang pambansa resolutions (Resolution No. proposing an amendment allo!ing a natural"born citizen of the Philippines naturalized in a foreign country to o!n a limited area of land for residential purposes !as approved by the vote of ## to $% Resolution No. # dealing !ith the Presidency& the Prime 'inister and the (abinet& and the National Assembly by a vote of )* to $ !ith abstention% and Resolution No. + on the amendment to the Article on the (ommission on ,lections by a vote of )- to # !ith abstention.. /he petitioners contends that such resolution is against the constitutions in proposing amendments0 ISSUE: 1hether the resolutions are unconstitutional2 HELD: 3n dismissing the petition for lac4 of merit& the court ruled the follo!ing0 . /he po!er of the 3nterim 5atasang Pambansa to propose its amendments and ho! it may be e6ercised !as validly obtained. /he 7*+ (onstitution in its /ransitory Provisions vested the 3nterim National Assembly !ith the po!er to propose amendments upon special call by the Prime 'inister by a vote of the ma8ority of its members to be ratified in accordance !ith the Article on Amendments similar !ith the interim and regular national assembly. $ 1hen& therefore& the 3nterim 5atasang Pambansa& upon the call of the President and Prime 'inister 9erdinand ,. 'arcos& met as a constituent body it acted by virtue of such impotence. #. Petitioners assailed that the resolutions !here so e6tensive in character as to amount to a revision rather than amendments. /o dispose this contention& the court held that !hether the (onstitutional (onvention !ill only propose amendments to the (onstitution or entirely overhaul the present (onstitution and propose an entirely ne! (onstitution based on an ideology foreign to the democratic system& is of no moment& because the same !ill be submitted to the people for ratification. Once ratified by the sovereign people& there can be no debate about the validity of the ne! (onstitution. /he fact that the present (onstitution may be revised and replaced !ith a ne! one ... is no argument against the validity of the la! because :amendment: includes the :revision: or total overhaul of the entire (onstitution. At any rate& !hether the (onstitution is merely amended in part or revised or totally changed !ould become immaterial the moment the same is ratified by the sovereign people.; +. /hat leaves only the <uestions of the vote necessary to propose amendments as !ell as the standard for proper submission. /he language of the (onstitution supplies the ans!er to the above <uestions. /he 3nterim 5atasang Pambansa& sitting as a constituent body& can propose amendments. 3n that capacity& only a ma8ority vote is needed. 3t !ould be an indefensible proposition to assert that the three"fourth votes re<uired !hen it sits as a legislative body applies as !ell !hen it has been convened as the agency through !hich amendments could be proposed. /hat is not a re<uirement as far as a constitutional convention is concerned. 9urther& the period re<uired by the constitution !as complied as follo!s0 ;Any amendment to& or revision of& this (onstitution shall be valid !hen ratified by a ma8ority of the votes cast in a plebiscite !hich shall be held not later than three months after the approval of such amendment or revision.; # /he three resolutions !ere approved by the 3nterim 5atasang Pambansa sitting as a constituent assembly on 9ebruary $ and #*& 7- . 3n the 5atasang Pambansa 5lg. ##& the date of the plebiscite is set for April *& 7- . 3t is thus !ithin the 7="day period provided by the (onstitution.

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT 'anila ,N 5AN( G.R. N . L-5!350 A"#$% 2, 1981 SAMUEL C. OCCENA, petitioner& vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT, THE NATIONAL TREASURER, THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING, respondents. G.R. N . L-5!404 A"#$% 2, 1981 RAMON A. GON&ALES, MANUEL '. IM'ONG, (O AUREA MARCOS-IM'ONG, RA) ALLAN T. DRILON, NELSON '. MALANA *+, GIL M. TA'IOS, petitioners& vs. THE NATIONAL TREASURER *+, -./ COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondents. FERNANDO, C.J.: /he challenge in these t!o prohibition proceedings against the validity of three 5atasang Pambansa Resolutions 1proposing constitutional amendments& goes further than merely assailing their alleged constitutional infirmity. Petitioners Samuel Occena and Ramon A. Gonzales& both members of the Philippine 5ar and former delegates to the 7* (onstitutional (onvention that framed the present (onstitution& are suing as ta6payers. /he rather unorthodo6 aspect of these petitions is the assertion that the 7*+ (onstitution is not the fundamental la!& the >avellana 2 ruling to the contrary not!ithstanding. /o put it at its mildest& such an approach has the arresting charm of novelty ? but nothing else. 3t is in fact self defeating& for if such !ere indeed the case& petitioners have come to the !rong forum. 1e sit as a (ourt duty"bound to uphold and apply that (onstitution. /o contend other!ise as !as done here !ould be& <uite clearly& an e6ercise in futility. Nor are the arguments of petitioners cast in the traditional form of constitutional litigation any more persuasive. 9or reasons to be set forth& !e dismiss the petitions. /he suits for prohibition !ere filed respectively on 'arch @ 3 and 'arch #& 7- . 4 On 'arch = and + respectively& respondents !ere re<uired to ans!er each !ithin ten days from notice. 5 /here !as a comment on the part of the respondents. /hereafter& both cases !ere set for hearing and !ere duly argued on 'arch #@ by petitioners and Solicitor General ,stelito P. 'endoza for respondents. 1ith the submission of pertinent data in amplification of the oral argument& the cases !ere deemed submitted for decision. 3t is the ruling of the (ourt& as set forth at the outset& that the petitions must be dismissed. . 3t is much too late in the day to deny the force and applicability of the 7*+ (onstitution. 3n the dispositive portion of Javellana v. The Executive Secretary& ! dismissing petitions for prohibition and mandamus to declare invalid its ratification& this (ourt stated that it did so by a vote of si6 0 to four. 8 3t then concluded0 ;/his being the vote of the ma8ority& there is no further 8udicial obstacle to the ne! (onstitution being considered in force and effect.; 9 Such a statement served a useful purpose. 3t could even be said that there !as a need for it. 3t served to clear the atmosphere. 3t made manifest that& as of >anuary *& 7*+& the present (onstitution came into force and effect. 1ith such a pronouncement by the Supreme (ourt and !ith the recognition of the cardinal postulate that !hat the Supreme (ourt says is not only entitled to respect but must also be obeyed& a factor for instability !as removed. /hereafter& as a matter of la!& all doubts !ere resolved. /he 7*+ (onstitution is the fundamental la!. 3t is as simple as that. 1hat cannot be too strongly stressed is that the function of 8udicial revie! has both a positive and a negative aspect. As !as so convincingly demonstrated by Professors 5lac4 10 and 'urphy& 11 the Supreme (ourt can chec4 as !ell as legitimate. 3n declaring !hat the la! is& it may not only nullify the acts of coordinate branches but may also sustain their validity. 3n the latter case& there is an affirmation that !hat !as done cannot be stigmatized as constitutionally deficient. /he mere dismissal of a suit of this character suffices.

/hat is the meaning of the concluding statement in >avellana. Since then& this (ourt has invariably applied the present (onstitution. /he latest case in point is People v. Sola, 12 promulgated barely t!o !ee4s ago. Auring the first year alone of the effectivity of the present (onstitution& at least ten cases may be cited. 13 #. 1e come to the crucial issue& the po!er of the Interim 5atasang Pambansa to propose amendments and ho! it may be e6ercised. 'ore specifically as to the latter& the e6tent of the changes that may be introduced& the number of votes necessary for the validity of a proposal& and the standard re<uired for a proper submission. As !as stated earlier& petitioners !ere unable to demonstrate that the challenged resolutions are tainted by unconstitutionality. ( . /he e6istence of the po!er of the Interim 5atasang Pambansa is indubitable. /he applicable provision in the 7*@ Amendments is <uite e6plicit. 3nsofar as pertinent it reads thus0 ;/he Interim 5atasang Pambansa shall have the same po!ers and its 'embers shall have the same functions& responsibilities& rights& privileges& and dis<ualifications as the interim National Assembly and the regular National Assembly and the 'embers thereof.; 14One of such po!ers is precisely that of proposing amendments. /he 7*+ (onstitution in its /ransitory Provisions vested the Interim National Assembly !ith the po!er to propose amendments upon special call by the Prime 'inister by a vote of the ma8ority of its members to be ratified in accordance !ith the Article on Amendments. 151hen& therefore& the Interim 5atasang Pambansa& upon the call of the President and Prime 'inister 9erdinand ,. 'arcos& met as a constituent body it acted by virtue Of such impotence 3ts authority to do so is clearly beyond doubt. 3t could and did propose the amendments embodied in the resolutions no! being assailed. 3t may be observed parenthetically that as far as petitioner Occena is (oncerned& the <uestion of the authority of the Interim5atasang Pambansa to propose amendments is not ne!. 3n Occena v. Commission on Elections& 1! filed by the same petitioner& decided on >anuary #-& 7-=& such a <uestion !as involved although not directly passed upon. /o <uote from the opinion of the (ourt penned by >ustice Antonio in that case0 ;(onsidering that the proposed amendment of Section * of Article B of the (onstitution e6tending the retirement of members of the Supreme (ourt and 8udges of inferior courts from si6ty"five (@$. to seventy (*=. years is but a restoration of the age of retirement provided in the 7+$ (onstitution and has been intensively and e6tensively discussed at the Interim 5atasang Pambansa& as !ell as through the mass media& it cannot& therefore& be said that our people are una!are of the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed amendment.; 10 (#. Petitioners !ould urge upon us the proposition that the amendments proposed are so e6tensive in character that they go far beyond the limits of the authority conferred on the 3nterim 5atasang Pambansa as Successor of the Interim National Assembly. 9or them& !hat !as done !as to revise and not to amend. 3t suffices to <uote from the opinion of >ustice 'a4asiar& spea4ing for the (ourt& in Del Rosario v. Commission on Elections 18 to dispose of this contention. /hus0 ;+. And !hether the (onstitutional (onvention !ill only propose amendments to the (onstitution or entirely overhaul the present (onstitution and propose an entirely ne! (onstitution based on an 3deology foreign to the democratic system& is of no moment% because the same !ill be submitted to the people for ratification. Once ratified by the sovereign people& there can be no debate about the validity of the ne! (onstitution. ). /he fact that the present (onstitution may be revised and replaced !ith a ne! one ... is no argument against the validity of the la! because :amendment: includes the :revision: or total overhaul of the entire (onstitution. At any rate& !hether the (onstitution is merely amended in part or revised or totally changed !ould become immaterial the moment the same is ratified by the sovereign people.; 19 /here is here the adoption of the principle so !ell"4no!n in American decisions as !ell as legal te6ts that a constituent body can propose anything but conclude nothing. 20 1e are not disposed to deviate from such a principle not only sound in theory but also advantageous in practice. (+. /hat leaves only the <uestions of the vote necessary to propose amendments as !ell as the standard for proper submission. Again& petitioners have not made out a case that calls for a 8udgment in their favor. /he language of the (onstitution supplies the ans!er to the above <uestions. /he Interim 5atasang Pambansa& sitting as a constituent body& can propose amendments. 3n that capacity& only a ma8ority vote is needed. 3t !ould be an indefensible proposition

to assert that the three"fourth votes re<uired !hen it sits as a legislative body applies as !ell !hen it has been convened as the agency through !hich amendments could be proposed. /hat is not a re<uirement as far as a constitutional convention is concerned. 3t is not a re<uirement either !hen& as in this case& the Interim 5atasang Pambansa e6ercises its constituent po!er to propose amendments. 'oreover& even on the assumption that the re<uirement of three" fourth votes applies& such e6traordinary ma8ority !as obtained. 3t is not disputed that Resolution No. proposing an amendment allo!ing a natural"born citizen of the Philippines naturalized in a foreign country to o!n a limited area of land for residential purposes !as approved by the vote of ## to $% Resolution No. # dealing !ith the Presidency& the Prime 'inister and the (abinet& and the National Assembly by a vote of )* to $ !ith abstention% and Resolution No. + on the amendment to the Article on the (ommission on ,lections by a vote of )- to # !ith abstention. 1here then is the alleged infirmity2 As to the re<uisite standard for a proper submission& the <uestion may be vie!ed not only from the standpoint of the period that must elapse before the holding of the plebiscite but also from the standpoint of such amendments having been called to the attention of the people so that it could not plausibly be maintained that they !ere properly informed as to the proposed changes. As to the period& the (onstitution indicates the !ay the matter should be resolved. /here is no ambiguity to the applicable provision0 ;Any amendment to& or revision of& this (onstitution shall be valid !hen ratified by a ma8ority of the votes cast in a plebiscite !hich shall be held not later than three months after the approval of such amendment or revision.; 21 /he three resolutions !ere approved by the Interim5atasang Pambansa sitting as a constituent assembly on 9ebruary $ and #*& 7- . 3n the 5atasang Pambansa 5lg. ##& the date of the plebiscite is set for April *& 7- . 3t is thus !ithin the 7=" day period provided by the (onstitution. /hus any argument to the contrary is unavailing. As for the people being ade<uately informed& it cannot be denied that this time& as in the cited 7-= Occena opinion of >ustice Antonio& !here the amendment restored to seventy the retirement age of members of the 8udiciary& the proposed amendments have ;been intensively and e6tensively discussed at the Interim 5atasang Pambansa& as !ell as through the mass media& C so that D it cannot& therefore& be said that our people are una!are of the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed amendment C s D.; 22 Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT 'anila ,N 5AN( G.R. N . L-40001 M*#1. 11, 1908 PEDRO G. PERALTA, petitioner& vs. HON. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, HON. NATIONAL TREASURER, *+, 2ILUSANG 'AGONG LIPUNAN,respondents. G.R. N . L-40803 M*#1. 11, 1908 (UAN T. DAVID, petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS 3COMELEC45 LEONARDO '. PERE&, C.*$#6*+-COMELEC5 VENANCIO S. DU7UE, FLORES A. 'A)OT, CASIMIRO R. MADARANG, VENANCIO L. )ANE&A, C 66$88$ +/#8-COMELEC5 (AIME LA)A, '9,:/- C 66$88$ +/#5 *+, GREGORIO G. MENDO&A, N*-$ +*% T#/*89#/#, respondents. G.R. N . L-4081! M*#1. 11, 1908 )OUTH DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT, RAMON PAGUIRIGAN, *+, ALFREDO SALAPANTAN, (R., petitioners& vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent. G.R. N . L-400!0 M*#1. 11, 1908 IN THE MATTER OF PETITION FOR THE DECLARATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE ELECTION CODE OF 1908 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. GUAL'ERTO (. DE LA LLANA, petitioner.

G.R. N . L-40091 M*#1. 11, 1908 '. ASUNCION 'UENAFE, petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent. G.R. N . L-40820 M*#1. 11, 1908 RE)NALDO T. FA(ARDO, petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, (AIME LA)A, *8 -./ 'UDGET COMMISSIONER, GREGORIO G. MENDO&A, *8 -./ NATIONAL TREASURER, 2ILUSANG 'AGONG LIPUNAN, *+, LA2AS NG 'A)AN, respondents. Pedro . Peralta in his o!n "ehal#. $emesio C. arcia, Jr., Rodri%o &. 'elchor, Dante, S. David, Julie David()eliciano * Juan T. David #or petitioner Juan T. David. Raul '. on+ale+ * ,ssociates #or petitioners -outh Democractic 'ovement, et al. ual"erto J. de la .lana in his o!n "ehal#. /. ,suncion /uena#e in his o!n "ehal# /inay Cueva, )ernande+ * ,ssociates #or petitioner Reynaldo T. )a0ardo. Tolentino .a! O##ice #or respondent 1ilusan% /a%on% .ipunan. Solicitor eneral Estelito P. 'endo+a, ,ssistant Solicitor eneral 2icente 2. 'endo+a and ,ssistant Solicitor eneral Reynato S. Puno #or Commission o# Elections 3CO'E.EC4. ANTONIO, J.: /hese si6 (@. consolidated petitions pose for the determination of this (ourt the constitutionality of specific provisions of the 7*- ,lection (ode (Presidential Aecree No. #@7.. 3 /he first issue posed for resolution is0 5hether or not the votin% system provided #or in Sections 678 and 699, su"para%raphs :; to :<, o# the 6=>< Election Code, %rantin% to the voter the option to vote either #or individual candidates "y #illin% in the proper spaces in the "allot the names o# candidates he desires to elect, or to vote #or all the candidates o# a political party, %roup or a%%rupation "y simply !aitin% in the space provided #or in the "allot the name o# the political party, %roup or a%%rupation, violates Section 6 o# ,rticle I2 and Section =364 o# article ?II(C o# the Constitution. /he specific provisions of the 7*- ,lection (ode !hich are assailed as being in violation of the e<ual protection clause are the follo!ing0 S,(. )=. 'anner o# preparin% the "allot. @/he voter upon receiving his folded ballot shall forth!ith proceed to one of the empty voting booths and shall there fill his ballot by !riting in the proper space for each office the name of the candidate for !hom he desires to vote0 Provided& /hat in the election of regional representatives to the interim 5atasang Pambansa& the voter may choose to vote for individual candidates by filling in the proper spaces of the ballot the names of candidates he desires to elect& but if for any reason he chooses to vote for all the candidates of a political party& group or aggrupation& by !riting in the space provided for in the ballot the name of the political party& group or aggrupation0 Provided #urther& /hat the ballots for the election of regional representatives to the interim 5atasang Pambansa shall be prepared by the (ommission in such manner that the voter may vote for the straight tic4et of a political party& group or aggrupation or for individual candidates& and for this purpose& the tic4et of a regularly organized political party& group or aggrupation as certified under oath by their respective directorates or duly authorized representatives as !en as candidates not belonging to any particular political party& group or aggrupation& shall be printed in the upper portion of said ballots in a manner !hich does not give undue advantage to any political party& group or aggrupation or candidate& and there shall also be a column containing blan4 spaces for the names

of such candidates !hich spaces are to be filled by the voter !ho does not desire to vote for a straight tic4et0 Provided, #inally& /hat a candidate may be in the tic4et of only one political party& group or aggrupation% if he is included in the tic4et of more than one political party& group or aggrupation presenting different sets of candidates& he shall immediately inform the (ommission as to !hich tic4et he chooses to be included& and if he fails to do so& he shall cease to be considered to belong to any tic4et. /he follo!ing notice shall be printed on the ballot0 ;3f you !ant to vote for all the official candidates of a political party& group or aggrupation to the e6clusion of all other candidates& !rite the name of such political party& group or aggrupation in the space indicated. 3t shag then be unnecessary for you to !rite the names of (andidates you vote for. On the other hand& if you !ant to vote for candidates belonging to different parties& groups or aggrupations andEor for individual candidates& !rite in the respective blan4 spaces the names of the candidates you vote for and the names !ritten by you in the respective blan4 spaces in the ballot shall then be considered as validly voted for. 666 666 666 S,(. $$. Rules #or the appreciation o# "allots. F 3n the reading and appreciation of ballots& the committee shall observe the follo!ing rules0 666 666 666 #@. 3f a voter has !ritten in the proper space of the ballot the name of a political party& group or aggrupation !hich has nominated official candidates& a vote shall be counted for each of the official candidates of such party& group or aggrupation. #*. 3f a voter has !ritten in the proper space of the ballot the name of a political party& group or aggrupation !hich has nominated official candidates and the names of individual candidates belonging to the tic4et of the same political party& group or aggrupation in the spaces provided therefor& a vote shall be counted for each of the official candidates of such party& group or aggrupation and the votes for the individual candidates !ritten on the ballot shall be considered as stray votes. #-. 3f a voter has !ritten in the proper space of his ballot the name of a political party& group or aggrupation !hich has nominated official candidates and the names of individual candidates not belonging to the tic4et of the same political party& group or aggrupation in the spaces provided therefor& an of the votes indicated in the ballot shall be considered as stray votes and shall not be counted. Provided, ho!ever, /hat if the number of candidates nominated by the political party& group or aggrupation !ritten by the voter in the ballot is less than the number of seats to be filled in the election and the voter also !rites the names of individual candidates in the spaces provided therefor not belonging to the tic4et of the political party& group or aggrupation he has !ritten in the ballot& the ballot shall be counted as votes in favor of the candidates of the political party& group or aggrupation concerned and the individual candidates !hose names !ere firstly !ritten by the voter in the spaces provided therefor& until the authorized number of seats is fined. /he system !hich allo!s straight party voting is not uni<ue in the Philippine e6perience. As early as 7) & the Second National Assembly of the Philippines enacted (ommon!ealth Act No. @@@& entitled ;An Act to Provide for the 9irst ,lection for President and Gice"President of the Philippines& Senators& and 'embers of the House of Representatives& Inder the (onstitution and the Amendments /hereof.; Said (ommon!ealth Act enabled the voter to vote for individual candidates or for a straight party tic4et by !riting either the names of the candidates of his choice or of the political party he favored on designated blan4 spaces on the ballot. 1 1hile the original ,lection (ode& (ommon!ealth Act No. +$*& dated August ##& 7+-& did not carry provisions for optional straight party voting& 2 the system !as& ho!ever& substantially reinstituted in Republic Act No. -=& or the Revised ,lection (ode& enacted on >une # & 7)*. 3 /he only im portent difference introduced !as that in appreciating ballots on !hich the voter had !ritten both the

name of a political party and the names of candidates not members of said party& Republic Act No. -= provided that the individual candidates !hose names !ere !ritten shall be considered voted for& 4 !hereas (ommon!ealth Act No. @@@ provided that the vote shall be counted in favor of the political party. 5 Ji4e!ise& it should be noted that in other 8urisdictions& ballots providing for optional straight party voting have been accepted as a standard form& in addition to the ;office"bloc4; ballots in !hich all candidates for each office grouped together. Among the different states of the Inited States& for e6ample& the follo!ing has been observed0 /he party"column ballot& used in about += states& is sometimes called the 3ndiana" type ballot because the 3ndiana la! of --7 has served as a model for other states. 3n most states using the party column ballot& it is possible to vote for the candidates of a single party for all offices by ma4ing a single cross in the circle at the head of the column containing the party:s candidates. 3n some states& the party emblem is carried at the top of its column& a feature !hich& in less literate days& !as of some utility in guiding the voter to the right column on the ballot. /o vote a split tic4et on a party"column ballot usually re<uires the recording of a choice for each office& path the voter !ill presumably hesitate to follo! !hen he has the alternative of ma4ing a single crossmar4. Professional party !or4ers generally favor the use of the party" column ballot because it encourages straight tic4et voting. ... 3n contrast !ith the party"column ballot is the office"bloc4 ballot& or& as it is sometimes called by virtue of its origin& the 'assachussetts ballot. Names of all candidates& by !hatever party nominated& for each office are grouped together on the office"bloc4 ballot& usually !ith an indication alongside each name of the party affiliation. /he supposition is that the voter !ill be compelled to consider separately the candidates for each ballot& in contrast !ith the encouragement given to straight"tic4et voting by the party column ballot. Pennsylvania uses a variation of the office"bloc4 ballot0 the candidates are grouped according to office but provision is made for straight"tic4et voting by a single mar4. ! ,lection la!s providing for the 3ndiana"type ballot& as aforementioned& have been held constitutional as against the contention that they interfere !ith the freedom and e<uality of elections. /hus& in Ou%hton, et al. v. /lacA, et al., 0assailed as unconstitutional !as a statutory proviso !hich re<uired that ballots should be printed !ith the follo!ing instructions0 ;/o vote a straight party tic4et& mar4 a cross (6. in the s<uare opposite the name of the party of your choice& in the first column. a crossmar4 in the s<uare opposite the name of any candidate indicates a vote for that candidate.; 3t !as contended that such provision interferes !ith the freedom and e<uality of elections& and authorizes a method of voting for political parties and not :or men. 3t !as alleged that the special privilege given to straight tic4et voters and denied to others in8ured appellants& !ho& as candidates& !ere opposed by other candidates !ho can much more easily be voted for. 3n resolving such <uestion and declaring the la! valid& the Supreme (ourt of Pennsylvania held that the ;free and e<ual e6ercises of the elective franchise by every elector is not impaired by the statute& but simply regulated. /he regulation is for the convenience of the electors. /he constitutionality of the la! is not to be tested by the fact that one voter can cast his ballot by ma4ing one mar4 !hile another may be re<uired to ma4e t!o or more to e6press his !ill. 1hen each has been afforded the opportunity and been provided !ith reasonable facilities to vote& the (onstitution& and lies in the sound discretion of the Jegislature.; 8 /he Pennsylvania (ourt further emphasized that elections are e<ual !hen the vote of every candidate is e<ual in its influence on the result& to the vote of every candidate% !hen each ballot is as effective as every other ballot. 9 /o the same effect is the holding in Ritchie v. Richards& !hich sustained the validity of a statute containing a similar provisional. 10 At any rate& voting by party has been accepted in various states as a form of democratic electoral process. 3n 3srael& for e6ample& !here the election system is one of proportional representation in !hich each political party presents a list of candidates to the citizenry& the voter selects a party& not a candidate& and each party is then represented in the Knesset in proportion to its strength on the

polls. /he head of the largest party is as4ed to form a government. 11 3n 9rance& on the other hand& under the electoral la! of October $& 7)@& providing for the selection of National Assembly members& a list system of proportional representation !as set up& !hereby each electoral area elected several candidates in proportion to its voting strength. /he voter !as re<uired to vote only for one party list% he could not split his vote among several candidates on different party lists& but could depart from the order of preference set up by the party. (ommissioners then count the ballots for each party list and distribute the total number of seats among the different successful parties. 12 3n 3taly and 1est Germany& party voting is li4e!ise in practice& and proportional representation seats are distributed on the basis of the number of votes received by the successful parties. Petitioners in the cases at bar invo4e the constitutional mandate that no person shag be denied the e<ual protection of the la!s (Article 3G& Section . and the provision that ; "ona #ide candidates for any public office shall be free from any form of harassment or discrimination; (Article B33"(& Section 7ClD.. /he !ord ;discrmination; in the latter provision should be construed in relation to the e<ual protection clause and in the manner and degree in !hich it is ta4en therein& since said provision ;is in line !ith the provision of the 5ill of Rights that no :person shall be denied the e<ual protection of the la!s: ;. 13 /he main ob8ection of petitioners against the optional straight party: voting provided for in the (ode is that an independent candidate !ould be discriminated against because by merely !riting on his ballot the name of a political party& a voter !ould have voted for all the candidates of that party& an advantage !hich the independent candidate does not en8oy. 3n effect& it discontended that the candidate !ho is not a party member is deprived of the e<ual protection of the la!s& as provided in Section of Article 3G& in relation to Section 7 of Article B33& of the (onstitution. /he e<ual protection clause does not forbid all legal classifications. 1hat is proscribes is a classification !hich is arbitrary and unreasonable. 3t is not violated by a reasonable classification based upon substantial distinctions& !here the classification is germane to the purpose of the la! and applies e<ually to all those belonging to the same class. 14 /he e<ual protection clause is not infringed by legislation !hich applies only to those persons falling !ithin a specified class& if it applies ali4e to all persons !ithin such class& and reasonable grounds e6ist for ma4ing a distinction bet!een those !ho fall !ithin the class and those !ho do not. 15 /here is& of course& no concise or easy ans!er as to !hat an arbitrary classification is. No definite rule has been or can be laid do!n on the basis of !hich such <uestion may be resolved. /he determination must be made in accordance !ith the facts presented by the particular case. /he general rule& !hich is !ell"settled by the authorities& is that a classification& to be valid& must rest upon material differences bet!een the persons& activities or things included and those e6cluded.: /here must& in other !ords& be a basis for distinction. 9urthermore& such classification must be germane and pertinent to the purpose of the la!. And& finally& the basis of classification must& in general& be so dra!n that those !ho stand in substantially the same position !ith respect to the la! are treated ali4e. 3t is& ho!ever& conceded that it is almost impossible in some matters to foresee and provide for every imaginable and e6ceptional case. ,6actness in division is impossible and never loo4ed for in applying the legal test. All that is re<uired is that there must be& in general& some reasonable basis on general lines for the division. 1! (lassification !hich has some reasonable basis does not offend the e<ual protection clause merely because it is not made !ith mathematical nicety. 10 3n the cases at bar& the assailed classification springs from the alleged differential treatment afforded to candidates !ho are party members as against those !ho run as independents. 3t must be emphasized in the election la! must carry the burden of sho!ing that it does not rest upon a reasonable basis& but is essentially arbitrary. 18 /he factual foundation to demonstrate invalidity must be established by the litigant challenging its constitutionality. 19 /hese principles are predicated upon the presumption in favor of constitutionality. /his has to be so because of ;the fundamental criteria in cases of this nature that all reasonable doubts should be resolved in favor of the constitutionality of a statute. An act of the legislature& approved by the e6ecutive& is presumed to be !ithin constitutional limitations. /he responsibility of upholding the (onstitution rests not on the courts alone but on the legislature as !ell. /he <uestion

of the validity of every statute is first determined by the legislative department of the government itself. 20 /hus& to 8ustify the nullification of a la!& there must be ;a clear and une<uivocal breach of the (onstitution& not a doubtful and argumentative implication.; 21 /here is practical unanimity among the courts in the pronouncement ;that la!s shag not be declared invalid unless the conflict !ith the (onstitution is clear beyond a reasonable doubt. 22 1e shall no! test the validity of petitioners: arguments on the basis of these principles. 3n the challenged provision of the electoral la!& unli4e the previous bloc4" voting statutes& all the names of the candidates& !hether of parties& groups or independent candidates& are printed on the ballot. 5efore he prepares his ballot& the voter !ill be able to read all the names of the candidates. No candidate !ill receive more than one vote& !hether he is voted individually or as a candidate of a party group or aggrupation. /he voter is free to vote for the individual candidates or to vote by party& group or aggrupation. /he choice is His. No one can compel him to do other!ise. 3n the case of candidates& the decision on !hether to run as an independent candidate or to 8oin a political party& group or aggrupation is left entirely to their discretion. (ertainly& before filing his certificate of candidacy& a candidate is a!are of the advantages under the la! accruing to candidates of a political party or group. 3f he !ishes to avail hihiself of such alleged advantages as an official candidate of a party& he is free to do so by 8oining a political party group or aggrupation. 3n other !ords& the choice is his. 3n ma4ing his decision& it must be assumed that the candidate had carefully !eighed and considered the relative advantages and disavantages of either alternative. So long as the application of the rule depends on his voluntary action or decision& he cannot& after e6ercising his discretion& claim that he !as the victim of discrimination. 3n the ordinary course of things& those !ho 8oin or become members of associations& such as political parties or any other la!ful groups or organizations& necessarily en8oy certain benefits and privileges !hich are incident to& or are conse<uences of such membership. 9reedom of association has been enshrined in the (onstitution to enable individuals to 8oin others of li4e persuasion to pursue common ob8ectives and to engage in la!ful activities. 'embership in associations is considered as an e6tension of individual freedom. ,ffective advocacy of both public and private vie!s or opinions is undeniably enhanced by group association. 9reedom to engage in associations for the advancement of beliefs and 3deas is& therefore& an inseparable aspect of the liberty guaranteed by the fundamental la!. /herefore& if& as an incident of 8oining a political party& group or aggrupation& the candidate is given certain privileges& this is constitutionally Permissible. /hus& under the provisions of the previous election la!s& only the parties !ho polled the largest and the ne6t largest number of votes in the last preceding presidential elections !ere entitled to representation in the 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors. 23 3ndependent candidates had no representation in the 5oard% and yet it !as never contended that the independent candidates !ere denied the e<ual protection of the la!s. /he official candidates of an organized political party may be distinguished from an independent candidate. /he former are bound by the party:s rules. /hey o!e loyalty to the party& its tenets& its policies& its platform and programmes of government. /o the electorate& they represent the party& its principles& ideals and ob8ectives. /his is not true of an independent candidate. 3f the electoral la! has bias in favor of political parties& it is because political parties constitute a basic element of the democractic institutional apparatus. Government derives its strength from the support& activity or passive& of a coalition of elements of society. 3n modern nines the political party has become the instrument for the organization of societies. /his is predicated on the doctrine that government e6ists !ith the consent of the governed. Political parties per. form an ;essential function in the management of succession to po!er& as !ell as in the process of obtaining popular consent to the course of public policy. /hey amass sufficient support to buttress the authority of governments% or& on the contrary& they attract or organize discontent and dissatisfaction sufficient to oust the government. 3n either case they perform the function of the articulation of the interests and aspirations of a substantial segment of the citizenry& usually in !ays contended to be promotive of the national !eal.; 24

/he (onstitution establishes a parliamentary system of government. Such a system implies the e6istence of responsible political parties !ith distinct programmes of government. /he parliamentary system !or4s best !hen party distinctions are !ell defined by differences in principle. As observed by a noted authority on political la!& under a parliamentary system% ;the maintenance and development party system becomes not only necessary but indispensable for the enforcement of the idea and the rule of government responsibility and accountability to the people in the political management of the country.; 25 3ndeed& the e6tent to !hich political parties can become effective instruments of self"government depends& in the final analysis& on the degree of the citizens: competence in politics and their !illingness to contribute political resources to the parties. 3t is also contended that the system of optional straight party voting is anathema to free& orderly and honest elections or that it encourages laziness or political irresponsibility. /hese are ob8ections that go to the !isdom of the statute. 3t is !ell to remember that this (ourt does not pass upon <uestions of !isdom or e6pediency of legislation. 1e have reiterated in a previous case that0 ;3t is ... settled ... that only congressional po!er or competence& not the !isdom of the action ta4en& may be the basis for declaring a statute invalid.; 2! /his not!ithstanding& 1e deem it necessary& for the information of everyone concerned& to e6plain !hy such fears& in a gro!ing climate of political maturity and social responsibility appear con8ectural. /here are no data to sho! that the system herein assailed !as the pro6imate cause of all the frauds in the 7) & 7)* and 7)7 elections. 5esides& all procedures or manners of voting are susceptible to fraud. /he important thing to consider is that the 7*- ,lection (ode is replete !ith ne! provisions designed to guarantee the sanctity and secrecy of the people:s vote. As demonstrated in the e6perience of other democratic states& such a system has its advantages. 3t may enable deserving young candidates F but !ithout ade<uate financial resources of their o!n F to !in& !ith party support& in country!ide or regional elections. Since candidates of a party or group may pool their resources& it !ill tend to ma4e elections less e6pensive. As this system of voting favors the strongly organized parties or groups& it tends to prevent the proliferation of political parties or groups. 3t thus results in the formation of stable and responsible political parties. On the part of the electorate& such a system of voting facilitates the e6ercise of their right of suffrage. 3t enables the laborer& the farmer and the voter of ordinary education to vote !ith greater facility for all the official candidates of the party of his choice. 3t thus broadens the !ays and means by !hich the sovereign !ill can be e6pressed. Nor could it be true& as petitioners contend& that a system !hich allo!s straight tic4et voting encourages laziness and political irresponsibility. 1hile there may be those !ho may be moved to vote straight party by reason of lac4 of interest& nevertheless& there are still those sufficiently interested to cast an intelligent vote. 3t has been observed that in a straight tic4et the motivated voter is more li4ely to organize his ballot in a highly structure pattern. His motivation may derive from an interest in parties& candidates& or issues or any combination of those. As observed by a survey research group0 ;'otivated straight tic4et voting appears to reflect an intention on the part of the voter to accomplish his political purpose as fully as possible. Such a voter does not scatter his choices casually& he has a political direction in mind and he implements it through the choice of one party or the other on the ballot. /he more highly motivated he is to!ard this political ob8ective& the less !illing he is to dilute his vote by crossing party lines.; 20 33 /he second issue before Is is0 5hether or not the provisions o# Sections 66, 6: and 67 o# the 6=>< Election Code, !hich authori+e the elections o# the mem"ers o# the interim /atasan% Pam"ansa "y re%ions, violate Section : o# ,rticle 2III o# the Constitution !hich provides that the mem"ers o# the $ational ,ssem"ly shall "e apportioned amon% the provinces, representative districts and cities. Assailed as unconstitutional are the follo!ing provisions of the 7*- ,lection (ode0 S,(. . Composition. F /he interim 5atasang Pambansa shall be composed of the incumbent President of the Philippines& representatives elected from the different regions of the nation& those !ho shag not be less than eighteen years of age elected

by their respective sectors& and those chosen by the incumbent President from the members of the (abinet.; S,(. #. ,pportionment o# re%ional representatives. F /here shall be @= regional representatives to the interim 5atasang Pambansa apportioned among the thirteen regions of the nation in accordance !ith the number of their respective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio ... 0 666 666 666 /he foregoing apportionment shall be not considered a precedent in connection !ith the re"apportionment of representative districts for the regular National Assembly under Section #& Article G333 and Section @& Article BG3 3 of the (onstitution. Not!ithstanding the foregoing provisions& the number of regional representative for any region shall not be less than the number of representative districts therein e6isting at the time of the ratification of the (onstitution. /here are also allotted t!o additional seats for regional representatives to Region 3G in vie! of inhabitants& such as students& in the region not ta4en into account in the 7*$ census. S,(. ). 2otin% "y re%ion. F ,ach region shall be entitled to such number of regional representatives as are allotted to it in Section # of Article 33 hereof. All candidates for region representatives shall be voted upon at large by the registered voters of their respective regions. /he candidates receiving the highest number of votes from the entire region shall be declared elected. /he constitutional provision relied upon is Section # of Article G333& !hich provides0 S,(. #. /he National Assembly shall be composed of as many 'embers as may be provided by la! to be apportioned among the provinces& representative districts and cities in accordance !ith the number of their respective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio. ,ach district shall (omprise& as far as practicable& contiguous& compact& and ad8acent territory. Representative districts or provinces already created or e6isting at the time of the ratification of this (onstitution shag have at least one 'ember each. 3n resolving the issue& the provisions of Amendment No. to the (onstitution& !hich too4 effect on October #*& 7*@& should be considered and not& as pointed out by petitioner >uan /. Aavid& those of Section # of Article G333 of the (onstitution& !hich deal !ith the composition of the regular National Assembly. 3t should be recalled that under the term of the /ransitory Provisions of the (onstitution& 28 the membership of theinterim National Assembly !ould consists of the 3ncumbent President and Gice" President& the Senators and the Representatives of the old (ongress and the Aelegates to the (onstitutional (onvention !ho have opted to serve therein. /he 9ilipino people re8ected the convening of the interim National Assembly& and for a perfectly 8ustifiable reason. 5y September of 7*@& the consensus had emerged for a referendum parta4ing of the character of a plebiscite !hich !ould be held to establish the solid foundation for the ne6t step to!ards normalizing the political process. 5y the !ill of the people& as e6pressed over!helmingly in the plebiscite of October $ and @& 7*@& Amendments Nos. to 7 !ere approved& abolishing the interim National Assembly and creating in its stead an interim 5atasang Pambansa. / !as intended as a preparatory and e6perimental step to!ard the establishment of full parliamentary government as provided for in the (onstitution. Amendment No. provides0 . /here shall be& in lieu of the interim National Assembly& an interim 5atasang Pambansa& 'embers of the interim 5atasang Pambansa& !hich shall not be more than #=& unless other!ise provided by la!& shall include the incumbent President of the Philippines& representatives elected #rom the di##erent re%ions o# the nation, those !ho shall not be less than eighteen years of age elected by their respective sectors& and those chosen by the incumbent President from the 'embers of the (abinet.Re%ional representatives shall "e apportioned amon% the re%ions in

accordance !ith the num"er o# their respective inha"itants and on the "asis o# a uni#orm and pro%ressive ratio, !hile the sectors shall be determined by la!. The num"er o# representatives #rom each re%ion or sector and the manner o# their election shall "e prescri"ed and re%ulated "y la!. (,mphasis supplied.. /he provisions of the Above Amendment are clear. 3nstead of providing that representation in the interim5atasang Pambansa shall be by representative districts& it specifically provides that% ( . the representatives shall be elected from the different regions of the nation% and (#. the ;Regional representatives shall be apportioned among the regions in accordance !ith the number of their respective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio !hile the sector shall be determined by la!. ; No mention !hatsoever is made of ) provinces& representative districts and cities;. 1here the intent is to relate to the regular National Assembly& the (onstitution made it clear and manifest& as indicated in Amendment No. # of the (onstitution. 29 3t is significant to note that no!here in the said amendment is it provided that the members of the interim 5atasang Pambansa shall be apportioned among the representative districts& in the same manner as the regular National Assembly. /he clear import and intent of the (onstitutional Amendment is& therefore& the election of the representatives from the different regions of the nation& and such regional representatives shall be alloted or distributed among the regions in accordance !ith the number of their respective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio. Neither does the Amendment provide that the members of the interim 5atasang Pambansa ;shall be elected by the <ualified electors in their respective district for term of si6 years ...; as provided in Section +ClD of Article G333 of the (onstitution. /o hold that Section +ClD of Article G333 is applicable to the interim 5atasang Pambansa !ould lead to the conclusion that the members of the 5atasan shall have a term of si6 years& !hich is of course inconsistent !ith its transitory character. /hat the interim 5atasang Pambansa is a distinct and special body& !hich& by reason of its transitory nature should be governed by specifically formulated rules& is apparent from the constitutional amendment !hich created it. /hus& its membership ;shall not be more than #=& unless other!ise provided "y la!.; 9urthermore& it ;shall include the incumbent President of the Philippines& representatives elected from the different regions of the nation& those !ho shall not be less than eighteen years of age elected by their respective sectors& and those chosen "y the incum"ent President #rom the 'em"ers o# the Ca"inet.B /he regular National Assembly& on the other hand& is limited in its membership to representatives to be apportioned among the provinces& representative districts and cities. 5y reason of its provisional character& the interim 5atasang Pambansa has to be more fle6ible& both in its representation and the manner of election of its members. /here is no denying the fact that as !ide a range of representation as possible is re<uired in order to hasten the nation:s return to normalcy. 3t is for t reason that sectors are given ade<uate representation 30 and are considered as ;national aggrupations. ; ,lections of sectoral representatives are specially provided for in the 7*,lection (ode. 31 3t should be emphasized that the regular National Assembly is distinct and different in composition& po!ers and manner of elections of its members from the interim 5atasang Pambansa is to function during the period of transition !hile the regular National Assembly is to operate upon the restoration of normalcy. /he composition of the interim 5atasang Pambansa is indeed e6perimental. 3t is an e6periment in size& form and distribution of constituencies in the hope of securing a legislature most truly representative of the vie!s of the electorate. 3t !ould& therefore& be ludicrous to confine the members of such body !ithin the strictures of the representative districts of the regular National Assembly. /he fear of petitioner >uan /. Aavid that several representative districts !ill be deprived of representation misconstrues the concept of regional elections. /he representatives are to be elected by the voters of the entire region. /hey !ill represent the !hole region and not merely its integral provinces& districts or cities. 'oreover& Section # of the (ode ensures that there shall be sufficient representatives for each region by providing that ;the number of regional representatives for any region shall not be less than the number of representative districts therein e6isting at the time of the ratification of the (onstitution.; 333

/he follo!ing t!o issues raised by petitioners are interrelated and must be 8ointly discussed herein. /hey are0 (a. 5hether or not the 1ilusan% /a%on% .ipunan 31/.4 and the .aAas n% /ayan 3.,/,$4 may "e re%istered and accredited as political parties under Section < o# ,rticle ?II(C o# the Constitution, so that their respective candidates #or mem"ership in the interim /atasan% Pam"ansa may "e voted #or as a %roup under the 6=>< Election CodeC and (b. 5hether or not mem"ers o# a political party in the l=>6 elections may run under the ticAet sponsored "y any other party, %roup or a%%rupation, considerin% the provisions o# Section 68 o# ,rticle ?II(C o# the Constitution !hich prohi"ition candidates #or any elective pu"lic o##ice #rom chan%in% party a##iliation !ithin six months s immediately precedin% or #ollo!in% an election /he resolution of the foregoing issues calls for the determination of the constitutionality of Section 77 of the 7*- ,lection (ode& <uestioned by petitioners. Said section provides0 S,(. 77. Re%istration o# political parties. F Pending the promulgation of rules and regulations to govern the registration and accreditation of political parties by the (ommission in accordance !ith Article B33C(D of the (onstitution& the registration !ith the (ommission previous to 7*# of the Nacionalista Party& Jiberal Party& (itizens: Party& and other national parties shall be deemed to continue and they may& upon notice to the (ommission through their respective presidents or duly authorized representatives& amend or change their names& constitutions& by"la!s& or other organizational papers& platfor& officers and members& and shag be entitled to nominate and support their respective candidates for representatives in the interim 5atasang Pambansa. Similarly& any other group of persons pursuing the same political 3deals in government may register !ith the (ommission and be entitled to the same rights and privileges. 3nvo4ed by petitioner are Sections - and = of Article B33"( of the (onstitution& !hich provide0 S,(. -. A political party shall be entitled to accreditation by the (ommission if& in the immediately preceding election& such party has obtained at least the third highest number of votes cast in the constituency to !hich it see4s accreditation. No religious sect shall be registered as political party& and no political party !hich see4s to achieve its goals through violence or subversion shall be entitled to accreditation. S,(. =. No elective public officer may change political party affiliation during term of office& and no candidate for any elective public office may change political party affiliation !ithin si6 months immediately preceding g or follo!ing an election. 3t should be recalled that the ob8ect of the afore"<uoted provisions of the (onstitution !as to develop a third party and brea4 the heretofore dominant hold on the political system by the t!o ma8or political parties !hich have been in e6istence since the birth of the republic. /hese t!o ma8or parties !ere considered as ;in fact a one party system !ith t!o factions openly disagreeing on fringe issues but tacitly united by one common aim0 alternate monopoly of po!er through a pattern of patronage politics.; 32 /he framers of the (onstitution e6amined the !ea4nesses of the party system and sa! the need ;for discarding the old party system as a political farce that has been largely responsible for many of the country:s ills ...;. 33 /hey envisioned& therefore& a ne! era in Philippine politics& !here elections !ere to be decided on issues rather than on personalities& and !here the electoral process !as to be free& less e6pensive government depends on an organized and vigorous citizenry. Such can only e6ist if citizens can increase their effectiveness in politics by modernizing and using political parties to set the general directions of public policy and to influence the specific decisions of public institutions that affect their daily lives. 3t !as intended& ho!ever& that some of these provisions !ould not operate during the interim period. /hus& from the !ording of Section -& it is obvious that said section is incapable of application during the first election because it states that no political party shall be entitled to accreditation unless in the immediately preceding election& it obtained at least the third highest number of votes cast in the

constituency to !hich it see4s accreditation. /hat there cannot be any accreditation during the first election under the 7*+ (onstitution is evident from the sponsorship speech of the proponent of t constitutional provision. 34 Although their members are united by common policies and principles of government and apparently impelled by the same political 3deals& neither the Kilusang 5agong Jipunan (K5J. nor the Ja4as ng 5ayan (JA5AN. professes to be a political party in the sense of a stable organization !ith a degree of permanence& imposing strict discipline among the members& and !ith a party platform drafted and ratified in a party convention. 3t does not follo!& ho!ever& that the K5J and JA5AN are not political parties& in a generic sense& since a political party has been generally defined as ;an association of voters believing in certain principles of government& formed to urge the adoption and e6ecution of such principles in governmental affairs through officers of li4e belief.; 35. Political parties ;result from the voluntary association of electors& and do not e6ist by operation of la!. /he element of time is not essential to the formation of a legal party% it may spring into e6istence from the e6igencies of a particular election& and !ith no intention of continuing after the e6igency has passed.; 3! As a matter of fact& it is only the Kilusang 5agong Jipunan (K5J. and the Ja4as ng 5ayan (JA5AN. that have polarized the ma8or differences on vital public issues affecting the nation. And& during t first election in t period of transition !hen& obviously& no political party can be accredited& does the (onstitution& in Article B33"(& Sections #C$D and - limit re%istration to political parties as strictly understood by !ithholding it from aggrupations of persons pursuing the same political 3deals of government as provided in Section 77 of the 7*- ,lection (ode2 3t clearly does not. /he listing of political parties appears to have a dual aspect F re%istration and accreditation Registration is a means by !hich the government is enabled to supervise and regulate the activities of various elements participating in an election. 3t !ould appear from Section - of Article B33"( that the only groups !hich cannot be registered are0 (a. religious groups or sects% and (b. those political parties or groups !ho see4 ;to achieve its goals through violence and subversion;. Accreditation is the means by !hich the registration re<uirement is made effective by conferring benefits to registered political parties. /he condition for accreditation& aside from those mentioned& is that the political party must have obtained& in the immediately preceding election& at least ;the third highest number of votes cast in the constituency to !hich it see4s accreditation. ; /he (onstitution& ho!ever& does not state !hat are the effects of accreditation. /here is& therefore& necessity for legislation. 'oreover& to construe the term ;political party; restrictively !ould delimit the supervisory authority of the (ommission on ,lections. 'ore specifically& it !ould e6empt aggrupations or other political groups from certain re<uirements. Inder Section 77& the 7*- ,lection (ode allo!s the registration of aggrupations or groups of persons ;pursuing the same political 3deals in government;% conse<uently& they are sub8ected to the regulation of propaganda materials (Sec. ) . and the limitation of e6penses for candidates (Sec. $#.. 9rom another point of vie!& a narro! construction may discourage the robust e6ercise of the right of association guaranteed by the 5ill of Rights& !hich at t stage of our political tory appears& necessary. /he facts that the coming polls !ill be the first that !e shall hold since the proclamation of martial la! on September # & 7*# ma4es it an event of no ordinary significance. ;/he 9ilipino society has outgro!n its age of innocence. /oday the acts of 9ilipino politicians must be 8udged by more mature standards and the test of national allegiance has become more strict and more demanding& even more binding.; 30 5y t election& !e shall inaugurate a ne! stage in our political life& and commence our fateful transition from crisis government to a parliamentary system. 5ut as President 9erdinand ,. 'arcos has significantly observed0 ... this step& 3 repeat& is no mere restoration of electoral processes and representative government. /he coming elections !ould be a perilous e6ercise indeed if they !ould merely return us to elections and representative institutions as !e had 4no!n them in the past& and compromise !hat had ta4en us so much time and effort to construct over the last five years. 1hat !e envision in t initiative is the permanence and continuity of the refor that !e have launched under the aegis of crisis government. 1e envision in it the full emergence of a

ne! political order that !ill give life and sustenance to our national vision of a ne! society. And it !ill have permanence and continuity because by the grace of suffrage and representative government& !e shag thereby attain a formal mechanism for the e6ercise of participation and involvement by our people in nation"building and national development. 38

3t is& therefore& necessary at t stage to encourage the emergence or gro!th of political parties that !ill truly reflect the opinions and aspirations of our people. /he right of individuals to form associations as guaranteed by the fundamental la!& includes the freedom to associate or refrain from association. 39 3n accord !ith t constitutional precept& it is recognized that no man is compelled by la! to become a member of a political party& or& after having become such& to remain a member. 40 /he e6istence of responsible political parties !ith distinct programs of government is essential to the effectiveness of a parliamentary system of government. 3t is in recognition of t fact that Section 77 of the 7*- ,lection (ode allo!s or sanctions the registration of groups of persons ;pursuing the same political ideals in government; !ith the (ommission on ,lections. 'oreover& to !hat e6tent the rights of organized political parties should be regulated by la! is a matter of public policy to be determined by the la!ma4er F a matter !hich does not concern the courts. 41 / brings us to the ne6t point raised by petitioners& namely& that under Section = of Article B33"( of the (onstitution& no candidate for elective office may change party affiliation !ithin si6 months immediately preceding or follo!ing an election. 3n the cases at bar& 1e understand that no candidate voluntarily changed party affiliation. On the contrary& the claim that the K5J and the JA5AN are not political parties; is based partly on the fact that the candidates running under their banners have retained their party affiliation. Section = is a statement of a basic principle against political opportunism. /o begin !ith& no legislation has been enacted to implement t constitutional prohibition. 3ndeed& it is difficult to conceive ho! the courts may apply the prohibition& in all the varied facts and circutances under !hich it may be invo4ed& !ithout the aid of supplementary legislation. 9or instance& the provision in <uestion states that no elective public officer may change political party affiliation during term of office. Suppose an elected representative in the legislature& belonging to one party& shall al!ays vote and side !ith another political party. 1ill he be considered a ;turncoat; even if he does not formally change party affiliation2 Suppose it be decided that he is a ;turncoat;. 1hat sanctions should be adopted2 Should he be suspended or ousted from the legislature2 1hen one turns to political candidates& the same <uestions as to !hat should be considered ;political opportunism; or ;turncoatism; !ill be encountered. 5ut the problem of procedure for hearing and deciding infringements of the prohibition or the determination of the appropriate sanction becomes more acute. 3s the sanction to be found in the refusal by the (ommission on ,lections to register the party or group& or in the denial of certificate of candidacy& or are there other !ays2 Should political parties be prevented from ;adopting; candidates2 Or from forming coalitions2 All of these are <uestions of policy& in resolving !inch many immensurable factors have to be considered. /he afore"cited constitutional provisions are commands to the legislature to enact la!s to carry out the constitutional purpose. /hey are& therefore& addressed initially to the la!ma4ing department of the government. 3t is not part of the 8udicial department to deal !ith such <uestions !ithout their authoritative solutions by the legislative department. 3t may be relevant to emphasize here that the 8urisdiction of t (ourt is ;limited to cases and controversies& presented in such form& !ith adverse litigants& that the 8udicial po!er is capable of acting upon them& and pronouncing and carrying into effect a 8udgment bet!een the parties& and does not e6tend to the determination of abstract <uestions or issues framed for the purpose of invo4ing the advice of the court !ithout real parties or a real case.; 42 3n any event& 1e cannot perceive ho! such constitutional prohibition could be applied in t first election. Precisely& the overriding constitutional purpose is to remove the dominant hold of the t!o ma8or political parties and encourage the formation of ne! political parties. /he intention is not to rebuild old party coalitions but to define ne! political means and instruments& !ithin the parties or beyond them& that !ill allo! the 9ilipino people to e6press their deeper concerns and aspirations through popular government.

3G /he fourth issue is0 !hether or not the #orty(#ive(day period o# campai%n prescri"ed in the 6=>< Election Code violates the Constitution "ecause. 3a4 it !as decreed "y the President and not "y the Commission on Elections as provided "y Section ; o# ,rticle ?II(CC and 3"4 the period should cover at least ninety 3=84 days. Petitioners <uestion the constitutionality of Section ) of the 7*- ,lection (ode& !hich provides0 S,(. ). Election and campai%n periods. F /he election period shall be fi6ed by the (ommission on ,lections in accordance !ith Section @& Article B33"( of the (onstitution. /he period of campaign shall not be more than forty" five days immediately preceding the election& e6cluding the day before and the day of the election0 Provided& /hat for the election of representatives to the interim 5atasang Pambansa& the period of campaign shall commence on 9ebruary *& 7*- e6cept that no election campaign or partisan political activity may be conducted on 'arch #+ and #)& 7*-. 3n support of the allegation of unconstitutionality& petitioners rely on Section @ of Article B33"( of the (onstitution& thus0 S,(. @. Inless other!ise fi6ed by the (ommission in special cases& the election period shall commence ninety days before the day of election and shall end thirty days thereafter. At the outset& it should be considered that Amendment No. provides that the ;number of representatives from each region and the manner o# their election shall "e prescri"ed and re%ulated "y la! B (emphasis supplied.. Inder Amendment No. $& ;the incumbent President shall continue to e6ercise legislative po!ers until martial la! shall have been lifted.; /he po!er conferred by these Amendment upon the la!ma4er necessarily included the authority to prescribe the date and procedure for the holding of such elections. 3t should be borne in mind that the forthcoming election for members in the interim 5atasang Pambansa !ill be a special election during a regime of martial la!. 3t is& therefore& an election in a state of emergency. /he e6igencies of the situation re<uire that it be governed by special rules. At t point& the ob8ective is to hasten the normalization of government and& at the same time& to ensure that the nation is not e6posed to the same critical proble that necessitated the declaration of martial la!. 3n conferring upon the incumbent President the authority to determine the date of the election& those !ho drafted the Amendments must have realized that it is only the incumbent President !ho has the authority and the means of obtaining& through the various facilities in the civil and military agencies of the government& information on the peace and order condition of the country& and to determine the period !ithin !hich an electoral campaign may be ade<uately conducted in all the regions of the nation. /hus& the 7*- ,lection (ode !as formulated to meet a special need& and t is emphasized by the fact that the (ode itself limits its application. 43 ,ven assuming that it should be the (ommission on ,lections that should fi6 the period for campaign& the constitutional mandate is complied !ith by the fact that the (ommission on ,lections has adopted and is enforcing the period fi6ed in Section )& Article 3 of the 7*- ,lection (ode. At any rate& insofar as ob8ections to the fi6ing of the campaign period for elections in general are concerned& it is apparent that there is a distinction bet!een the ter ;election period; and ;campaign period;. /hus& Section )& Article 3 of the 7*- ,lection (ode provides that the ;election period shag be fi6ed by the (ommission on ,lections in accordance !ith Section @& Article B33 ((. of the (onstitution.; /he ;campaign period;& ho!ever& has been fi6ed so that ;it shall not be more than forty"five days immediately preceding the election0 Provided& /hat for the election of representatives to the interim 5atasang Pambansa& the period of campaign shag commence on 9ebruary *& 7*e6cept that no election campaign or partisan political activity may be conducted on 'arch #+ and #)& 7*-.; /he distinction is further made apparent by the fact that the ;election period; under Section $ of Article B33"( of the (onstitution e6tends even beyond the day of the election itself& !hile the ;campaign period;& by reason of its nature and purpose& must necessarily be before the elections are held. /here is& therefore& no conflict !ith the constitutional provision.

At t 8uncture& it may be relevant to note the efforts of the (ommission on ,lections to give more substance and meaning to the intent and spirit of the (onstitution and the 7*- ,lection (ode by giving the same practicable opportunities to candidates& groups or parties involved in the April *& 7*- interim 5atasang Pambansa elections. /hus& in Resolution No. #-7& the (O',J,( removed the so"called undue advantage !hich the Nacionalista Party and the Kilusang 5agong Jipunan (K5J. had over the Ja4as ng 5ayan (JA5AN. in ter of authorized election e6penses& appointment of election !atchers and use of print and broadcast media. / circutance& contrary to the clai of petitioners& sho!s that the (ommission on ,lections& as a constitutional body charged !ith the enforcement and administration of all la!s relative to the conduct of elections& and !ith broad po!ers& functions and duties under the 7*+ (onstitution& can give candidates& irrespective of parties& e<ual opportunities under e<ual circutances. 1H,R,9OR,& in vie! of the foregoing& the instant petitions are hereby A3S'3SS,A& !ithout costs. Castro, C.J., 'aAasiar, ,Duino, Concepcion, Jr., Santos, )ernande+, and uerrero, JJ., concur.

Peralta et al vs Commission on Elections et al

15112010
EEDual ProtectionF G 6=>< Election Code G /locA 2otin% Peralta !as an independent candidate in the April 7*- 3nterim 5atasang Pambansa ,lections. He& along !ith others& assailed the constitutionality of PA #@7 or the 7*- ,lection (ode. Secs )= and $$& sub"paragraphs #@ to #-& of the 7*- ,lection (ode& grants the voter the option to vote either for individual candidates by filling in the proper spaces in the ballot the names of candidates he desires to elect& or to vote for all the candidates of a political party& group or aggrupation by simply !riting in the space provided for in the ballot the name of the political party& group or aggrupation (office"bloc4 ballot.. Peralta !as vehement in contending that the optional bloc4 voting scheme is violative of this provision of the (onstitution0 L5ona fide candidates for any public office shall be free from any form of harassment and discrimination.M He sought the shelter of its protection for himself and other independent candidates !ho& according to him& !ould be thus made to suffer if the assailed provision is not nullified. ,ssentially& in terms of individual rights& he !ould raise a due process and e<ual protection <uestion. /he main ob8ection of Peralta against the optional straight party voting provided for in the (ode is that an independent candidate !ould be discriminated against because by merely !riting on his ballot the name of a political party& a voter !ould have voted for all the candidates of that party& an advantage !hich the independent candidate does not en8oy. 3n effect& it is contended that the candidate !ho is not a party"member is deprived of the e<ual protection of the la!s& as provided in Sec of Article 3G& in relation to Sec 7 of Article B33& of the 7*+ (onstitution. ISSUE: 1hether or not the 7*- ,lection (ode is violative of e<ual protection. HELD: /he S( ruled that the 7*- ,lection (ode is valid. No candidate !ill receive more than one vote& !hether he is voted individually or as a candidate of a party group or aggrupation. /he voter is free to vote for the individual candidates or to vote by party& group or aggrupation. 3n the case of candidates& the decision on !hether to run as an independent candidate or to 8oin a political party& group or aggrupation is left entirely to their discretion. (ertainly& before filing his certificate of candidacy& a candidate is a!are of the advantages under the la! accruing to candidates of a political party or group. 3f he !ishes to avail himself of such alleged advantages as an official candidate of a party& he is free to do so by 8oining a political party group or aggrupation. 3n other !ords& the choice is his. 3n ma4ing his decision& it must be assumed that the candidate had carefully !eighed and considered the relative advantages and disadvantages of either alternative. So long as the application of the rule depends on his voluntary action or decision& he cannot& after e6ercising his discretion& claim that he !as the victim of discrimination.

SUBIC BAY METROPOLITAN AUTHORITY

vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 125416 September 26 1!!6"ACTS# On March 13, 1992, Congress enacted RA. $22$ (The Bases Conversionand Development Act o 1992!, "hich created the #$%ic &conomic'one. (A )22) li*e"ise created #BMA to implement the declared national polic+ o converting the #$%ic militar+ reservation into alternative prod$ctive $ses.

On ,ovem%er 2-, 1992, the American nav+ t$rned over the #$%ic militar+ reservation to the .hilippines government. /mmediatel+, petitioner commenced the implementation o its tas*, partic$larl+ the preservation o the sea0ports, airport, %$ildings, ho$ses and other installations le t %+ the American nav+.

On April 1993, the #angg$niang Ba+an o% Moro&', Bataan passed .am%a+ang 1apas+ahan Bilang 12 , #er+e 1993 , e3pressing therein its a%sol$te conc$rrence, as re4$ired %+ said #ec. 12 o (A )22), to 5oin the #$%ic #pecial &conomic 'one and s$%mitted s$ch to the O ice o the .resident. On Ma+ 2-, 1993, respondents 6arcia iled a pet(t(o& "ith the#angg$niang Ba+an o Morong to ann$l .ambayang Kapasyahan Blg.10, Serye 1993 . The petition pra+ed or the ollo"ing7 a! to n$lli + .am%a+ang1apas+ang Blg. 12 or Morong to 5oin the #$%ic #pecial &conomi 'one,%! to allo" Morong to 5oin provided conditions are met.

The Sangguniang Bayan ng Morong acted $pon the petition %+prom$lgating .am%a+ang 1apas+ahan Blg. 18, #er+e 1993 , re4$estingCongress o the .hilippines so amend certain provisions o (A )22). ,ot satis ied, respondents resorted to their po"er initiative $nder the96C o 1991. On :$l+ ;, 1993, COM&9&C denied the petition or local initiative on thegro$nd that the s$%5ect thereo "as merel+ a resol$tion and not anordinance. On <e%r$ar+ 1, 199=, the .resident iss$ed Pro)*+m+t(o& No. 5,2 de ining the metes and %o$nds o the ##&' incl$ding therein theportion o the ormer naval %ase "ithin the territorial 5$risdiction o theM$nicipalit+ o Morong. On :$ne 18, 199=;, respondent Comelec iss$ed Re-o*.t(o& No. 2/45+&0 2/4/ , adopting a >Calendar o Activities or *o)+* re%ere&0.m andproviding or >the r$les and g$idelines to govern the cond$ct o there erend$m On :$l+ 12, 199;, #BMA instit$ted a petition or certiorari contestingthe validit+ o (esol$tion ,o. 28-8 alleging that p$%lic respondent isintent on proceeding "ith a local initiative that proposes anamendment o a national la" ISSUE# 1. ?O, Comelec committed grave a%$se o discretion in prom$lgating(esol$tion ,o. 28-8 "hich governs the cond$ct o the re%ere&0.m proposing to ann$l or repeal Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10 2.

?O, the 4$estioned local initiative covers a s$%5ect "ithin the po"erso the people o Morong to enact@ i . e ., "hether s$ch initiative >see*sthe amendment o a national la".> HEL1# 1. A&#. COM&9&C committed grave a%$se o discretion.</(#T. The process started %+ private respondents "as an /,/T/AT/B& %$trespondent Comelec made preparations or a (&<&(&,DCM onl+./n act, in the %od+ o the (esol$tion as reprod$ced in the ootnote %elo",the "ord >re erend$m> is repeated at least 2) times, %$t >initiative> is notmentioned at all. The Comelec la%eled the e3ercise as a >(e erend$m>@ theco$nting o votes "as entr$sted to a >(e erend$m Committee>@ thedoc$ments "ere called >re erend$m ret$rns>@ the canvassers, >(e erend$mBoard o Canvassers> and the %allots themselves %ore the description>re erend$m>. To repeat, not once "as the "ord >initiative> $sed in said%od+ o (esol$tion ,o. 28-8. And +et, this e3ercise is $n4$estiona%l+ an/,/T/AT/B&.As de ined, /nitiative is the po"er o the people to propose %ills and la"s,and to enact or re5ect them at the polls independent o the legislativeassem%l+. On the other hand, re erend$m is the right reserved to the peopleto adopt or re5ect an+ act or meas$re "hich has %een passed %+ a legislative%od+ and "hich in most cases "o$ld "itho$t action on the part o electors%ecome a la"./n initiative and re erend$m, the Comelec e3ercises administration ands$pervision o the process itsel , a*in to its po"ers over the cond$ct o elections. T2e-e *+34m+5(&' po3er- be*o&' to t2e peop*e 2e&)e t2ere-po&0e&t Comm(--(o& )+&&ot )o&tro* or )2+&'e t2e -.b-t+&)e or t2e)o&te&t o% *e'(-*+t(o&. 2. The local initiative is ,OT $ltra vires %eca$se the m$nicipal resol$tion isstill in the proposal stage and not +et an approved la". The m$nicipal resol$tion is still in the proposal stage. /t is not +et anapproved la". #ho$ld the people re5ect it, then there "o$ld %e nothing tocontest and to ad5$dicate. /t is onl+ "hen the people have voted or it and ithas %ecome an approved ordinance or resol$tion that rights and o%ligationscan %e en orced or implemented there$nder. At this point, it is merel+ aproposal and the "rit or prohi%ition cannot iss$e $pon a mere con5ect$re orpossi%ilit+. Constit$tionall+ spea*ing, co$rts ma+ decide onl+ act$alcontroversies, not h+pothetical 4$estions or cases./n the present case, it is 4$ite clear that the Co$rt has a$thorit+ to revie"Comelec (esol$tion ,o. 28-8 to determine the commission o grave a%$se o discretion. Do"ever, it does not have the same a$thorit+ in regard to theproposed initiative since it has not %een prom$lgated or approved, or passed$pon %+ an+

>%ranch or instr$mentalit+> or lo"er co$rt, or that matter. TheCommission on &lections itsel has made no revie"a%le prono$ncementsa%o$t the iss$es %ro$ght %+ the pleadings. The Comelec simpl+ incl$dedver%atim the proposal in its 4$estioned (esol$tion ,o. 28-8. Dence, there isreall+ no decision or action made %+ a %ranch, instr$mentalit+ or co$rt "hichthis Co$rt co$ld ta*e cogniEance o and ac4$ire 5$risdiction over, in thee3ercise o its revie" po"ers

,N 5AN( ;G.R. N . 12541!. S/"-/6</# 2!, 199!= SU'IC 'A) METROPOLITAN AUTHORIT), petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ENRI7UE T. GARCIA *+, CATALINO A. CALIM'AS,respondents. DECISION
PANGANI'AN, J.:

/he 7-* (onstitution is uni<ue in many !ays. 9or one thing& it institutionalized people po!er in la!"ma4ing. Jearning from the bitter lesson of completely surrendering to (ongress the sole authority to ma4e& amend or repeal la!s& the present (onstitution concurrently vested such prerogatives in the electorate by e6pressly recognizing their residual and sovereign authority to ordain legislation directly through the concepts and processes of initiative and of referendum. 3n this Aecision& this (ourt distinguishes referendum from initiative and discusses the practical and legal implications of such differences. 3t also sets do!n some guidelines in the conduct and implementation of these t!o novel and vital features of popular democracy& as !ell as settles some relevant <uestions on 8urisdiction "" all !ith the purpose of nurturing& protecting and promoting the people:s e6ercise of direct democracy. 3n this action for certiorari and prohibition& petitioner see4s to nullify the respondent (ommission on ,lections: Ruling dated April *& 77@ and Resolution No. #-)- promulgated on >une #*& 77@ C D denying petitioner:s plea to stop the holding of a local initiative and referendum on the proposition to recall Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /l%. 68, Serye 6==H, o# the San%%unian% /ayan of 'orong& 5ataan. T./ F*1-8 On 'arch +& 77#& (ongress enacted Republic Act No. *##* (/he 5ases (onversion and Aevelopment Act of 77#.& !hich among others& provided for the creation of the Subic Special ,conomic None& thus0 "Sec. 12. Subic Special Economic Zone. - Subject to the concurrence by resolution of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of the ity of !longapo and the Sangguniang "ayan of the #unicipalities of Subic$ #orong and %ermosa$ there is hereby created a Special Economic and &ree'port Zone consisting of the ity of !longapo and the

#unicipality of Subic$ Pro(ince of Zambales$ the lands occupied by the Subic )a(al "ase and its contiguous e*tensions as embraced$ co(ered and defined by the 1+,#ilitary "ases .greement bet/een the Philippines and the 0nited States of .merica as amended$ and /ithin the territorial jurisdiction of the #unicipalities of #orong and %ermosa$ Pro(ince of "ataan$ hereinafter referred to as the Subic Special Economic Zone /hose metes and bounds shall be delineated in a proclamation to be issued by the President of the Philippines. 1ithin thirty 2304 days after the appro(al of this .ct$ each local go(ernment unit shall submit its resolution of concurrence to join the Subic Special Economic Zone to the !ffice of the President. 5hereafter$ the President of the Philippines shall issue a proclamation defining the metes and bounds of the 6one as pro(ided herein." 20nderscoring supplied4 RA *##* li4e!ise created petitioner to implement the declared national policy of converting the Subic military reservation into alternative productive uses.C#D Petitioner !as organized !ith an authorized capital stoc4 of P#= billion !hich !as fully subscribed and fully paid up by the Republic of the Philippines !ith& among other assets& ;(a.ll lands embraced& covered and defined in Section # hereof& as !ell as permanent improvements and fi6tures upon proper inventory not other!ise alienated& conveyed& or transferred to another government agency.MC+D On November #)& 77#& the American navy turned over the Subic military reservation to the Philippine government. 3mmediately& petitioner commenced the implementation of its tas4& particularly the preservation of the seaports& airports& buildings& houses and other installations left by the American navy. 3n April 77+& the San%%unian% /ayan of 'orong& 5ataan passed a Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /ilan% 68, Serye 6==H, e6pressing therein its absolute concurrence& as re<uired by said Sec. # of RA *##*& to 8oin the Subic Special ,conomic None. On September $& 77+& the San%%unian% /ayan o# 'oron% submitted Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /ilan% 68, Serye 6==H to the Office of the President. On 'ay #)& 77+& respondents Garcia& (alimbas and their companions filed a petition !ith the San%%unian% /ayan of 'orong to annul Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /l%. 68, Serye 6==H. /he petition prayed for the follo!ing0 "7. "a/iin$ nulipi8ahin at pa/alang'bisa ang Pambayang 9apasyahan "lg. 10 Serye 1++3 ng Sangguniang "ayan para sa pag'anib ng #orong sa SSE&Z na /alang 8undisyon. 77. Palitan ito ng isang Pambayang 8apasiyahan na aanib lamang ang #orong sa SSE&Z 8ung ang mga sumusunod na 8ondisyones ay ipag8a8aloob$ ipatutupad at isasaga/a para sa 8apa8anan at interes ng #orong at"ataan: 2.4 7bali8 sa "ataan ang ;<irgin &orests; '' isang bundo8 na hindi nagagala/ at punong'puno ng malala8ing punong'8ahoy at iba;t'ibang halaman.

2"4 7hi/alay ang =rande 7sland sa SSE&Z at ibali8 ito sa "ataan. 294 7sama ang mga lupain ng "ataan na na8apaloob sa S"#. sa pag8u8uenta ng salaping ipinag8aloob ng pamahalaang national o ;7nternal >e(enue .llotment; 27>.4 sa #orong$ %ermosa at sa ?ala/igan. 2@4 Payagang magtatag rin ng sariling ;special economic 6ones; ang ba/at bayan ng #orong$ %ermosa at @inalupihan. 2E4 7base sa la8i ng 8anya'8anyang lupa ang pamamahagi ng 8i8itain ng S"#.. 2=4 7base rin ang alo8asyon ng pagbibigay ng trabaho sa la8i ng nasabing mga lupa. 2%4 Pabayaang bu8as ang pinto ng S"#. na nasa #orong ng 2, na oras at bu8od dito sa magbu8as pa ng pinto sa hangganan naman ng #orong at %ermosa upang mag8aroon ng pag8a8ataong umunlad rin ang mga nasabing bayan$ pati na rin ng iba pang bayan ng "ataan. 274 5apusin ang pag8o8on8reto ng mga daang #orong'5ala'!rani at #orong'5asig' @inalupihan para sa 8abutihan ng mga taga'"ataan at tuloy ma8atulong sa pangangalaga ng mga 8abundu8an. 2A4 #ag8a8aroon ng sapat na representasyon sa pamunuan ng S"#. ang #orong$ %ermosa at "ataan." The San%%unian% /ayan of 'orong acted upon the petition of respondents Garcia& (alimbas& et al. by promulgating Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /l%. 6<, Serye 6==H, re<uesting (ongress of the Philippines to amend certain provisions of R.A. No. *##*& particularly those concerning the matters cited in items (A.& (5.& (K.& (,. and (G. of private respondents: petition. /heSan%%unian% /ayan of 'orong also informed respondents that items (A. and (H. had already been referred to and favorably acted upon by the government agencies concerned& such as the 5ases (onversion Aevelopment Authority and the Office of the President. Not satisfied& and !ithin += days from submission of their petition& herein respondents resorted to their po!er of initiative under the Jocal Government (ode of 77 &C)D Sec. ## paragraph (b. of !hich provides as follo!s0 "Sec. 122. Procedure in ?ocal 7nitiati(e. ' 666 666 666 2b4 7f no fa(orable action thereon is ta8en by the sanggunian concerned$ the proponents$ through their duly authori6ed and registered representati(es$ may in(o8e their po/er of initiati(e$ gi(ing notice thereof to the sanggunian concerned. 666 666 6 6 6.; On >uly @& 77+& respondent (ommission En /anc in (omelec Resolution No. 7+" @#+ denied the petition for local initiative by herein private respondents on the ground that the sub8ect thereof !as merely a resolution 3pam"ayan% Aapasyahan4 and not an ordinance. On >uly +& 77+& public respondent (omelec En /anc (thru (omelec Resolution no. 7+" @*@.

further directed its Provincial ,lection Supervisor to hold action on the authentication of signatures being solicited by private respondents. On August $& 77+& private respondents instituted a petition for certiorari and mandamusC$D before this (ourt against the (ommission on ,lections and the San%%unian% /ayan of 'orong& 5ataan& to set aside (omelec Resolution No. 7+" @#+ insofar as it disallo!ed the conduct of a local initiative to annul Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /ilan% 68, Serye 6==H, and (omelec Resolution No. 7+" @*@ insofar as it prevented the Provincial ,lection Supervisor of 5ataan from proceeding !ith the authentication of the re<uired number of signatures in support of the initiative and the gathering of signatures. On 9ebruary & 77$& pursuant to Sec. # of RA *##*& the President of the Philippines issued proclamation No. $+# defining the metes and bounds of the SS,N. Said proclamation included in the SS,N all the lands !ithin the former Subic Naval 5ase& including Grande 3sland and that portion of the former naval base !ithin the territorial 8urisdiction of the 'unicipality of'orong. On >une -& 77@& respondent (omelec issued Resolution No. #-)$& adopting therein a ;(alendar of Activities for local referendum on certain municipal ordinance passed by the Sangguniang 5ayan of 'orong& 5ataan;& and !hich indicated& among others& the scheduled referendum Aay (>uly #*& 77@& Saturday.. On >une #*& 77@& the (omelec promulgated the assailed Resolution No. #-)- providing for ;the rules and guidelines to govern the conduct of the referendum proposing to annul or repeal 1apasyahan /l%. 68, Serye 6==H of the San%%unian% /ayan of 'orong& 5ataan;. On >uly =& 77@& petitioner instituted the present petition for certiorari and prohibition contesting the validity of Resolution No. #-)- and alleging& inter alia& that public respondent ;is intent on proceeding !ith a local initiative that proposes an amendment of a national la!. 6 6 6; T./ I889/8 C@D /he petition presents the follo!ing ;argument;0 ">espondent ommission on Elections committed gra(e abuse of discretion amounting to lac8 of jurisdiction in scheduling a local initiati(e /hich see8s the amendment of a national la/." 3n his (omment& private respondent Garcia claims that ( . petitioner has failed to sho! the e6istence of an actual case or controversy% (#. 6 6 6 petitioner see4s to overturn a decisionE8udgment !hich has long become final and e6ecutory% (+. 6 6 6 public respondent has not abused its discretion and has in fact acted !ithin its 8urisdiction% (and. (). 6 6 6 the concurrence of local

government units is re<uired for the establishment of the Subic Special ,conomic None.; Private respondent (alimbas& no! the incumbent 'ayor of 'orong& in his Reply (should be (omment. 8oined petitioner:s cause because ;(a.fter several meetings !ith petitioner:s (hairman and staff and after consultation !ith legal counsel& respondent (alimbas discovered that the demands in the petition for a local initiativeEreferendum !ere not legally feasible.;C*D /he Solicitor General& as counsel for public respondent& identified t!o issues& as follo!s0 "1. 1hether or not the omelec can be enjoined from schedulingBconducting the local intiati(e proposing to annul Pambayang 9apasyahan "lg. 10$ Serye 1++3 of the Sangguniang "ayan of #orong$ "ataan. 2. 1hether or not the omelec committed gra(e abuse of discretion in denying the reCuest of petitioner S"#. to stop the local initiati(e." On >uly #+& 77@& the (ourt heard oral argument by the parties& after !hich& it issued the follo!ing resolution0 "5he ourt >esol(ed to 214 =>.)5 the #otion to .dmit the .ttached omment filed by counsel for pri(ate respondent EnriCue 5. =arcia$ dated Auly 22$ 1++D and 224 )!5E the: 2a4 >eply 2should be comment4 to the petition for certiorari and prohibition /ith prayer for temporary restraining order andBor /rit of preliminary injunctiom$ filed by counsel for respondent atalino alimbas$ dated Auly 22$ 1++DE 2b4 Separate omments on the petition$ filed by: 2b'14 the Solicitor =eneral for respondent ommission on Elections dated Auly 1+$ 1++D and 2b'24 counsel for pri(ate respondent EnriCue 5. =arcia$ dated Auly 22$ 1++D and 2c4 #anifestation filed by counsel for petitioner dated Auly 22$ 1++D. .t the hearing of this case this morning$ .tty. >odolfo !. >eyes appeared and argued for petitioner Subic "ay #etropolitan .uthority 2S"#.4 /hile .tty. Si*to "rillantes for pri(ate respondent EnriCue 5. =arcia$ and .tty. !scar ?. 9araan for respondent atalino alimbas. Solicitor =eneral >aul =oco$ .ssistant Solicitor =eneral ecilio !. Estoesta and Solicitor Zenaida %ernande6'Pere6 appeared for respondent ommission on Elections /ith Solicitor =eneral =oco arguing. "efore the ourt adjourned$ the ourt directed the counsel for both parties to 7)&!># this ourt by &riday$ Auly 2D$ 1++D$ /hether or not ommission on Elections /ould push through /ith the initiati(eBreferendum this Saturday$ Auly 2-$ 1++D. 5hereafter$ the case shall be considered S0"#755E@ for resolution. .t 2:50 p.m. Auly 23$ 1++D$ the ourt recei(ed by facsimile transmission an !rder dated also on Auly 23$ 1++D from the respondent ommission on Elections En "anc inter alia ;to hold in abeyance the scheduled referendum 2initiati(e4 on Auly 2-$ 1++D pending resolution of =.>. )o. 125,1D.; 7n (ie/ of this !rder$ the petitioner;s

application for a temporary restraining order andBor /rit of preliminary injunction has become moot and academic and /ill thus not be passed upon by this ourt at this time. Puno$ A.$ no part due to relationship. "ellosillo$ A.$ is on lea(e." After careful study of and 8udicious deliberation on the submissions and arguments of the parties& the (ourt believes that the issues may be restated as follo!s0 214 1hether this petition "see8s to o(erturn a decisionBjudgment /hich has long become final and e*ecutory"E namely =.>. )o. 111230$ EnriCue =arcia$ et al. (s. ommission on Elections$ et al.E 224 1hether the respondent omelec committed gra(e abuse of discretion in promulgating and implementing its >esolution )o. 2F,F /hich "go(ern2s4 the conduct of the referendum proposing to annul or repeal Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10, Serye 1993 of the Sangguniang Bayan of #orong$ "ataanE" and 234 1hether the Cuestioned local initiati(e co(ers a subject /ithin the po/ers of the people of #orong to enactE i.e.$ /hether such initiati(e "see8s the amendment of a national la/." F$#8- I889/: Bar by Final Judgment Respondent Garcia contends that this (ourt had already ruled !ith finality in ,nri<ue /. Garcia& et al. vs. (ommission on ,lections& et. al.C-D on ;the very issue raised in (the. petition0 !hether or not there can be an initiative by the people of 'orong& 5ataan on the sub8ect proposition "" the very same proposition& it bears emphasizing& the submission of !hich to the people of 'orong& 5ataan is no! sought to be en8oined by petitioner 6 6 6;. 1e disagree. /he only issue resolved in the earlier arcia case is !hether a municipal resolution as contra"distinguished from an ordinance may be the proper sub8ect of an initiative andEor referendum. 1e <uote from our said Aecision0C7D "7n light of this legal bac8drop$ the essential issue to be resol(ed in the case at bench is /hether Pambayang 9apasyahan "lg. 10$ serye 1++3 of the Sangguniang "ayan of #orong$ "ataan is the proper subject of an initiati(e. >espondents ta8e the negati(e stance as they contend that under the ?ocal =o(ernment ode of 1++1 only an ordinance can be the subject of initiati(e. 5hey rely on Section 120$ hapter 2$ 5itle G7$ "oo8 7 of the ?ocal =o(ernment ode of 1++1 /hich pro(ides: ;?ocal 7nitiati(e @efined. '' ?ocal initiati(e is the legal process /hereby the registered (oters of a local go(ernment unit may directly propose$ enact$ or amend any ordinance.; 1e reject respondent;s narro/ and literal reading of the abo(e pro(ision for it /ill collide /ith the onstitution and /ill sub(ert the intent of the la/ma8ers in enacting the pro(isions of the ?ocal =o(ernment of 1++1 on initiati(e and referendum. 5he onstitution clearly includes not only ordinances but resolutions as appropriate subjects of a local initiati(e. Section 32 of .rticle <7 pro(ides in luminous

language: ;5he ongress shall$ as early as possible$ pro(ide for a system of initiati(e and referendum$ and the e*ceptions therefrom$ /hereby the people can directly propose and enact la/s or appro(e or reject any act or la/ or part thereof passed by the ongress$ or local legislati(e body * * *;. .n act includes a resolution. "lac8 defines an acts ;an e*pression of /ill or purpose . . . it may denote something done . . . as a legislature$ including not merely physical acts$ but also decrees$ edicts$ la/s$ judgement$ resolves$ a/ards and determination * * *.; 7t is basic that a la/ should be construed in harmony /ith and not in (iolation of the onstitution. 7n line /ith this postulates$ /e held in 7n >e =uarina that if there is doubt or uncertainly as to the meaning of the legislati(e$ if the /ords or pro(isions are obscure$ or if the enactment is fairly susceptible of t/o or more construction$ that interpretations /ill be adopted /hich /ill a(oid the effect of unconstitutionality$ e(en though it may be necessary$ for this purpose$ to disregard the more usual or apparent import of the language used.; " 'oreover& !e revie!ed our rollo in said G.R. No. #+= and !e found that the sole issue presented by the pleadings !as the <uestion of ;!hether or not a Sangguniang 5ayan Resolution can be the sub8ect of a valid initiative or referendum;.C =D 3n the present case& petitioner is not contesting the propriety of municipal resolution as the form by !hich these t!o ne! constitutional prerogatives of the people may validly e6ercised. 1hat is at issue here is !hether Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /l%. 68, Serye 6==H& as !orded& is sufficient in form and substance for submission to the people for their approval% in fine& !hether the (omelec acted properly and 8uridically in promulgating and implementing Resolution No. #-)-. S/1 +, I889/: Sufficiency of Comelec Resolution No. 2 ! /he main issue in this case may be re"started thus0 Aid respondent (omelec commit grave abuse of discretion in promulgating and implementing Resolution No. #-)-2 1e ans!er the <uestion in the affirmative. /o begin !ith& the process started by private respondents !as an 3N3/3A/3G, but respondent (omelec made preparations for a R,9,R,NAI' only. 3n fact& in the body of the ResolutionC Das reproduced in the footnote belo! the !ord ;referendum; is repeated at least #* times& but ;initiative; is not mentioned at all. /he (omelec labeled the e6ercise as a ;Referendum;% the counting of votes !as entrusted to a ;Referendum (ommittee;% the documents !ere called ;referendum returns;% the canvassers& ;Referendum 5oard of (anvassers; and the ballots themselves bore the description ;referendum;. /o repeat& not once !as the !ord ;initiative; used in said body of Resolution No. #-)-. And yet& this e6ercise is un<uestionably an 3N3/3A/3G,.

/here are statutory and conceptual demarcations bet!een a referendum and an initiative. 3n enacting the ;3nitiative and Referendum Act& C #D (ongress differentiated one term from the other& thus0 2a4 "7nitiati(e" is the po/er of the people to propose amendments to the onstitution or to propose and enact legislations through an election called for the purpose. 5here are three 234 systems of initiati(e$ namely:
a. . 3nitiative on the (onstitution !hich refers to a petition proposing amendments to the (onstitution% a.#. 3nitiative on statutes !hich refers to a petition proposing to enact a national legislation% and a.+. 3nitiative on local legislation !hich refers to a petition proposing to enact a regional& provincial& city& municipal& or barangay la!& resolution or ordinance.

2b4 "7ndirect initiati(e" is e*ercise of initiati(e by the people through a proposition sent to ongress or the local legislati(e body for action. 2c4 ">eferendum" is the po/er of the electorate to appro(e or reject a legislation through an election called for the purpose. 7t may be of t/o classes$ namely:
c. . Referendum on statutes !hich refers to a petition to approve or re8ect an act or la!& or part thereof& passed by (ongress% and c.#. Referendum on local la! !hich refers to a petition to approve or re8ect a la!& resolution or ordinance enacted by regional assemblies and local legislative bodies.

Along these statutory definitions& >ustice 3sagani A. (ruz C +D defines initiative as the ;po!er of the people to propose bills and la!s& and to enact or re8ect them at the polls independent of the legislative assembly.; On the other hand& he e6plains that referendum ;is the right reserved to the people to adopt or re8ect any act or measure !hich has been passed by a legislative body and !hich in most cases !ould !ithout action on the part of electors become a la!.; /he foregoing definitions& !hich are based on 5lac4:s C )D and other leading American authorities& are echoed in the Jocal Government (ode (RA * @=. substantially as follo!s0 "SE . 120. ?ocal 7nitiati(e @efined. '' ?ocal 7nitiati(e is the legal process /hereby the registered (oters of a local go(ernment unit may directly propose$ enact$ or amend any ordinance. "SE . 12D. ?ocal >eferendum @efined. '' ?ocal referendum is the legal process /hereby the registered (oters of the local go(ernment units may appro(e$ amend or reject any ordinance enacted by the sanggunian. 5he local referendum shall be held under the control and direction of the omelec /ithin si*ty 2D04 days in case of pro(inces and cities$ forty'fi(e 2,54 days in case of municipalities and thirty 2304 days in case of barangays. 5he omelec shall certify and proclaim the results of the said referendum." Prescinding from these definitions& !e gather that initiative is resorted to (or initiated. by the people directly either because the la!"ma4ing body fails or refuses to enact the la!& ordinance& resolution or act that they desire or

because they !ant to amend or modify one already e6isting. Inder Sec. + of R.A. @*+$& the local legislative body is given the opportunity to enact the proposal. 3f its refusesEneglects to do so !ithin thirty (+=. days from its presentation& the proponents through their duly"authorized and registered representatives may invo4e their po!er of initiative& giving notice thereof to the local legislative body concerned. Should the proponents be able to collect the number of signed conformities !ithin the period granted by said statute& the (ommission on ,lections ;shall then set a date for the initiative (not referendum. at !hich the proposition shall be submitted to the registered voters in the local government unit concerned 6 6 6;. On the other hand& in a local referendum& the la!"ma4ing body submits to the registered voters of its territorial 8urisdiction& for approval or re8ection& any ordinance or resolution !hich is duly enacted or approved by such la!"ma4ing authority. Said referendum shall be conducted also under the control and direction of the (ommission on ,lections.C $D 3n other !ords& !hile initiative is entirely the !or4 of the electorate& referendum is begun and consented to by the la!"ma4ing body. 3nitiative is a process of la!"ma4ing by the people themselves !ithout the participation and against the !ishes of their elected representatives& !hile referendum consists merely of the electorate approving or re8ecting !hat has been dra!n up or enacted by a legislative body. Hence& the process and the voting in an initiative are understandably more comple6 than in a referendum !here e6pectedly the voters !ill simply !rite either ;Oes; or ;No; in the ballot. CNote0 1hile the above <uoted la!s variously refer to initiative and referendum as ;po!ers; or ;legal processes;& these can also be ;rights;& as >ustice (ruz terms them& or ;concepts;& or ;the proposal; itself (in the case of initiative. being referred to in this Aecision.D 9rom the above differentiation& it follo!s that there is need for the (omelec to supervise an initiative more closely& its authority thereon e6tending not only to the counting and canvassing of votes but also to seeing to it that the matter or act submitted to the people is in the proper form and language so it may be easily understood and voted upon by the electorate. /his is especially true !here the proposed legislation is lengthy and complicated& and should thus be bro4en do!n into several autonomous parts& each such part to be voted upon separately. (are must also be e6ercised that ;(n.o petition embracing more than one sub8ect shall be submitted to the electorate&;C @D although ;t!o or more propositions may be submitted in an initiative;.C *D 3t should be noted that under Sec. + (c. of RA @*+$& the ;Secretary of Jocal Government or his designated representative shall e6tend assistance in the formulation of the proposition.;

3n initiative and referendum& the (omelec e6ercises administration and supervision of the process itself& a4in to its po!ers over the conduct of elections. /hese la!"ma4ing po!ers belong to the people& hence the respondent (ommission cannot control or change the substance or the content of legislation. 3n the e6ercise of its authority& it may (in fact it should have done so already. issue relevant and ade<uate guidelines and rules for the orderly e6ercise of these ;people"po!er; features of our (onstitution. T.$#, I889/: "it#dra$al of %d#erence and &mposition of Conditionalities '' (ltra )ires> Petitioner maintains that the proposition sought to be submitted in the plebiscite& namely& Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /l%. 68, Serye 6==H & is ultra vires or beyond the po!ers of the Sangguniang 5ayan to enact& C -D stressing that under Sec. #) (b. of RA * @= (the Jocal Government (ode.& ;local initiative shall cover only such sub8ects or matters as are !ithin the legal po!ers of the sanggunians to enact.; ,lse!ise stated& a local initiative may enact only such ordinances or resolutions as the municipal council itself could& if it decided to so enact.C 7D After the Sangguniang 5ayan of 'orong and the other municipalities concerned (Olongapo& Subic and Hermosa. gave their resolutions of concurrence& and by reason of !hich the SS,N had been created& !hose metes and bounds had already been delineated by Proclamation No. $+# issued on 9ebruary & 77$ in accordance !ith Section # of R.A. No. *##*& the po!er to !ithdra! such concurrence andEor to substitute therefor a conditional concurrence is no longer !ithin the authority and competence of the 'unicipal (ouncil of 'orong to legislate. 9urthermore& petitioner adds& the specific conditionalities included in the <uestioned municipal resolution are beyond the po!ers of the (ouncil to impose. Hence& such !ithdra!al can no longer be enacted or conditionalities imposed by initiative. 3n other !ords& petitioner insists& the creation of SS,N is no! a #ait accompli for the benefit of the entire nation. /hus& 'orong cannot unilaterally !ithdra! its concurrence or impose ne! conditions for such concurrence as this !ould effectively render nugatory the creation by (national. la! of the SS,N and !ould deprive the entire nation of the benefits to be derived therefrom. Once created& SS,N has ceased to be a local concern. 3t has become a national pro8ect. On the other hand& private respondent Garcia counters that such argument is premature and con8ectural because at this point& the resolution is 8ust a proposal. 3f the people should re8ect it during the referendum& then there is nothing to declare as illegal. Aeliberating on this issue& the (ourt agrees !ith private respondent Garcia that indeed& the municipal resolution is still in the proposal stage. 3t is not yet an approved la!. Should the people re8ect it& then there !ould be nothing to

contest and to ad8udicate. 3t is only !hen the people have voted for it and it has become an approved ordinance or resolution that rights and obligations can be enforced or implemented thereunder. At this point& it is merely a proposal and the !rit of prohibition cannot issue upon a mere con8ecture or possibility. (onstitutionally spea4ing& courts may decide only actual controversies& not hypothetical <uestions or cases.C#=D 1e also note that the 3nitiative and Referendum Act itself provides C# D that ;(n.othing in this Act shall prevent or preclude the proper courts from declaring null and void any propositionapproved pursuant to this Act 6 6 6.; So too& the Supreme (ourt is basically a revie! court. C##D 3t passes upon errors of la! (and sometimes of fact& as in the case of mandatory appeals of capital offenses. of lo!er courts as !ell as determines !hether there had been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lac4 or e6cess of 8urisdiction on the part of any ;branch or instrumentality; of government. 3n the present case& it is <uite clear that the (ourt has authority to revie! (omelec Resolution No. #-)- to determine the commission of grave abuse of discretion. Ho!ever& it does not have the same authority in regard to the proposed initiative since it has not been promulgated or approved& or passed upon by any ;branch or instrumentality; or lo!er court& for that matter. /he (ommission on ,lections itself has made no revie!able pronouncements about the issues brought by the pleadings. /he (omelec simply included ver"atim the proposal in its <uestioned Resolution No. #-)-. Hence& there is really no decision or action made by a branch& instrumentality or court !hich this (ourt could ta4e cognizance of and ac<uire 8urisdiction over& in the e6ercise of its revie! po!ers. Having said that& !e are in no !ise suggesting that the (omelec itself has no po!er to pass upon proposed resolutions in an initiative. Puite the contrary& !e are ruling that these matters are in fact !ithin the initiatory 8urisdiction of the (ommission "" to !hich then the herein basic <uestions ought to have been addressed& and by !hich the same should have been decided in the first instance. 3n other !ords& !hile regular courts may ta4e 8urisdiction over ;approved propositions; per said Sec. - of R.A. @*+$& the (omelec in the e6ercise of its <uasi"8udicial and administrative po!ers may ad8udicate and pass upon such proposals insofar as their form and language are concerned& as discussed earlier% and it may be added& even as to content& !here the proposals or parts thereof are "*-/+-%? and 1%/*#%? outside the ;capacity of the local legislative body to enact.;C#+D Accordingly& the <uestion of !hether the sub8ect of this initiative is !ithin the capacity of the 'unicipal (ouncil of 'orong to enact may be ruled upon by the (omelec upon remand and after hearing the parties thereon.

1hile on the sub8ect of capacity of the local la!ma4ing body& it !ould be fruitful for the parties and the (omelec to plead and ad8udicate& respectively& the <uestion of !hether Grande 3sland and the ;virgin forests; mentioned in the proposed initiative belong to the national government and thus cannot be segregated from the None and ;returned to 5ataan; by the simple e6pedient of passing a municipal resolution. 1e note that Sec. + (e. of R.A. *##* spea4s of the full subscription and payment of the P#= billion authorized capital stoc4 of the Subic Authority by the Republic& !ith& aside from cash and other assets& the ;... lands& embraced& covered and defined in Section # hereof& ...; !hich includes said island and forests. /he o!nership of said lands is a <uestion of fact that may be ta4en up in the proper forum "" the (ommission on ,lections. Another <uestion !hich the parties may !ish to submit to the (omelec upon remand of the initiative is !hether the proposal& assuming it is !ithin the capacity of the 'unicipal (ouncil to enact& may be divided into several parts for purposes of voting. 3tem ;3; is a proposal to recall& nullify and render !ithout effect ("a!iin, nulipiAahin at pa!alan%"isa. 'unicipal Resolution No. =& Series of 77+. On the other hand& 3tem ;33; proposes to change or replace (palitan. said resolution !ith another municipal resolution of concurrence provided certain conditions enumerated thereunder !ould be granted& obeyed and implemented (ipag4a4aloob& ipatutupad at isasaga!a. for the benefit and interest of 'orong and 5ataan. A voter may favor 3tem 3 "" i.e.& he may !ant atotal dismemberment of 'orong from the Authority "" but may not agree !ith any of the conditions set forth in 3tem 33. Should the proposal then be divided and be voted upon separately and independently2 All told& !e shall not pass upon the third issue of ultra vires on the ground of prematurity. E"$% :9/ 3n sum& !e hold that (i. our decision in the earlier arcia case is not a bar to the present controversy as the issue raised and decided therein is different from the <uestions involved here% (ii. the respondent (ommission should be given an opportunity to revie! and correct its errors in promulgating its Resolution No. #-)- and in preparing "" if necessary "" for the plebiscite% and (iii. that the said (ommission has administrative and initiatory <uasi"8udicial 8urisdiction to pass upon the <uestion of !hether the proposal is sufficient in form and language and !hether such proposal or part or parts thereof are 1%/*#%? and "*-/+-%? outside the po!ers of the municipal council of 'orong to enact& and therefore violative of la!. 3n deciding this case& the (ourt realizes that initiative and referendum& as concepts and processes& are ne! in our country. 1e are remanding the matter to the (omelec so that proper corrective measures& as above discussed& may be underta4en& !ith a vie! to helping fulfill our people:s

aspirations for the actualization of effective direct sovereignty. 3ndeed !e recognize that ;(p.rovisions for initiative and referendum are liberally construed to effectuate their purposes& to facilitate and not to hamper the e6ercise by the voters of the rights granted thereby.; C#)D 3n his authoritative treatise on the (onstitution& 9r. >oa<uin G. 5ernas& S.>. treasures these ;instruments !hich can be used should the legislature sho! itself indifferent to the needs of the people.;C#$D3mpelled by a sense of urgency& (ongress enacted Republic Act No. @*+$ to give life and form to the constitutional mandate. (ongress also interphased initiative and referendum into the !or4ings of local governments by including a chapter on this sub8ect in the local Government (ode of 77 .C#@D And the (ommission on ,lections can do no less by seasonably and 8udiciously promulgating guidelines and rules& for both national and local use& in implementation of these la!s. 9or its part& this (ourt early on e6pressly recognized the revolutionary import of reserving people po!er in the process of la!"ma4ing.C#*D Ji4e elections& initiative and referendum are po!erful and valuable modes of e6pressing popular sovereignty. And this (ourt as a matter of policy and doctrine !ill e6ert every effort to nurture& protect and promote their legitimate e6ercise. 9or it is but sound public policy to enable the electorate to e6press their free and untrammeled !ill& not only in the election of their anointed la!ma4ers and e6ecutives& but also in the formulation of the very rules and la!s by !hich our society shall be governed and managed. @HEREFORE the petition is R,$TED. Resolution No. #-)is ,$$I..ED and SET ,SIDE. /he initiative on Pam"ayan% 1apasyahan /l%. 68, Serye 6==H is RE',$DED to the (ommission on ,lections for further proceedings consistent !ith the foregoing discussion. No costs. IT IS SO ORDERED. $arvasa, C.J., Padilla, Re%alado, Davide, Jr., /ellosillo, 'elo, 2itu%, 1apunan, )rancisco, and &ermosisima, Jr., JJ.& concur. Romero, and 'endo+a, JJ., on official leave. Puno, J., no part due to relationship.
Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT 'anila ,N 5AN( G.R. N . 113100 (9%? 20, 1994 @ILMAR P. LUCERO, petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS *+, (OSE L. ONG, (R., respondents. G.R. N . 113509 (9%? 20, 1994

(OSE L. ONG, (R., petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS *+, @ILMAR P. LUCERO, respondents. Cesar ,. Sevilla * ,ssociates #or 5ilmar .ucero. $apolean . Rama and Remollo 'elocoton * ,ssociates #or Jose .. On%, Jr. DAVIDE, (R., J.: After the issues had been 8oined in these consolidated cases& the (ourt resolved to give due course to the petitions therein and to decide the cases on the merits. 3t can no longer allo! the parties to delay these cases. /heir legal s4irmishes& !hich have unduly magnified uncomplicated issues& have effectively deprived the people of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar of representation in the House of Representatives for more than t!o years no!. /hese cases are se<uels to G. R. No. =$* *& entitled ;>ose J. Ong& >r. vs. (ommission on ,lections and 1ilmar P. Jucero&; !hich !e finally resolved on ## April 77+. 1 /he petitioners !ere t!o of the five candidates 2 for the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar in the synchronized national and local elections held on 'ay 77#. /he canvass of the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers (P5(. of Northern Samar credited >ose J. Ong& >r. !ith #)&#*# votes and 1ilmar P. Jucero !ith #)&=@- votes& or a lead by Ong of #=) votes. Ho!ever& this tally did not include the results of Precinct No. * of the municipality of Silvino Jobos& !here the submitted election returns had not been canvassed because they !ere illegible% of Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos& !here the ballot bo6es !ere snatched and no election !as held% and of Precinct No. @& also of Silvino Jobos& !here all copies of the election returns !ere missing. On ## 'ay 77#& Jucero as4ed the (ommission on ,lections ((O',J,(.& in SPA No. 7#"#-#& to0 . 9orth!ith order Respondent Provincial 5oard of (anvassers for Northern Samar to suspend the proclamation of Private Respondent >ose J. Ong& >r.% #. Airect Respondent Provincial 5oard of (anvassers for Northern Samar to correct the (ertificate of (anvass ((,9 #=. for Jas Navas and& accordingly& to correct the total votes so far counted by it for Petitioner from #)&=@- to #)&=--& thus reducing the margin it found in favor of Private Respondent >ose J. Ong& >r. from #=) to -) votes only% +. Order a special election in Precinct +& 5arangay Gusaran& Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode% ). Order a recount of the votes for Representative of the Second Aistrict of Northern Samar in Precinct @& 5arangay /ubgon& and Precinct *& 5arangay (amayaan& both of Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+) of the Omnibus ,lection (ode% $. Order a recount of the votes for Representative in the $# precincts herein above enumerated in order to correct ;manifest errors; pursuant to Section $ of Republic Act * @@ and for this purpose order the impounding and safe4eeping of the ballot bo6es of all said precincts in order to preserve the integrity of the ballots and other election paraphernalia contained therein. 3 On # >une 77#& the (O',J,(& acting on Jucero:s urgent manifestation& directed the P5( to desist from reconvening until further orders. On - >une 77#& Ong moved to lift the suspension of the proceedings by the P5(& !hich Jucero opposed on = >une 77# on the ground that the canvass could not be completed even if the P5( !ere to reconvene because no election !as held in Precinct No. + (5arangay Gusaran. of Silvino Jobos and there !as no canvassing of the votes in Precinct No. * (5arangay (amayaan. and Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon. both of Silvino Jobos. On + >une 77+& the (O',J,( en "anc promulgated a resolution& the dispositive portion of !hich reads0 Accordingly& the (ommission hereby orders the Provincial ,lection Supervisor of Northern Samar to bring to the (ommission !ithin three (+.

days from receipt hereof the ballot bo6es from Precinct * and @ of Silvino Jobos& to be escorted by representatives from the petitioner and the respondents as !ell as other parties !ho have an interest to protect& and to notify said parties hereof. /he 'unicipal /reasurer of said to!n is directed to turn over custody of said ballot bo6es to the Provincial ,lection Supervisor& and the 4eys thereof shall li4e!ise be turned over by the appropriate officials in custody thereof to the P,S& !ho shall in turn give one 4ey for each ballot bo6 to the duly authorized representatives of the petitioner and the respondent. /he (ommission li4e!ise orders the ,lection Registrar of Silvino Jobos& Northern Samar& and the (hairman and members of the 5oards of ,lection 3nspectors of Precincts * and @ of said municipality to appear before the (ommission !ithin three (+. days from receipt hereof. 5elo! the signatures of the (hairman and the si6 (ommissioners& ho!ever& (hairman (hristian S. 'onsod and (ommissioners Haydee 5. Oorac& Aario (. Rama and Regalado ,. 'aambong directed as follo!s0 1e vote in favor of this resolution e6cept that portion !hich denied the correction of the (ertificate of (anvass for Jas Navas. (orrection of the (ertificate of (anvass for Jas Navas is in order in vie! of the testimony of the election registrar of Jas Navas to the effect that 1ilmar Jucero garnered #&$+* votes for Jas Navas and not #&$ *. Petition for correction !as duly filed by Jucero !ith the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar on 'ay 7& 77#. /he Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar is therefore directed to retabulate the total number of votes for Jas Navas for Jucero and enter the same in the Provincial (ertificate of (anvass. 4 On $ >une 77#& Jucero filed an urgent motion to constitute a Special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors (S5,3. to count the votes of Precincts Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos. 5 On #= >une 77#& Ong& in a special civil action for certiorari filed !ith this (ourt and subse<uently doc4eted as G. R. No. =$* *& <uestioned the order for the recount of ballots in Precincts No. * and @. Aespite the pendency of this petition& the (O',J,( ordered the recount of the ballots in Precinct No. @ by a S5,3 !hich recorded )+ votes for Jucero and # votes for Ong. ! On #$ >une 77#& this (ourt issued in G. R. No. =$* * a temporary restraining order against the implementation by the (O',J,( of its Order of # >une 77# and its Resolution of + >une 77#. On #+ Aecember 77#& this (ourt promulgated its decision in G. R. No. =$* *& 0 the dispositive portion of !hich reads0 1H,R,9OR,& the petition for certiorari is GRAN/,A and a !rit of preliminary in8unction is hereby 3SSI,A directing the (O',J,( to (,AS, and A,S3S/ from implementing its order of >une #& 77#& and its resolution dated >une +& 77#& and the same are hereby declared NIJJ393,A. (onse<uently& the election returns based on the recounted ballots from Precinct @ are hereby A3S(ARA,A and in lieu thereof& authentic returns from said precinct should instead be made a basis for the canvassing. /he Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar is hereby directed to PRO(,,A 13/H A3SPA/(H in the canvassing of ballots until completed and to PRO(JA3' the duly elected !inner of the congressional seat for the Second Aistrict of Northern Samar. /his decision is immediately e6ecutory. 8 Acting on the motions for reconsideration and clarification respectively filed by the (O',J,( and Jucero& this (ourt& on ## April 77+& modified 9 its aforesaid disposition in G. R. No. =$* * as follo!s%

3N G3,1 O9 AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG& the dispositive portion of the Aecember #+& 77# Aecision is hereby 'OA393,A to read as follo!s% ;1H,R,9OR,& /H, P,/3/3ON 3S GRAN/,A. /H, >IN, #& 77# ORA,R O9 R,SPONA,N/ (O''3SS3ON ON ,J,(/3ONS 3N SPA NO. 7#"#-# 3S H,R,5O ANNIJJ,A ANA S,/ AS3A,. 3/S >IN, +& 77# R,SOJI/3ON /H,R,3N 3S J3K,13S, ANNIJJ,A ANA S,/ AS3A, 3NSO9AR AS 3/ A99,(/S PR,(3N(/ NO. * O9 S3JG3NO JO5OS& /H, R,(OIN/ O9 GO/,S 3N /H, $# O/H,R PR,(3N(/S ANA /H, (ORR,(/3ON O9 /H, (,R/393(A/, O9 (ANGASS O9 JAS NAGAS& 5I/ 3S A993R',A 13/H R,SP,(/ /O /H, 3SSI, O9 HOJA3NG A SP,(3AJ ,J,(/3ON 3N PR,(3N(/ NO. + ANA /H, R,(OIN/ O9 /H, 5AJJO/S 3N PR,(3N(/ NO. @. /H, R,SPONA,N/ (O''3SS3ON ON ,J,(/3ONS 3S H,R,5O A3R,(/,A /O ASS3GN SPA NO. 7#"#-# /O ANO O9 3/S A3G3S3ONS PIRSIAN/ /O 3/S RIJ, ON RA99J, O9 (AS,S 9OR 3/ /O R,SOJG, /H, PR,"PRO(JA'A/3ON 3SSI,S /H,R,3N& /AK3NG 3N/O A((OIN/ /H, A5OG, PRONOIN(,',N/S ANA /H, ,B(,P/3ONS PROG3A,A 9OR 3N S,(/3ON $ O9 R. A. NO. * @@. 1H,N,G,R 1ARRAN/,A 5O /H, (3R(I'S/AN(,S& /H, (O''3SS3ON 'AO (A. (AJJ A SP,(3AJ ,J,(/3ON 3N PR,(3N(/ NO. + O9 S3JG3NO JO5OS& NOR/H,RN SA'AR& ANA (5. R,(ONG,N, /H, SP,(3AJ 'IN3(3PAJ 5OARA O9 (ANGASS,RS ANA /H, SP,(3AJ PROG3N(3AJ 5OARA O9 (ANGASS,RS 3/ HAA ,ARJ3,R (ONS/3/I/,A OR (R,A/, N,1 ON,S. AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG SHOIJA 5, AON, 13/H PIRPOS,9IJ A3SPA/(H /O /H, ,NA /HA/ /H, 13NN3NG (ANA3AA/, 9OR (ONGR,SS'AN R,PR,S,N/3NG /H, S,(ONA (ONGR,SS3ONAJ A3S/R3(/ O9 NOR/H,RN SA'AR 'AO 5, PRO(JA3',A AS SOON AS POSS35J,.; 10 As to the certificate of canvass of the municipality of Jas Navas& this (ourt e6plicitly stated% /he correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas is li4e!ise in order. ,ven though a pre"proclamation issue is involved& the correction of the manifest error is allo!ed under Section $ of R. A. No. * @@. 11 (onformably !ith the aforesaid modified 8udgment in G. R. No. =$* *& SPA No. 7#"#-# !as raffled to the 9irst Aivision of the (O',J,( !hich conducted hearings thereon and received the arguments and evidence of both parties !ho then submitted their respective memoranda on #$ >une 77). Ho!ever& during the consultations on the case by the 'embers of the 9irst Aivision& the concurrence of at least t!o of them could not be obtained% accordingly& pursuant to the (O',J,( Rules& the case !as elevated for proper disposition to the (O',J,( en "anc to !hich the parties submitted their respective memoranda on 7 November 77+. 12 On * >anuary 77)& the (O',J,( en "anc promulgated a resolution 13 !hose dispositive portion reads as follo!s0 . /o direct the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers for Northern Samar (a. to include in the municipal certificate of canvass of Silvino Jobos the forty"three ()+. votes of petitioner Jucero and the t!o (#. votes of private respondent Ong as reflected in the election returns of Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon. prepared by the special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors constituted by the (ommission to recount the votes (ballots. in said precinct& as canvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers for Silvino Jobos% (b. to include in the municipal certificate of canvass of

Silvino Jobos& the si6ty"one (@ . votes of private respondent Ong and #7& +=& or + votes of petitioner Jucero as reflected in the election returns ('5( (opy submitted as ;(omelec (opy;. of Precinct No. * (5arangay (amaya"an.& as canvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers for Silvino Jobos% (c. to retabulate the total number of votes of petitioner Jucero for the 'unicipality of Jas Navas and to enter in the provincial certificate of canvass the correct total !hich is t!o thousand five hundred thirty"seven (#&$+*. as reflected in the Statement of Gotes ((. ,. 9orm #="A. prepared and submitted by the 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers for Jas Navas% and (d. to submit to the (ommission a computation of the votes of the contending parties including therein all the votes of petitioner Jucero (!ith alternative totals. and private respondent Ong& in Precinct Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos and the total votes of petitioner Jucero in the 'unicipality of Jas Navas as corrected. Ho!ever& under no circumstances should the 5oard proclaim any !inning candidate until instructed to do so by the (ommission% #. /o issue an Order calling for a special election in the last remaining Precinct No. + (5arangay Gusaran. of the 'unicipality of Silvino Jobos if 8ustified by the result of the canvass by the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers for Northern Samar& and to notify the parties of the schedule of election activities for that precinct% and +. After including in the tabulation the results of the special election of Precinct No. +& to decide the issue of the recount of the votes (ballots. of Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode& to resolve the discrepancy of the votes of petitioner Jucero in the same return& if such discrepancy of votes of the candidates concerned !ould affect the over"all results of the election after the totality of the votes of the contending parties shall have been determined. 5oth Jucero and Ong have come to this (ourt by !ay of separate special civil actions for certiorari to challenge the Resolution. 3n G. R. No. + =*& Jucero maintains that ( . the count of the ballots in Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos must be unconditional because the election returns therefrom are invalid% and (#. his chances in the special election in Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos !ould be spoiled if the returns for Precinct No. * !ere to be included beforehand in the canvass. 3n G. R. No. +$=7& Ong <uestions ( . the authority of the (O',J,( to order the correction of the alleged manifest error in the 'unicipal (ertificate of (anvass of Jas Navas despite the absence of any appeal% and (#. the authority of the (O',J,( to call for a special election in Precinct No. + almost t!o years after the regular election. As !e see it& the core issues in these consolidated cases are0 ( . 1hether there should first be a count of the ballots of Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos before determining the necessity of holding a special election in Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos0 (#. 1hether the (O',J,( acted !ith grave abuse of discretion in ordering the correction of the alleged manifest error in the 'unicipal (ertificate of (anvass of Jas Navas% and (+. 1hether the (O',J,( acted !ith grave abuse of discretion in calling for a special election in Precinct No. + after almost t!o (#. years& or more specifically after one ( . year and ten ( =. months& follo!ing the day of the synchronized elections. 1e shall ta4e up these issues seriatim. 3. /he ans!er to the first issue is in the affirmative.

1e find the (O',J,(:s disposition regarding Precinct No. * to be unclear. 3n the first paragraph of the dispositive portion of the challenged resolution& it directs the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers ;to include in the municipal certificate of canvas of Silvino Jobos the si6ty"one (@ . votes of private respondent Ong and #7& +=& or + votes of petitioner Jucero as reflected in the election returns ('5( copy submitted as ;(O',J,( (opy;. of Precinct No. * (5arangay (amaya"an.& as canvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers for Silvino Jobos&; and ;to submit to the (ommission a computation of the votes of the contending parties including therein all the votes of petitioner Jucero (!ith alternative totals. and private respondent Ong& in Precinct Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos. . . .; On the other hand& in the fourth paragraph of the said dispositive portion& it orders the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers& after ;including in the tabulation the results of the special election of Precinct No. +&; to ;decide the issue of the recount of the votes (ballots. of Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode CandD to resolve the discrepancy of the votes of petitioner Jucero in the same return& if such discrepancy of votes of the candidate concerned !ould affect the over"all results of the election after the totality of the votes of the contending parties shall have been determined.; Obviously& instead of ordering an outright recount of the ballots of Precinct No. *& the (O',J,( !ould first give full faith and credit to the <uestioned election returns thereof& !hich it describes as the ;(omelec (opy&; and& accordingly& direct the P5( to include in the municipal certificate of canvass of Silvino Jobos the @ votes for Ong and the uncertain votes for Jucero F #7& +=& or + . /he recount !ould only be made if after a special election in Precinct No. + shall have been held& it shall be determined that such a recount !ould be necessary. 1e fail to grasp the logic of the proposition. 9irst& it is clear to us that the (O',J,(& !hich has in its possession the so"called ;(omelec (opy; of the <uestioned election returns of Precinct No. * and heard the !itnesses !ho testified thereon& doubts the authenticity of the so"called ;(omelec (opy; of the election returns of Precinct No. *%14 hence& it authorizes the P5( to decide the issue of a recount ;pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode.; Since it doubts such authenticity& it could not& !ithout arbitrariness and abuse of discretion& order the inclusion of the ;votes; of Ong and Jucero found in the doubtful ;(omelec (opy; of the election returns in the municipal certificate of canvass. Second& it is an uncontroverted fact that an election !as held in Precinct No. *. None !as held in Precinct No. + for reasons the parties fully 4ne!. Pursuant to Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode (5.P. 5lg. -- .& a special election may be held in Precinct No. + only if the failure of the election therein ;!ould affect the result of the election.; /his ;result of the election; means the net result of the election in the rest of the precincts in a given constituency& such that if the margin of a leading candidate over that of his closest rival in the latter precincts is less than the total number of votes in the precinct !here there !as failure of election& then such failure !ould certainly affect ;the result of the election;% hence& a special election must be held. (onse<uently& the holding of a special election in Precinct No. + can only be determined after the votes in Precinct No. * shall have been included in the canvass by the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers. 1e may further state that the so"called ;(omelec (opy; of the election returns of Precinct No. * can by no means be validly included in the municipal canvass. /he summary of the evidence in the ;preparation; of the election returns of Precinct No. *& both in the challenged Resolution and in the separate (oncurring and Aissenting Opinion of (ommissioners Gorospe and (laravall& leaves no room for doubt that there !as actually no countin% of the votes in Precinct No. *. Puoted in the challenged Resolution is a portion of the testimony of Sabina /. >arito& Precinct (hairman of Precinct No. *& !hich clearly sho!s that on <uestions by (O',J,( (hairman (hristian S. 'onsod and (ommissioner Gicente 5. de Jima& the !itness candidly admitted that the election returns !ere prepared at the BmunisipyoB or municipal building and not at the polling place of Precinct No. * in barangay (amaya"an. 15 /his BmunisipyoB is located at the po"lacion of Silvino Jobos. Inder the la!& the board of election inspectors shall prepare the election returns simultaneously !ith the counting of votes in the polling place. 1!/here is no evidence !hatsoever that the (O',J,( had& for valid reasons& authorized the transfer of venue of the counting of the votes of Precinct No. * from the polling place in barangay (amaya"an to the municipal building and that the counting did in fact ta4e place at the latter. Although in the (oncurring and Aissenting Opinion of (ommissioners Gorospe

and (laravall there is a reference to ,6hibit ;,&; the >oint Affidavit of Sabina >arito and 'evilyn Surio !herein they declare that after the voting the 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors unanimously approved to transfer the counting of votes to the 'unicipal 5uilding in the Poblacion of Silvino Jobos& !hich !as allegedly concurred in by all the !atchers of political parties and the candidates present& the alleged ;counting; at the municipal building !as denied by no less than the 'unicipal ,lection Officer of Silvino Jobos& Antonio /epace& and the 'unicipal /reasurer thereof& 'r. Gabriel 5asarte& in their affidavits mar4ed as ,6hibit ;9; and ,6hibit ;G&; respectively. 10 Since there !as no counting of the votes of Precinct No. *& no valid election returns could be made and any copy of election returns purporting to come therefrom is a fabrication. A recount thereof& !hich presupposes a prior count& !ould obviously be un!arranted. Only a count then of the votes of Precinct No. + !ould heretofore be in order. Sections #+)& #+$& and #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode are thus still inapplicable. And& in the light of !hat !e stated before in relation to the holding of a special election& such a count of the votes of Precinct No. * must& perforce& precede the special election in Precinct No. +. 33. Ong:s first grievance in G. R. No. +$=7 is !ithout merit. /he order of the (O',J,( for the correction of the manifest error in the municipal certificate of canvass of Jas Navas !as made pursuant to the declaration made by this (ourt in G. R. No. =$* * (On% vs. CO'E.EC. 18 that0 /he correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas is li4e!ise in order. ,ven though a pre"proclamation issue is involved& the correction of the manifest error is allo!ed under Sec. $ of R. A. No. * @@. Since no motion for reconsideration !as filed in that case& the decision therein became final and entry of 8udgment !as made on ) August 77+. (onse<uently& Ong cannot no! re"litigate the issue of the correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas. 333 On the authority of the (O',J,( to order the holding of a special election& Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode provides0 Sec. @. )ailure o# election. F 3f& on account of #orce ma0eure, violence& terrorism& fraud& or other analogous causes the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fi6ed& or had been suspended before the hour fi6ed by la! for the closing of the voting& or after the voting and during the preparation and the transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof& such election results in a failure to elect& and if in any of such cases the failure or suspension of election !ould affect the result of the election& the (ommission shall& on the basis of a verified petition by any interested party and after due notice and hearing& call for the holding or continuation of the election not held& suspended or !hich resulted in a failure to elect on a date reasonably close to the date of the election not held& suspended or !hich resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty days after the cessation of the cause of such postponement or suspension of the election or failure to elect. /he first paragraph of Section ) of R. A. No. * @@ li4e!ise provides0 Sec. ). Postponement, )ailure o# Election and Special Elections. F /he postponement& declaration of failure of election and the calling of special elections as provided in Sections $& @ and * of the Omnibus ,lection (ode shall be decided by the (ommission sitting en "anc by a ma8ority votes of its members. /he causes for the declaration of a failure of election may occur before or after the casting of votes or on the day of the election. /here are& therefore& t!o re<uisites for the holding of special elections under Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode& vi+., ( . that there is a failure of election& and (#. that such failure !ould affect the results of the election. /he parties admit that the failure of the election in Precinct No. +

!as due to ballot"bo6 snatching and do not dispute the finding of the (O',J,( as to the necessity and inevitability of the holding of a special election in said precinct& even if the result of Precinct No. * should be based on the <uestionable ;(omelec (opy; of its election returns. /he (O',J,( held0 5ased on the ad8udged correction of the votes in favor of petitioner Jucero in the 'unicipality of Jas Navas& the results of the recount of votes (ballots. of Precinct No. @ (Silvino .o"os.& and the votes reflected in the available copy of the election returns for Precinct No. * (Silvino .o"os.& it is safe to predict that !hen the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers !ill reconvene to sum up the votes of the contending parties& the original lead of private respondent Ong of t!o hundred four (#=). votes against petitioner Jucero F :7,:>: as a%ainst :7,8;< F !ill be reduced to either *$ or *+ depending on !hether Jucero !ill be credited a lo! of #7 or a high of + votes as reflected in the election returns of Precinct No. *. 1ithout preempting the e6act figures !hich only the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers can correctly determine& undoubtedly it is inevitable that a special election !ill have to be held in Precinct No. + (5arangay Gusaran. of the 'unicipality of Silvino Jobos. ... Given the established lead of private respondent Ong over petitioner Jucero& 1e ans!er in the affirmative. According to (omelec records& the number of registered voters in Precinct No. + ist!o hundred thirteen 3:6H4. Since the lead of respondent Ong is less than the number of registered voters& the votes in that precinct could affect the e6isting result because of the possibility that petitioner Jucero might get a ma8ority over Ong in that precinct and that ma8ority might be more than the present lead of Ong. 19 On the basis of the additional votes credited so far to the parties& 20 the follo!ing computation is in order0 to Ong:s #)&#*# votes !ill be added # more from Precinct No. @& to ma4e a total of #)&#*)& !hile to Jucero:s #)&=@- votes !ill be added #= more from Jas Navas and )+ from Precinct No. @& for a total of #)& + . Ong:s earlier lead !ill thus be reduced to )+& !hich is admittedly less than the # + registered voters in Precinct No. +. 21 /he t!o re<uirements then for a special election under Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode have indeed been met. 3n fi6ing the date of the special election& the (O',J,( should see to it that0 ( . it should be not later than thirty days after the cessation of the cause of the postponement or suspension of the election or the failure to elect& and (#. it should be reasonably close to the date of the election not held& suspended& or !hich resulted in failure to elect. /he first involves <uestions of fact. /he second must be determined in the light of the peculiar circumstances of a case. 3n the instant case& the delay !as not attributable to the poor voters of Precinct No. + or to the rest of the electorate of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar. /he delay !as& as stated in the opening paragraph of this ponencia& primarily caused by the legal s4irmishes or maneuvers of the petitioners !hich muddled simple issues. /he (ourt ta4es 8udicial notice of the fact that G. R. No. +$=7 is the third case Ong has brought to this (ourt. 22 (onsidering then that the petitioners themselves must share the blame for the delay& and ta4ing into account the fact that since the term of the office of the contested position is only three years& the holding of a special election in Precinct No. + !ithin the ne6t fe! months may still be considered ;reasonably close to the date of the election not held.; Ong:s postulation should then be re8ected. 3n the course of the deliberations on these cases& the (ourt considered the possible application& by analogy& of Section =& Article G33 of the 7-* (onstitution providing that no special election in the event of a vacancy in the Offices of the President and Gice President ;shall be called if the vacancy occurs !ithin eighteen months before the date of the ne6t presidential election&; and of the second paragraph of Section ) of R. A. No. * @@ !hich provides0

3n case a permanent vacancy shall occur in the Senate or House of Representatives at least one ( . year before the e6piration of the term& the (ommission shall call and hold a special election to fill the vacancy not earlier than si6ty (@=. days nor longer than ninety (7=. days after the occurrence of the vacancy. Ho!ever& in case of such vacancy in the Senate& the special election shall be held simultaneously !ith the ne6t succeeding regular election. A vie! !as e6pressed that !e should not hold the special election because the underlying philosophy for the prohibition to hold the special election if the vacancy occurred !ithin a certain period before the ne6t presidential election or the ne6t regular election& as the case may be& is obviously the avoidance of the e6pense to be incurred in the holding of a special election !hen a regular election is& after all& less than a year a!ay. /he (ourt ultimately resolved that the aforesaid constitutional and statutory proscriptions are inapplicable to special elections !hich may be called under Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode. 9irst& the special election in the former is to fill permanent vacancies in the Office of the President& Gice President& and 'embers of (ongress occurring after the election& !hile the special election under the latter is due to or by reason of a failure of election. Second& a special election under Section @ !ould entail minimal costs because it is limited to only the precincts involved and to the candidates !ho& by the result of the election in a particular constituency& !ould be affected by the failure of election. On the other hand& the special election for the Offices of the President& Gice President& and Senators !ould be nation"!ide& and that of a Representative& district"!ide. /hird& Section @& !hen specifically applied to the instant case& presupposes that no candidate had been proclaimed and therefore the people of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar !ould be unrepresented in the House of Representatives until the special election shall ultimately determine the !inning candidate& such that if none is held& they !ould have no representation until the end of the term. under the aforesaid constitutional and statutory provisions& the elected officials have already served their constituencies for more than one"half of their terms of office. 9ourth& if the la! had found it fit to provide a specific and determinate time"frame for the holding of a special election under Section @& then it could have easily done so in Section ) of R. A. No. * @@. Another serious obstacle to Ong:s proposition is that& considering the (O',J,(:s disposition of Precinct No. * in the challenged Resolution& he !ould then be declared and proclaimed the duly elected Representative of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar despite the fact that as earlier observed& there !as no counting of the votes of Precinct No. *& and the results of the district elections for Representative !ould be affected by the failure of the election in Precinct No. +. /o accept the proposition is to allo! a proclamation based on an incomplete canvass !here the final result !ould have been affected by the uncanvassed result of Precinct No. * and by the failure of the election in Precinct No. + and to impose upon the people of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar a Representative !hose mandate is& at the very least& uncertain& and at the most& ine6istent. 3N G3,1 O9 AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG& 8udgment is hereby rendered0 3. A3S'3SS3NG& for lac4 of merit& the petition in G. R. No. +$=7% and 33. 3n G. R. No. + =*& A3R,(/3NG the respondent (ommission on ,lections to0 ( . Reconvene& in its main office of 'anila& !ithin five ($. days from notice hereof& the Special 5oard of (anvassers of the municipality of Silvino Jobos& Northern Samar& !hich shall then& as a special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors of Precinct No. * of said municipality& !ithin forty"eight ()-. hours from its reconvening& count the ballots of said Precinct No. *& and deliver to the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of the said Province a copy of the election returns% (#. Reconvene& in its main office in 'anila& !ithin the same period as aforestated& the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar !hich shall then& !ithin seventy"t!o (*#. hours from its reconvening0

(a. 3nclude in the 'unicipal (ertificate of (anvass of Silvino Jobos ( . the total number of votes for petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero and for petitioner >ose J. Ong& >r.& respectively& in Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos as recorded in the election returns submitted by the aforementioned special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers& and (#. the forty"three ()+. votes for petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero and the t!o (#. votes for petitioner >ose J. Ong& >r. as reflected in the election returns of Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon. prepared& after a recount of the ballots& by the special 5oard of (anvassers% and after such inclusions to enter the ne! totals of the votes for the petitioners in the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass% (b. Retabulate the total number of votes for 1ilmar P. Jucero for the 'unicipality of Jas Navas& Northern Samar& !hich shall be t!o thousand and five hundred thirty"seven (#&$+*. as reflected in the Statement of Gotes ((.,. 9orm #="A. prepared and submitted by the 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers of Jas Navas& and to enter the same in the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass% (c. After the accomplishment of all the foregoing& to sum up ane! in the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass the canvassed municipal certificates of canvass of all the municipalities of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar and if the same !ould establish that the difference in votes bet!een petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero and petitioner >ose J. Ong& >r. is less than t!o hundred and thirteen (# +.& hence the failure of the election in Precinct No. + !ould unavoidably and inevitably affect then the result of the election& to report to the (ommission on ,lections such fact and to furnish the latter !ith a certified photocopy of the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass% (+. 1ithin three (+. days after receipt of the aforesaid report from the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers& to (AJJ a special election in Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos& !hich shall be held not later than thirty (+=. days from such call% a copy of the election returns of said special election shall forth!ith be transmitted to the Special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar& !hich shall then enter the results thereof in its canvass and ma4e a final summation of the results in the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass& and thereafter& pursuant to the Omnibus ,lection (ode& pertinent election la!s and rules and resolutions of the (ommission& proclaim the !inning candidate for Representative of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar. 3f for any reason !hatsoever it !ould not be possible to immediately reconvene the Special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers of Silvino Jobos and the Special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar& the (O',J,( may create ne! ones. No pronouncements as to costs. SO ORA,R,A. $arvasa, C.J., Cru+, )eliciano, Padilla, /idin, Re%alado, Romero, 'elo, Juiason, Puno, 2itu%, 1apunan and 'endo+a, JJ., concur. /ellosillo, J., is on leave.

Paras vs. COMELEC (G.R. No. 123169. November 4, 1996)

1!APR
DANILO E. PARAS, petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent. PonenteK )R,$CISCO FACTS: Petitioner !as the incumbent Punong 5arangay !ho !on during the last regular barangay election. A petition for his recall as Punong 5arangay !as filed by the registered voters of the barangay. At least #7.+=Q of the registered voters signed the petition& !ell above the #$Q re<uirement provided by la!. Acting on the petition for recall& public respondent (ommission on ,lections ((O',J,(. resolved to approve the petition and set recall election date. /o prevent the holding of recall election& petitioner filed before the Regional /rial (ourt a petition for in8unction !hich !as later dismissed. Petitioner filed petition for certiorari !ith urgent prayer for in8unction& insisting that the recall election is barred by the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK. election under Sec. *)(b. of Jocal Government (ode (JG(. !hich states that Lno recall shall taAe place !ithin one 364 year #rom the date o# the o##icialLs assumption to o##ice or one 364 year immediately precedin% a re%ular local election L. ISSUE: 1hether or not the prohibition on Sec.*)(b. of the JG( may refer to SK elections& !here the recall election is for 5arangay post. HELD: NO. 5ut petition !as dismissed for having become moot and academic. RATIO: Recall election is potentially disruptive of the normal !or4ing of the local government unit necessitating additional e6penses& hence the prohibition against the conduct of recall election one year immediately preceding the regular local election. /he proscription is due to the pro6imity of the ne6t regular election for the office of the local elective official concerned. /he electorate could choose the officialRs replacement in the said election !ho certainly has a longer tenure in office than a successor elected through a recall election. 3t !ould& therefore& be more in 4eeping !ith the intent of the recall provision of the (ode to construe regular local election as one referring to an election !here the office held by the local elective official sought to be recalled !ill be contested and be filled by the electorate. 5y the time of 8udgment& recall !as no longer possible because of the limitation stated under the same Section *)(b. no! referred to as 5arangay ,lections. CONCURRING OPINION: D,2IDEK A re%ular election& !hether national or local& can only refer to an election participated in by those !ho possess the right of suffrage& are not other!ise dis<ualified by la!& and !ho are registered voters. One of

the re<uirements for the e6ercise of suffrage under Section & Article G of the (onstitution is that the person must be at least - years of age& and one re<uisite before he can vote is that he be a registered voter pursuant to the rules on registration prescribed in the Omnibus ,lection (ode (Section +" -.. Inder the la!& the SK includes the youth !ith ages ranging from $ to # (Sec. )#)& Jocal Government (ode of 77 .. Accordingly& they include many !ho are not <ualified to vote in a regular election& vi+.& those from ages $ to less than -. 3n no manner then may SK elections be considered a regular election (!hether national or local..

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT 'anila ,N 5AN( G.R. N . 1231!9 N A/6</# 4, 199! DANILO E. PARAS, petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent. R,SOJI/3ON FRANCISCO, J.: Petitioner Aanilo ,. Paras is the incumbent Punong 5arangay of Pula& (abanatuan (ity !ho !on during the last regular barangay election in 77). A petition for his recall as Punong 5arangay !as filed by the registered voters of the barangay. Acting on the petition for recall& public respondent (ommission on ,lections ((O',J,(. resolved to approve the petition& scheduled the petition signing on October )& 77$& and set the recall election on November +& 77$. 1 At least #7.+=Q of the registered voters signed the petition& !ell above the #$Q re<uirement provided by la!. /he (O',J,(& ho!ever& deferred the recall election in vie! of petitioner:s opposition. On Aecember @& 77$& the (O',J,( set ane! the recall election& this time on Aecember @& 77$. /o prevent the holding of the recall election& petitioner filed before the Regional /rial (ourt of (abanatuan (ity a petition for in8unction& doc4eted as SP (ivil Action No. ##$)"A9& !ith the trial court issuing a temporary restraining order. After conducting a summary hearing& the trial court lifted the restraining order& dismissed the petition and re<uired petitioner and his counsel to e6plain !hy they should not be cited for contempt for misrepresenting that the barangay recall election !as !ithout (O',J,( approval. 2 3n a resolution dated >anuary $& 77@& the (O',J,(& for the third time& re"scheduled the recall election an >anuary +& 77@% hence& the instant petition for certiorari !ith urgent prayer for in8unction. On >anuary #& 77@& the (ourt issued a temporary restraining order and re<uired the Office of the Solicitor General& in behalf of public respondent& to comment on the petition. 3n vie! of the Office of the Solicitor General:s manifestation maintaining an opinion adverse to that of the (O',J,(& the latter through its la! department filed the re<uired comment. Petitioner thereafter filed a reply. 3 Petitioner:s argument is simple and to the point. (iting Section *) (b. of Republic Act No. * @=& other!ise 4no!n as the Jocal Government (ode& !hich states that ;no recall shall taAe place !ithin one 364 year #rom the date o# the o##icialMs assumption to o##ice or one 364 year immediately precedin% a re%ular local election;& petitioner insists that the scheduled >anuary +& 77@ recall election is no! barred as the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK. election !as set by Republic Act No. *-=- on the first 'onday of 'ay 77@& and every three years thereafter. 3n support thereof& petitioner cites ,ssociated .a"or Inion v. .etrondo('onte0o& #+* S(RA @# & !here the (ourt considered the SK election as a regular local election. Petitioner maintains that as the SK election is a regular local election& hence no recall election can be had for barely four months separate the SK election from the recall election. 1e do not agree.

/he sub8ect provision of the Jocal Government (ode provides0 Sec. *). .imitations on Recall. F (a. Any elective local official may be the sub8ect of a recall election only once during his term of office for loss of confidence. (b. No recall shall ta4e place !ithin one ( . year from the date of the official:s assumption to office or one ( . year immediately preceding a re%ular local election. C,mphasis addedD 3t is a rule in statutory construction that every part of the statute must be interpreted !ith reference to the conte6t&i.e.& that every part of the statute must be considered together !ith the other parts& and 4ept subservient to the general intent of the !hole enactment. 4 /he evident intent of Section *) is to sub8ect an elective local official to recall election once during his term of office. Paragraph (b. construed together !ith paragraph (a. merely designates the period !hen such elective local official may be sub8ect of a recall election& that is& during the second year of his term of office. /hus& subscribing to petitioner:s interpretation of the phrase re%ular local election to include the SK election !ill unduly circumscribe the novel provision of the Jocal Government (ode on recall& a mode of removal of public officers by initiation of the people before the end of his term. And if the SK election !hich is set by R.A No. *-=- to be held every three years from 'ay 77@ !ere to be deemed !ithin the purvie! of the phrase ;re%ular local election;& as erroneously insisted by petitioner& then no recall election can be conducted rendering inutile the recall provision of the Jocal Government (ode. 3n the interpretation of a statute& the (ourt should start !ith the assumption that the legislature intended to enact an effective la!& and the legislature is not presumed to have done a vain thing in the enactment of a statute. 5 An interpretation should& if possible& be avoided under !hich a statute or provision being construed is defeated& or as other!ise e6pressed& nullified& destroyed& emasculated& repealed& e6plained a!ay& or rendered insignificant& meaningless& inoperative or nugatory. ! 3t is li4e!ise a basic precept in statutory construction that a statute should be interpreted in harmony !ith the (onstitution. 0 /hus& the interpretation of Section *) of the Jocal Government (ode& specifically paragraph (b. thereof& should not be in conflict !ith the (onstitutional mandate of Section + of Article B of the (onstitution to ;enact a local government code !hich shall provide for a more responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system of decentralization !ith e##ective mechanism o# recall& initiative& and referendum . . . .; 'oreover& petitioner:s too literal interpretation of the la! leads to absurdity !hich !e cannot countenance. /hus& in a case& the (ourt made the follo!ing admonition0 1e admonish against a too"literal reading of the la! as this is apt to constrict rather than fulfill its purpose and defeat the intention of its authors. /hat intention is usually found not in ;the letter that 4illeth but in the spirit that vivifieth;. . . 8 /he spirit& rather than the letter of a la! determines its construction% hence& a statute& as in this case& must be read according to its spirit and intent. 9inally& recall election is potentially disruptive of the normal !or4ing of the local government unit necessitating additional e6penses& hence the prohibition against the conduct of recall election one year immediately preceding the re%ular local election. /he proscription is due to the pro6imity of the ne6t regular election for the office of the local elective official concerned. /he electorate could choose the official:s replacement in the said election !ho certainly has a longer tenure in office than a successor elected through a recall election. 3t !ould& therefore& be more in 4eeping !ith the intent of the recall provision of the (ode to construe re%ular local election as one referring to an election !here the office held by the local elective official sought to be recalled !ill be contested and be filled by the electorate. Nevertheless& recall at this time is no longer possible because of the limitation stated under Section *) (b. of the (ode considering that the ne6t regular election involving the barangay office concerned is barely seven (*. months a!ay& the same having been scheduled on 'ay 77*. 9 A((ORA3NGJO& the petition is hereby dismissed for having become moot and academic. /he temporary restraining order issued by the (ourt on >anuary #& 77@& en8oining the recall election should be as it is hereby made permanent. SO ORA,R,A.

$arvasa, C.J., Padilla, Re%alado, Romero, /ellosillo, 'elo, Puno, 2itu%, 1apunan, 'endo+a, &ermosisima, Jr., Pan%ani"an and Torres, Jr., JJ., concur.

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT 'anila ,N 5AN( G.R. N . 113100 (9%? 20, 1994 @ILMAR P. LUCERO, petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS *+, (OSE L. ONG, (R., respondents. G.R. N . 113509 (9%? 20, 1994 (OSE L. ONG, (R., petitioner& vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS *+, @ILMAR P. LUCERO, respondents. Cesar ,. Sevilla * ,ssociates #or 5ilmar .ucero. $apolean . Rama and Remollo 'elocoton * ,ssociates #or Jose .. On%, Jr. DAVIDE, (R., J.: After the issues had been 8oined in these consolidated cases& the (ourt resolved to give due course to the petitions therein and to decide the cases on the merits. 3t can no longer allo! the parties to delay these cases. /heir legal s4irmishes& !hich have unduly magnified uncomplicated issues& have effectively deprived the people of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar of representation in the House of Representatives for more than t!o years no!. /hese cases are se<uels to G. R. No. =$* *& entitled ;>ose J. Ong& >r. vs. (ommission on ,lections and 1ilmar P. Jucero&; !hich !e finally resolved on ## April 77+. 1 /he petitioners !ere t!o of the five candidates 2 for the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar in the synchronized national and local elections held on 'ay 77#. /he canvass of the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers (P5(. of Northern Samar credited >ose J. Ong& >r. !ith #)&#*# votes and 1ilmar P. Jucero !ith #)&=@- votes& or a lead by Ong of #=) votes. Ho!ever& this tally did not include the results of Precinct No. * of the municipality of Silvino Jobos& !here the submitted election returns had not been canvassed because they !ere illegible% of Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos& !here the ballot bo6es !ere snatched and no election !as held% and of Precinct No. @& also of Silvino Jobos& !here all copies of the election returns !ere missing. On ## 'ay 77#& Jucero as4ed the (ommission on ,lections ((O',J,(.& in SPA No. 7#"#-#& to0 . 9orth!ith order Respondent Provincial 5oard of (anvassers for Northern Samar to suspend the proclamation of Private Respondent >ose J. Ong& >r.% #. Airect Respondent Provincial 5oard of (anvassers for Northern Samar to correct the (ertificate of (anvass ((,9 #=. for Jas Navas and& accordingly& to correct the total votes so far counted by it for Petitioner from #)&=@- to #)&=--& thus reducing the margin it found in favor of Private Respondent >ose J. Ong& >r. from #=) to -) votes only% +. Order a special election in Precinct +& 5arangay Gusaran& Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode%

). Order a recount of the votes for Representative of the Second Aistrict of Northern Samar in Precinct @& 5arangay /ubgon& and Precinct *& 5arangay (amayaan& both of Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+) of the Omnibus ,lection (ode% $. Order a recount of the votes for Representative in the $# precincts herein above enumerated in order to correct ;manifest errors; pursuant to Section $ of Republic Act * @@ and for this purpose order the impounding and safe4eeping of the ballot bo6es of all said precincts in order to preserve the integrity of the ballots and other election paraphernalia contained therein. 3 On # >une 77#& the (O',J,(& acting on Jucero:s urgent manifestation& directed the P5( to desist from reconvening until further orders. On - >une 77#& Ong moved to lift the suspension of the proceedings by the P5(& !hich Jucero opposed on = >une 77# on the ground that the canvass could not be completed even if the P5( !ere to reconvene because no election !as held in Precinct No. + (5arangay Gusaran. of Silvino Jobos and there !as no canvassing of the votes in Precinct No. * (5arangay (amayaan. and Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon. both of Silvino Jobos. On + >une 77+& the (O',J,( en "anc promulgated a resolution& the dispositive portion of !hich reads0 Accordingly& the (ommission hereby orders the Provincial ,lection Supervisor of Northern Samar to bring to the (ommission !ithin three (+. days from receipt hereof the ballot bo6es from Precinct * and @ of Silvino Jobos& to be escorted by representatives from the petitioner and the respondents as !ell as other parties !ho have an interest to protect& and to notify said parties hereof. /he 'unicipal /reasurer of said to!n is directed to turn over custody of said ballot bo6es to the Provincial ,lection Supervisor& and the 4eys thereof shall li4e!ise be turned over by the appropriate officials in custody thereof to the P,S& !ho shall in turn give one 4ey for each ballot bo6 to the duly authorized representatives of the petitioner and the respondent. /he (ommission li4e!ise orders the ,lection Registrar of Silvino Jobos& Northern Samar& and the (hairman and members of the 5oards of ,lection 3nspectors of Precincts * and @ of said municipality to appear before the (ommission !ithin three (+. days from receipt hereof. 5elo! the signatures of the (hairman and the si6 (ommissioners& ho!ever& (hairman (hristian S. 'onsod and (ommissioners Haydee 5. Oorac& Aario (. Rama and Regalado ,. 'aambong directed as follo!s0 1e vote in favor of this resolution e6cept that portion !hich denied the correction of the (ertificate of (anvass for Jas Navas. (orrection of the (ertificate of (anvass for Jas Navas is in order in vie! of the testimony of the election registrar of Jas Navas to the effect that 1ilmar Jucero garnered #&$+* votes for Jas Navas and not #&$ *. Petition for correction !as duly filed by Jucero !ith the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar on 'ay 7& 77#. /he Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar is therefore directed to retabulate the total number of votes for Jas Navas for Jucero and enter the same in the Provincial (ertificate of (anvass. 4 On $ >une 77#& Jucero filed an urgent motion to constitute a Special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors (S5,3. to count the votes of Precincts Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos. 5 On #= >une 77#& Ong& in a special civil action for certiorari filed !ith this (ourt and subse<uently doc4eted as G. R. No. =$* *& <uestioned the order for the recount of ballots in Precincts No. * and @. Aespite the pendency of this petition& the (O',J,( ordered the recount of the ballots in Precinct No. @ by a S5,3 !hich recorded )+ votes for Jucero and # votes for Ong. ! On #$ >une 77#& this (ourt issued in G. R. No. =$* * a temporary restraining order against the implementation by the (O',J,( of its Order of # >une 77# and its Resolution of + >une 77#.

On #+ Aecember 77#& this (ourt promulgated its decision in G. R. No. =$* *& 0 the dispositive portion of !hich reads0 1H,R,9OR,& the petition for certiorari is GRAN/,A and a !rit of preliminary in8unction is hereby 3SSI,A directing the (O',J,( to (,AS, and A,S3S/ from implementing its order of >une #& 77#& and its resolution dated >une +& 77#& and the same are hereby declared NIJJ393,A. (onse<uently& the election returns based on the recounted ballots from Precinct @ are hereby A3S(ARA,A and in lieu thereof& authentic returns from said precinct should instead be made a basis for the canvassing. /he Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar is hereby directed to PRO(,,A 13/H A3SPA/(H in the canvassing of ballots until completed and to PRO(JA3' the duly elected !inner of the congressional seat for the Second Aistrict of Northern Samar. /his decision is immediately e6ecutory. 8 Acting on the motions for reconsideration and clarification respectively filed by the (O',J,( and Jucero& this (ourt& on ## April 77+& modified 9 its aforesaid disposition in G. R. No. =$* * as follo!s% 3N G3,1 O9 AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG& the dispositive portion of the Aecember #+& 77# Aecision is hereby 'OA393,A to read as follo!s% ;1H,R,9OR,& /H, P,/3/3ON 3S GRAN/,A. /H, >IN, #& 77# ORA,R O9 R,SPONA,N/ (O''3SS3ON ON ,J,(/3ONS 3N SPA NO. 7#"#-# 3S H,R,5O ANNIJJ,A ANA S,/ AS3A,. 3/S >IN, +& 77# R,SOJI/3ON /H,R,3N 3S J3K,13S, ANNIJJ,A ANA S,/ AS3A, 3NSO9AR AS 3/ A99,(/S PR,(3N(/ NO. * O9 S3JG3NO JO5OS& /H, R,(OIN/ O9 GO/,S 3N /H, $# O/H,R PR,(3N(/S ANA /H, (ORR,(/3ON O9 /H, (,R/393(A/, O9 (ANGASS O9 JAS NAGAS& 5I/ 3S A993R',A 13/H R,SP,(/ /O /H, 3SSI, O9 HOJA3NG A SP,(3AJ ,J,(/3ON 3N PR,(3N(/ NO. + ANA /H, R,(OIN/ O9 /H, 5AJJO/S 3N PR,(3N(/ NO. @. /H, R,SPONA,N/ (O''3SS3ON ON ,J,(/3ONS 3S H,R,5O A3R,(/,A /O ASS3GN SPA NO. 7#"#-# /O ANO O9 3/S A3G3S3ONS PIRSIAN/ /O 3/S RIJ, ON RA99J, O9 (AS,S 9OR 3/ /O R,SOJG, /H, PR,"PRO(JA'A/3ON 3SSI,S /H,R,3N& /AK3NG 3N/O A((OIN/ /H, A5OG, PRONOIN(,',N/S ANA /H, ,B(,P/3ONS PROG3A,A 9OR 3N S,(/3ON $ O9 R. A. NO. * @@. 1H,N,G,R 1ARRAN/,A 5O /H, (3R(I'S/AN(,S& /H, (O''3SS3ON 'AO (A. (AJJ A SP,(3AJ ,J,(/3ON 3N PR,(3N(/ NO. + O9 S3JG3NO JO5OS& NOR/H,RN SA'AR& ANA (5. R,(ONG,N, /H, SP,(3AJ 'IN3(3PAJ 5OARA O9 (ANGASS,RS ANA /H, SP,(3AJ PROG3N(3AJ 5OARA O9 (ANGASS,RS 3/ HAA ,ARJ3,R (ONS/3/I/,A OR (R,A/, N,1 ON,S. AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG SHOIJA 5, AON, 13/H PIRPOS,9IJ A3SPA/(H /O /H, ,NA /HA/ /H, 13NN3NG (ANA3AA/, 9OR (ONGR,SS'AN R,PR,S,N/3NG /H, S,(ONA (ONGR,SS3ONAJ A3S/R3(/ O9 NOR/H,RN SA'AR 'AO 5, PRO(JA3',A AS SOON AS POSS35J,.; 10 As to the certificate of canvass of the municipality of Jas Navas& this (ourt e6plicitly stated%

/he correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas is li4e!ise in order. ,ven though a pre"proclamation issue is involved& the correction of the manifest error is allo!ed under Section $ of R. A. No. * @@. 11

(onformably !ith the aforesaid modified 8udgment in G. R. No. =$* *& SPA No. 7#"#-# !as raffled to the 9irst Aivision of the (O',J,( !hich conducted hearings thereon and received the arguments and evidence of both parties !ho then submitted their respective memoranda on #$ >une 77). Ho!ever& during the consultations on the case by the 'embers of the 9irst Aivision& the concurrence of at least t!o of them could not be obtained% accordingly& pursuant to the (O',J,( Rules& the case !as elevated for proper disposition to the (O',J,( en "anc to !hich the parties submitted their respective memoranda on 7 November 77+. 12 On * >anuary 77)& the (O',J,( en "anc promulgated a resolution 13 !hose dispositive portion reads as follo!s0 . /o direct the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers for Northern Samar (a. to include in the municipal certificate of canvass of Silvino Jobos the forty"three ()+. votes of petitioner Jucero and the t!o (#. votes of private respondent Ong as reflected in the election returns of Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon. prepared by the special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors constituted by the (ommission to recount the votes (ballots. in said precinct& as canvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers for Silvino Jobos% (b. to include in the municipal certificate of canvass of Silvino Jobos& the si6ty"one (@ . votes of private respondent Ong and #7& +=& or + votes of petitioner Jucero as reflected in the election returns ('5( (opy submitted as ;(omelec (opy;. of Precinct No. * (5arangay (amaya"an.& as canvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers for Silvino Jobos% (c. to retabulate the total number of votes of petitioner Jucero for the 'unicipality of Jas Navas and to enter in the provincial certificate of canvass the correct total !hich is t!o thousand five hundred thirty"seven (#&$+*. as reflected in the Statement of Gotes ((. ,. 9orm #="A. prepared and submitted by the 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers for Jas Navas% and (d. to submit to the (ommission a computation of the votes of the contending parties including therein all the votes of petitioner Jucero (!ith alternative totals. and private respondent Ong& in Precinct Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos and the total votes of petitioner Jucero in the 'unicipality of Jas Navas as corrected. Ho!ever& under no circumstances should the 5oard proclaim any !inning candidate until instructed to do so by the (ommission% #. /o issue an Order calling for a special election in the last remaining Precinct No. + (5arangay Gusaran. of the 'unicipality of Silvino Jobos if 8ustified by the result of the canvass by the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers for Northern Samar& and to notify the parties of the schedule of election activities for that precinct% and +. After including in the tabulation the results of the special election of Precinct No. +& to decide the issue of the recount of the votes (ballots. of Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode& to resolve the discrepancy of the votes of petitioner Jucero in the same return& if such discrepancy of votes of the candidates concerned !ould affect the over"all results of the election after the totality of the votes of the contending parties shall have been determined. 5oth Jucero and Ong have come to this (ourt by !ay of separate special civil actions for certiorari to challenge the Resolution. 3n G. R. No. + =*& Jucero maintains that ( . the count of the ballots in Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos must be unconditional because the election returns therefrom are invalid% and (#. his chances in the special election in Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos !ould be spoiled if the returns for Precinct No. * !ere to be included beforehand in the canvass. 3n G. R. No. +$=7& Ong <uestions ( . the authority of the (O',J,( to order the correction of the alleged manifest error in the 'unicipal (ertificate of (anvass of Jas Navas despite the absence of

any appeal% and (#. the authority of the (O',J,( to call for a special election in Precinct No. + almost t!o years after the regular election. As !e see it& the core issues in these consolidated cases are0 ( . 1hether there should first be a count of the ballots of Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos before determining the necessity of holding a special election in Precinct No. + of Silvino Jobos0 (#. 1hether the (O',J,( acted !ith grave abuse of discretion in ordering the correction of the alleged manifest error in the 'unicipal (ertificate of (anvass of Jas Navas% and (+. 1hether the (O',J,( acted !ith grave abuse of discretion in calling for a special election in Precinct No. + after almost t!o (#. years& or more specifically after one ( . year and ten ( =. months& follo!ing the day of the synchronized elections. 1e shall ta4e up these issues seriatim. 3. /he ans!er to the first issue is in the affirmative. 1e find the (O',J,(:s disposition regarding Precinct No. * to be unclear. 3n the first paragraph of the dispositive portion of the challenged resolution& it directs the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers ;to include in the municipal certificate of canvas of Silvino Jobos the si6ty"one (@ . votes of private respondent Ong and #7& +=& or + votes of petitioner Jucero as reflected in the election returns ('5( copy submitted as ;(O',J,( (opy;. of Precinct No. * (5arangay (amaya"an.& as canvassed by the special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers for Silvino Jobos&; and ;to submit to the (ommission a computation of the votes of the contending parties including therein all the votes of petitioner Jucero (!ith alternative totals. and private respondent Ong& in Precinct Nos. * and @ of Silvino Jobos. . . .; On the other hand& in the fourth paragraph of the said dispositive portion& it orders the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers& after ;including in the tabulation the results of the special election of Precinct No. +&; to ;decide the issue of the recount of the votes (ballots. of Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos& pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode CandD to resolve the discrepancy of the votes of petitioner Jucero in the same return& if such discrepancy of votes of the candidate concerned !ould affect the over"all results of the election after the totality of the votes of the contending parties shall have been determined.; Obviously& instead of ordering an outright recount of the ballots of Precinct No. *& the (O',J,( !ould first give full faith and credit to the <uestioned election returns thereof& !hich it describes as the ;(omelec (opy&; and& accordingly& direct the P5( to include in the municipal certificate of canvass of Silvino Jobos the @ votes for Ong and the uncertain votes for Jucero F #7& +=& or + . /he recount !ould only be made if after a special election in Precinct No. + shall have been held& it shall be determined that such a recount !ould be necessary. 1e fail to grasp the logic of the proposition. 9irst& it is clear to us that the (O',J,(& !hich has in its possession the so"called ;(omelec (opy; of the <uestioned election returns of Precinct No. * and heard the !itnesses !ho testified thereon& doubts the authenticity of the so"called ;(omelec (opy; of the election returns of Precinct No. *%14 hence& it authorizes the P5( to decide the issue of a recount ;pursuant to Section #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode.; Since it doubts such authenticity& it could not& !ithout arbitrariness and abuse of discretion& order the inclusion of the ;votes; of Ong and Jucero found in the doubtful ;(omelec (opy; of the election returns in the municipal certificate of canvass. Second& it is an uncontroverted fact that an election !as held in Precinct No. *. None !as held in Precinct No. + for reasons the parties fully 4ne!. Pursuant to Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode (5.P. 5lg. -- .& a special election may be held in Precinct No. + only if the failure of the election therein ;!ould affect the result of the election.; /his ;result of the election; means the net result of the election in the rest of the precincts in a given constituency& such that if the margin of

a leading candidate over that of his closest rival in the latter precincts is less than the total number of votes in the precinct !here there !as failure of election& then such failure !ould certainly affect ;the result of the election;% hence& a special election must be held. (onse<uently& the holding of a special election in Precinct No. + can only be determined after the votes in Precinct No. * shall have been included in the canvass by the Provincial 5oard of (anvassers. 1e may further state that the so"called ;(omelec (opy; of the election returns of Precinct No. * can by no means be validly included in the municipal canvass. /he summary of the evidence in the ;preparation; of the election returns of Precinct No. *& both in the challenged Resolution and in the separate (oncurring and Aissenting Opinion of (ommissioners Gorospe and (laravall& leaves no room for doubt that there !as actually no countin% of the votes in Precinct No. *. Puoted in the challenged Resolution is a portion of the testimony of Sabina /. >arito& Precinct (hairman of Precinct No. *& !hich clearly sho!s that on <uestions by (O',J,( (hairman (hristian S. 'onsod and (ommissioner Gicente 5. de Jima& the !itness candidly admitted that the election returns !ere prepared at the BmunisipyoB or municipal building and not at the polling place of Precinct No. * in barangay (amaya"an. 15 /his BmunisipyoB is located at the po"lacion of Silvino Jobos. Inder the la!& the board of election inspectors shall prepare the election returns simultaneously !ith the counting of votes in the polling place. 1!/here is no evidence !hatsoever that the (O',J,( had& for valid reasons& authorized the transfer of venue of the counting of the votes of Precinct No. * from the polling place in barangay (amaya"an to the municipal building and that the counting did in fact ta4e place at the latter. Although in the (oncurring and Aissenting Opinion of (ommissioners Gorospe and (laravall there is a reference to ,6hibit ;,&; the >oint Affidavit of Sabina >arito and 'evilyn Surio !herein they declare that after the voting the 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors unanimously approved to transfer the counting of votes to the 'unicipal 5uilding in the Poblacion of Silvino Jobos& !hich !as allegedly concurred in by all the !atchers of political parties and the candidates present& the alleged ;counting; at the municipal building !as denied by no less than the 'unicipal ,lection Officer of Silvino Jobos& Antonio /epace& and the 'unicipal /reasurer thereof& 'r. Gabriel 5asarte& in their affidavits mar4ed as ,6hibit ;9; and ,6hibit ;G&; respectively. 10 Since there !as no counting of the votes of Precinct No. *& no valid election returns could be made and any copy of election returns purporting to come therefrom is a fabrication. A recount thereof& !hich presupposes a prior count& !ould obviously be un!arranted. Only a count then of the votes of Precinct No. + !ould heretofore be in order. Sections #+)& #+$& and #+@ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode are thus still inapplicable. And& in the light of !hat !e stated before in relation to the holding of a special election& such a count of the votes of Precinct No. * must& perforce& precede the special election in Precinct No. +. 33. Ong:s first grievance in G. R. No. +$=7 is !ithout merit. /he order of the (O',J,( for the correction of the manifest error in the municipal certificate of canvass of Jas Navas !as made pursuant to the declaration made by this (ourt in G. R. No. =$* * (On% vs. CO'E.EC. 18 that0 /he correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas is li4e!ise in order. ,ven though a pre"proclamation issue is involved& the correction of the manifest error is allo!ed under Sec. $ of R. A. No. * @@. Since no motion for reconsideration !as filed in that case& the decision therein became final and entry of 8udgment !as made on ) August 77+. (onse<uently& Ong cannot no! re"litigate the issue of the correction of the certificate of canvass of Jas Navas. 333 On the authority of the (O',J,( to order the holding of a special election& Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode provides0 Sec. @. )ailure o# election. F 3f& on account of #orce ma0eure, violence& terrorism& fraud& or other analogous causes the election in any polling place has not been held

on the date fi6ed& or had been suspended before the hour fi6ed by la! for the closing of the voting& or after the voting and during the preparation and the transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof& such election results in a failure to elect& and if in any of such cases the failure or suspension of election !ould affect the result of the election& the (ommission shall& on the basis of a verified petition by any interested party and after due notice and hearing& call for the holding or continuation of the election not held& suspended or !hich resulted in a failure to elect on a date reasonably close to the date of the election not held& suspended or !hich resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty days after the cessation of the cause of such postponement or suspension of the election or failure to elect. /he first paragraph of Section ) of R. A. No. * @@ li4e!ise provides0 Sec. ). Postponement, )ailure o# Election and Special Elections. F /he postponement& declaration of failure of election and the calling of special elections as provided in Sections $& @ and * of the Omnibus ,lection (ode shall be decided by the (ommission sitting en "anc by a ma8ority votes of its members. /he causes for the declaration of a failure of election may occur before or after the casting of votes or on the day of the election. /here are& therefore& t!o re<uisites for the holding of special elections under Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode& vi+., ( . that there is a failure of election& and (#. that such failure !ould affect the results of the election. /he parties admit that the failure of the election in Precinct No. + !as due to ballot"bo6 snatching and do not dispute the finding of the (O',J,( as to the necessity and inevitability of the holding of a special election in said precinct& even if the result of Precinct No. * should be based on the <uestionable ;(omelec (opy; of its election returns. /he (O',J,( held0 5ased on the ad8udged correction of the votes in favor of petitioner Jucero in the 'unicipality of Jas Navas& the results of the recount of votes (ballots. of Precinct No. @ (Silvino .o"os.& and the votes reflected in the available copy of the election returns for Precinct No. * (Silvino .o"os.& it is safe to predict that !hen the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers !ill reconvene to sum up the votes of the contending parties& the original lead of private respondent Ong of t!o hundred four (#=). votes against petitioner Jucero F :7,:>: as a%ainst :7,8;< F !ill be reduced to either *$ or *+ depending on !hether Jucero !ill be credited a lo! of #7 or a high of + votes as reflected in the election returns of Precinct No. *. 1ithout preempting the e6act figures !hich only the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers can correctly determine& undoubtedly it is inevitable that a special election !ill have to be held in Precinct No. + (5arangay Gusaran. of the 'unicipality of Silvino Jobos. ... Given the established lead of private respondent Ong over petitioner Jucero& 1e ans!er in the affirmative. According to (omelec records& the number of registered voters in Precinct No. + ist!o hundred thirteen 3:6H4. Since the lead of respondent Ong is less than the number of registered voters& the votes in that precinct could affect the e6isting result because of the possibility that petitioner Jucero might get a ma8ority over Ong in that precinct and that ma8ority might be more than the present lead of Ong. 19 On the basis of the additional votes credited so far to the parties& 20 the follo!ing computation is in order0 to Ong:s #)&#*# votes !ill be added # more from Precinct No. @& to ma4e a total of #)&#*)& !hile to Jucero:s #)&=@- votes !ill be added #= more from Jas Navas and )+ from Precinct No. @& for a total of #)& + . Ong:s earlier lead !ill thus be reduced to )+& !hich is admittedly less than the # + registered voters in Precinct No. +. 21

/he t!o re<uirements then for a special election under Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode have indeed been met. 3n fi6ing the date of the special election& the (O',J,( should see to it that0 ( . it should be not later than thirty days after the cessation of the cause of the postponement or suspension of the election or the failure to elect& and (#. it should be reasonably close to the date of the election not held& suspended& or !hich resulted in failure to elect. /he first involves <uestions of fact. /he second must be determined in the light of the peculiar circumstances of a case. 3n the instant case& the delay !as not attributable to the poor voters of Precinct No. + or to the rest of the electorate of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar. /he delay !as& as stated in the opening paragraph of this ponencia& primarily caused by the legal s4irmishes or maneuvers of the petitioners !hich muddled simple issues. /he (ourt ta4es 8udicial notice of the fact that G. R. No. +$=7 is the third case Ong has brought to this (ourt. 22 (onsidering then that the petitioners themselves must share the blame for the delay& and ta4ing into account the fact that since the term of the office of the contested position is only three years& the holding of a special election in Precinct No. + !ithin the ne6t fe! months may still be considered ;reasonably close to the date of the election not held.; Ong:s postulation should then be re8ected. 3n the course of the deliberations on these cases& the (ourt considered the possible application& by analogy& of Section =& Article G33 of the 7-* (onstitution providing that no special election in the event of a vacancy in the Offices of the President and Gice President ;shall be called if the vacancy occurs !ithin eighteen months before the date of the ne6t presidential election&; and of the second paragraph of Section ) of R. A. No. * @@ !hich provides0 3n case a permanent vacancy shall occur in the Senate or House of Representatives at least one ( . year before the e6piration of the term& the (ommission shall call and hold a special election to fill the vacancy not earlier than si6ty (@=. days nor longer than ninety (7=. days after the occurrence of the vacancy. Ho!ever& in case of such vacancy in the Senate& the special election shall be held simultaneously !ith the ne6t succeeding regular election. A vie! !as e6pressed that !e should not hold the special election because the underlying philosophy for the prohibition to hold the special election if the vacancy occurred !ithin a certain period before the ne6t presidential election or the ne6t regular election& as the case may be& is obviously the avoidance of the e6pense to be incurred in the holding of a special election !hen a regular election is& after all& less than a year a!ay. /he (ourt ultimately resolved that the aforesaid constitutional and statutory proscriptions are inapplicable to special elections !hich may be called under Section @ of the Omnibus ,lection (ode. 9irst& the special election in the former is to fill permanent vacancies in the Office of the President& Gice President& and 'embers of (ongress occurring after the election& !hile the special election under the latter is due to or by reason of a failure of election. Second& a special election under Section @ !ould entail minimal costs because it is limited to only the precincts involved and to the candidates !ho& by the result of the election in a particular constituency& !ould be affected by the failure of election. On the other hand& the special election for the Offices of the President& Gice President& and Senators !ould be nation"!ide& and that of a Representative& district"!ide. /hird& Section @& !hen specifically applied to the instant case& presupposes that no candidate had been proclaimed and therefore the people of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar !ould be unrepresented in the House of Representatives until the special election shall ultimately determine the !inning candidate& such that if none is held& they !ould have no representation until the end of the term. under the aforesaid constitutional and statutory provisions& the elected officials have already served their constituencies for more than one"half of their terms of office. 9ourth& if the la! had found it fit to provide a specific and determinate time"frame for the holding of a special election under Section @& then it could have easily done so in Section ) of R. A. No. * @@.

Another serious obstacle to Ong:s proposition is that& considering the (O',J,(:s disposition of Precinct No. * in the challenged Resolution& he !ould then be declared and proclaimed the duly elected Representative of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar despite the fact that as earlier observed& there !as no counting of the votes of Precinct No. *& and the results of the district elections for Representative !ould be affected by the failure of the election in Precinct No. +. /o accept the proposition is to allo! a proclamation based on an incomplete canvass !here the final result !ould have been affected by the uncanvassed result of Precinct No. * and by the failure of the election in Precinct No. + and to impose upon the people of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar a Representative !hose mandate is& at the very least& uncertain& and at the most& ine6istent. 3N G3,1 O9 AJJ /H, 9OR,GO3NG& 8udgment is hereby rendered0 3. A3S'3SS3NG& for lac4 of merit& the petition in G. R. No. +$=7% and 33. 3n G. R. No. + =*& A3R,(/3NG the respondent (ommission on ,lections to0 ( . Reconvene& in its main office of 'anila& !ithin five ($. days from notice hereof& the Special 5oard of (anvassers of the municipality of Silvino Jobos& Northern Samar& !hich shall then& as a special 5oard of ,lection 3nspectors of Precinct No. * of said municipality& !ithin forty"eight ()-. hours from its reconvening& count the ballots of said Precinct No. *& and deliver to the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of the said Province a copy of the election returns% (#. Reconvene& in its main office in 'anila& !ithin the same period as aforestated& the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar !hich shall then& !ithin seventy"t!o (*#. hours from its reconvening0 (a. 3nclude in the 'unicipal (ertificate of (anvass of Silvino Jobos ( . the total number of votes for petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero and for petitioner >ose J. Ong& >r.& respectively& in Precinct No. * of Silvino Jobos as recorded in the election returns submitted by the aforementioned special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers& and (#. the forty"three ()+. votes for petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero and the t!o (#. votes for petitioner >ose J. Ong& >r. as reflected in the election returns of Precinct No. @ (5arangay /ubgon. prepared& after a recount of the ballots& by the special 5oard of (anvassers% and after such inclusions to enter the ne! totals of the votes for the petitioners in the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass% (b. Retabulate the total number of votes for 1ilmar P. Jucero for the 'unicipality of Jas Navas& Northern Samar& !hich shall be t!o thousand and five hundred thirty"seven (#&$+*. as reflected in the Statement of Gotes ((.,. 9orm #="A. prepared and submitted by the 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers of Jas Navas& and to enter the same in the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass% (c. After the accomplishment of all the foregoing& to sum up ane! in the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass the canvassed municipal certificates of canvass of all the municipalities of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar and if the same !ould establish that the difference in votes bet!een petitioner 1ilmar P. Jucero and petitioner >ose J. Ong& >r. is less than t!o hundred and thirteen (# +.& hence the failure of the election in Precinct No. + !ould unavoidably and inevitably affect then the result of the election& to report to the (ommission on ,lections such fact and to furnish the latter !ith a certified photocopy of the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass% (+. 1ithin three (+. days after receipt of the aforesaid report from the special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers& to (AJJ a special election in Precinct No. + of

Silvino Jobos& !hich shall be held not later than thirty (+=. days from such call% a copy of the election returns of said special election shall forth!ith be transmitted to the Special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar& !hich shall then enter the results thereof in its canvass and ma4e a final summation of the results in the (ertificate of Provincial (anvass& and thereafter& pursuant to the Omnibus ,lection (ode& pertinent election la!s and rules and resolutions of the (ommission& proclaim the !inning candidate for Representative of the Second Jegislative Aistrict of Northern Samar. 3f for any reason !hatsoever it !ould not be possible to immediately reconvene the Special 'unicipal 5oard of (anvassers of Silvino Jobos and the Special Provincial 5oard of (anvassers of Northern Samar& the (O',J,( may create ne! ones. No pronouncements as to costs. SO ORA,R,A.

,N 5AN(
;G.R. N . 1!12!5. F/<#9*#? 24, 2004=

LA'AN NG DEMO2RATI2ONG PILIPINO, #/"#/8/+-/, <? $-8 C.*$#6*+ EDGARDO (. ANGARA )S. THE COMMISION ON ELECTIONS *+, AGAPITO A. A7UINO DECISION
TINGA, J.:

/he 5ible tells the story of ho! t!o !omen came to King Solomon to decide !ho among them is the babyRs true mother. King Solomon& in his legendary !isdom& a!arded the baby to the !oman !ho gave up her claim after he threatened to split the baby into t!o. 3t is fortunate that the t!o !omen did not as4 the (ommission on ,lections ((O',J,(. to decide the babyRs fate% other!ise& it !ould have cut the baby in half. 9or that is !hat the (O',J,( e6actly did in this case. On Aecember -& #==+& the General (ounsel of the Jaban ng Aemo4rati4ong Pilipino (JAP.& a registered political party& informed the (O',J,( by !ay of 'ani#estation that only the Party (hairman& Senator ,dgardo >. Angara& or his authorized representative may endorse the certificate of candidacy of the partyRs official candidates. /he same 'ani#estation stated that Sen. Angara had placed the JAP Secretary General& Representative Agapito A. A<uino& on Lindefinite forced leave.M 3n the meantime& Ambassador ,nri<ue A. Naldivar !as designated Acting Secretary General. /he 'ani#estation concluded !ith this prayer0

..

".

5he %onorable ommission recogni6es HsicI only those ertificates of andidacy to /hich are attached ertificates of )omination e*ecuted by ?@P Party hairman Edgardo A. .ngara or by such other officers of the ?@P /hom he may authori6e in /riting$ and /hose /ritten authori6ations shall be deposited /ith the %onorable ommission by the ?@P =eneral ounsel. 5he %onorable ommission declares HsicI as a nullity$ denies HsicI due course or cancels HsicI all ertificates of andidacy not endorsed by ?@P Party hairman .ngara or by such other ?@P officials as may be authori6ed by him.

5he %onorable ommission ta8es HsicI note of the designation of .mbassador EnriCue J78eK .. Zaldi(ar as .cting Secretary =eneral of the ?@P$ and for the %onorable ommission to honor and recogni6e the official acts$ to the e*clusion of e(eryone$ of .mbassador Zaldi(ar for and in behalf of the ?@P as Secretary =eneral.
H1I

On Aecember @& #==+& Rep. A<uino filed his Comment& contending that the Party (hairman does not have the authority to impose disciplinary sanctions on the Secretary General. As the'ani#estation filed by the JAP General (ounsel has no basis& Rep. A<uino as4ed the (O',J,( to disregard the same. On Aecember *& #==+& the parties agreed to file a 8oint manifestation pending !hich the proceedings !ere deemed suspended. On Aecember ##& #==+& ho!ever& only the JAP General (ounsel filed an Ir%ent 'ani#estation reiterating the contents of the Aecember -& #==+ 'ani#estation. /he (O',J,( also received a .etter from Rep. A<uino stating that the parties !ere unable to arrive at a 8oint manifestation. /he ne6t day& the JAP General (ounsel filed a Second Ir%ent 'ani#estation disputing ne!spaper accounts that Rep. A<uino had suspended Sen. Angara as Party (hairman. On Aecember #@& #==+& the (O',J,( issued an Order re<uiring the parties to file a verified petition. 3t turned out that& t!o days before& Sen. Angara had submitted a verified Petition& in essence& reiterating the contents of its previous 'ani#estations. Attached to the Petition !as a Resolution adopted by the JAP National ,6ecutive (ouncil& stating0
C#D

1%E>E.S$ on September 25$ 2003$ the )ational E*ecuti(e ouncil of the ?aban ng @emo8rati8ong Pilipino 2?@P4 con(ened and unanimously passed a resolution granting full authority to Party hairman Edgardo A. .ngara to enter$ negotiate and conclude a coalition agreement /ith other li8e'minded opposition parties$ aggrupations and interest groups /ith the sole purpose of uniting the political opposition and fielding a unity tic8et for the #ay 10$ 200, electionsE 1%E>E.S$ on @ecember 3$ 2003$ the ?@P$ together /ith the Pu/ersa ng #asang Pilipino 2P#P4 and the Partido @emo8rati8o ng Pilipinas ' ?.".) 2P@P'?.".)4 forged a coalition to form the Koalisyon ng Nag a aisang Pilipino 29)P4E 1%E>E.S$ the E*ecuti(e ommittee of the 9)P subseCuently adopted its resolution entitled: J>esolution hoosing #r. &ernando Poe$ Ar. as the Standard "earer of the 9oalisyon ng )ag8a8aisang Pilipino 29)P4 for President of the >epublic of the Philippines in the #ay 10$ 200, )ational ElectionsKE .... 1%E>E.S$ the process of unification of the political opposition and the actions ta8en in connection there/ith by hairman .ngara and by other go(erning bodies of the ?@P reCuired the ta8ing of immediate and forceful action by them to preser(e and protect the integrity$ credibility$ unity and solidarity of the ?@P$ and ensure the attainment of unification of the political oppositionE

1%E>E.S$ such immediate and forceful action include those that ha(e to do /ith pre'empti(e efforts to diffuse the chaos$ confusion and disunity projected by the pronouncements and acts of some officers and members to the general membership of the ?@P and the electorate$ such as the one ta8en by the >egional ommittee for >egion <7 21estern <isayas4 on @ecember D$ 2003E the enforcement of order in the ?@P through the (oice of a central leadership in command in an other/ise e*traordinary and emergency situation$ such as the one ta8en by Party hairman .ngara on @ecember D$ 2003E the filing of the #anifestation /ith the !#E?E on the matter of the authori6ed signatories for the nominations and$ the adoption of resolutions by the regional committees affirming their trust and confidence in hairman .ngara$ and authori6ing him to choose the presidential standard bearer for the #ay 10$ 200, electionsE )!1 5%E>E&!>E$ "E 75 >ES!?<E@$ .S 75 7S %E>E"L >ES!?<E@$ "y the )ational E*ecuti(e ouncil$ to ratify and confirm the o(enant of )ational 0nity$ the @eclaration of 0nity entered into by Party hairman Edgardo A. .ngara$ and all acts and decisions ta8en by him to enforce and implement the sameE >ES!?<E@$ &0>5%E>$ 5o ratify and confirm all other acts and decisions of hairman .ngara and other go(erning bodies to preser(e the integrity$ credibility$ unity and solidarity of the ?@PE and$ >ES!?<E@$ &7).??L$ 5o reiterate the (ote of confidence of the )ational E*ecuti(e ouncil in$ and support to$ the continued efforts of hairman .ngara to unite the political opposition.
H3I

Rep. A<uino filed his ,ns!er to the Petition on Aecember +=& #==+. /he (O',J,( heard the parties on oral arguments on the same day& after !hich the case !as submitted for resolution. Pending resolution& a Certi#icate o# $omination of Sen. Panfilo Jacson as JAP candidate for President !as filed !ith the (O',J,(. /he Certi#icate o# $omination !as signed by Rep. A<uino as JAP Secretary General. On >anuary @& #==)& the (O',J,( came to a decision. /he (ommission identified the sole issue as L!ho among the CJAPD officers CareD authorized to authenticate before the (ommission that the person filing the certificate of candidacy as party nominee for a certain position is the official candidate of the party chosen in accordance !ith its (onstitution.M /he (O',J,( recognized that it Lhas the authority to act on matters pertaining to Sthe ascertainment of the identity of CaD political party and its legitimate officersT.RM 3n the same breath& ho!ever& it held that Linternal party matters and !ranglings CsicD are purely for the party members to settle among themselves and any unsettled controversy should be brought to the proper forum !ith 8urisdiction.M /he L<uestion of !ho !as suspended by !homM !as thus left for such proper forum to resolve. Noting that Lthe intramurals in the JAP as an internal party matter seems to be irreconcilable for the present !hen the filing of (ertificate of (andidacy and (ertificate of Nomination are about to reach the deadline&M the (O',J,( disposed of the Petition in the follo!ing fashion0
C)D C$D C@D

WHEREFORE, premises considered$ the petition is GRANTED /ith LEGAL EQU T! for both Petitioner and !ppositor. 5he candidates for President do/n to the last Sangguniang "ayan 9aga/ad nominated and endorsed by ?@P hairman Edgardo A. .ngara are recogni6ed by the ommission as official candidates of ?@P JAn"ara Win"K. 5he candidates from President do/n to the last Sangguniang "ayan 9aga/ad as nominated and endorsed by ?@P Secretary =eneral .gapito J"ut6K .Cuino are recogni6ed as official candidates of ?@P J A#$ino Win"K. onseCuently$ each faction or J1ingK is entitled to a representati(e to any election committee to /hich it may be entitled as created by the ommission for the #ay 10$ 200, elections. &or the copies of the election returns$ the J An"ara Win"K /ill be entitled to the copies corresponding to o%% n$m&er of precincts$ that is$ Precinct )os. 1$ 3$ 5$ etc.$ and for the JA#$ino Win"K to the even n$m&er of precincts$ that is Precinct )os. 2$ ,$ D$ etc. 5his is on the assumption that the ?@P or as a party /ithin a registered Political oalition becomes a recogni6ed and denominated as a @ormant HsicI #inority Party under the Election ?a/s. 5he t/o ?@P J1ingsK are further entitled to and be accorded the rights and pri(ileges /ith corresponding legal obligations under Election ?a/s.
H-I

(ommissioners Juzviminda G. /ancangco& Ralph (. Jantion& Resurreccion N. 5orra and 9lorentino A. /uason& >r. concurred in the Resolution authored by (ommissioner Rufino S.5. >avier. (hair 5en8amin S. Abalos& Sr.& 8oined by (ommissioner 'ehol K. Sadain& submitted dissenting opinions. Sen. Angara thus filed the present petition for Certiorari assailing the (O',J,( Resolution for having been issued !ith grave abuse of discretion. /hereafter& Rep. A<uino filed his Comment. /he Office of the Solicitor General submitted a 'ani#estation and 'otion praying for the granting of the Petition. /he (O',J,( thus filed a separate Comment to the Petition. /he (O',J,( correctly stated that Lthe ascertainment of the identity of CaD political party and its legitimate officersM is a matter that is !ell !ithin its authority. /he source of this authority is no other than the fundamental la! itself& !hich vests upon the (O',J,( the po!er and function to enforce and administer all la!s and regulations relative to the conduct of an election. 3n the e6ercise of such po!er and in the discharge of such function& the (ommission is endo!ed !ith ample L!here!ithalM and Lconsiderable latitude in adopting means and methods that !ill ensure the accomplishment of the great ob8ectives for !hich it !as created to promote free& orderly and honest elections.M /hus& in 1ala! v. Commission on Elections !hich involved the leadership fight in the Jiberal Party& this (ourt held0
C-D C7D C =D C D

M that the respondent H !#E?E I has jurisdiction to hear and decide SP ase )o. F5'021 Hin(ol(ing a petition to prohibit E(a Estrada 9ala/ Jfrom usurping or using the title or position of President of the ?iberal PartyKI in (ie/ of its po/ers under .rticle 7G' $ Section 2$ of the onstitution to$ among others$ enforce and administer all la/s relati(e to the conduct of elections$ decide all Cuestions affecting elections$

register and regulate political parties$ and insure orderly elections. 5hese po/ers include the determination of the conflicting claims made in SP ase )o. F5'021$ /hich are li8ely to cause confusion among the electorate if not resol(ed. .dditionally$ the !#E?E is mandated by the Election ode to inter alia reCuire candidates to specify their political party affiliation in their certificates of candidacy$ allo/ political parties to appoint /atchers$ limit the e*penditures of each political party$ determine /hether or not a political party shall retain its registration on the basis of its sho/ing in the preceding elections$ etc. T'ese matters incl$%e t'e ascertainment o( t'e i%entit) o( t'e *olitical *art) an% its le"itimate o((icers res*onsi&le (or its acts an% t'e resol$tion o( s$c' controversies as t'e one no+ &e(ore it +'ere one *art) a**ears to &e %ivi%e% into t+o +in"s $n%er se*arate lea%ers eac' claimin" to &e t'e *resi%ent o( t'e entire *art),- HEmphasis supplied.I
Ji4e!ise in Palmares v. Commission on Elections& to !hich the assailed Resolution made reference and !hich involved the Nacionalista Party& this (ourt ruled
C #D C +D

M that the !#E?E has jurisdiction o(er the issue of leadership in a political party. 0nder the onstitution$ the !#E?E is empo/ered to register political parties HSec. 2254$ .rticle 7G' .I )ecessarily$ the po/er to act on behalf of a party and the responsibility for the acts of such political party must be fi*ed in certain persons acting as its officers. 7n the e*ercise of the po/er to register political parties$ the !#E?E must determine /ho these officers are. onseCuently$ if there is any contro(ersy as to leadership$ the !#E?E may$ in a proper case brought before it$ resol(e the issue incidental to its po/er to register political parties.
/his (ourt then proceeded to <uote from 1ala!& supra. /he t!o cited decisions find support in Sumulon% v. Commission on Elections and Sotto v. Commission on Elections & !here this (ourt& in resolving the issue as to !ho bet!een the factions of a political party !as entitled to nominate election inspectors& necessarily settled claims to the partyRs leadership. 5oth cases !ere decided !ithout <uestion on the (O',J,(Rs po!er to determine such claims. 3n conformity !ith 8urisprudence& this (ourt did not identify the (O',J,(Rs 8urisdiction as an issue !hen this case !as heard on oral argument. /here is no inconsistency bet!een the above cases on the one hand and this (ourtRs more recent ruling in Sinaca v. 'ula on the other. 3n the latter case& this (ourt held0
C )D C $D C @D

. political party has the right to identify the people /ho constitute the association and to select a standard bearer /ho best represents the partyNs ideologies and preference. Political parties are generally free to conduct their internal affairs free from judicial super(isionE this common'la/ principle of judicial restraint$ rooted in the constitutionally protected right of free association$ ser(es the public interest by allo/ing the political processes to operate /ithout undue interference. 5hus$ the rule

is that the determination of disputes as to party nominations rests /ith the party$ in the absence of statutes gi(ing the courtNs HsicI jurisdiction. Ouintessentially$ +'ere t'ere is no controllin" stat$te or clear le"al ri"'t involve% $ the court /ill not assume jurisdiction to determine factional contro(ersies /ithin a political party$ but /ill lea(e the matter for determination by the proper tribunals of the party itself or by the electors at the polls. Similarly$ in the absence of specific constitutional or legislati(e regulations defining ho/ nominations are to be made$ or prohibiting nominations from being made in certain /ays$ political parties may handle such affairs$ including nominations$ in such manner as party rules may establish. HEmphasis supplied.I
Sinaca& unli4e previous cases& did not involve the <uestion of party identity or leadership% hence& it !as not necessary for the (O',J,( to delve therein. None of the candidates involved in that case !ere claiming to be the political partyRs sole candidate. 3n the case at bar& the Party (hairman& purporting to represent the JAP& contends that under the Party (onstitution only he or his representative& to the e6clusion of the Secretary General& has the authority to endorse and sign party nominations. /he Secretary General vigorously disputes this claim and maintains his o!n authority. (learly& the <uestion of party identity or leadership has to be resolved if the (O',J,( is to ascertain !hether the candidates are legitimate party standard bearers or not. /he repercussions of the <uestion of party identity and leadership do not end at the validity of the endorsement of the certificates of candidacy of persons claiming to be the partyRs standard bearer. /he la! grants a registered political party certain rights and privileges& !hich& naturally& redound to the benefit of its candidates. 3t is also for this significant dimension that Sinaca is not applicable in this case. As conceded in Sinaca itself& the (ourt !ill have to assume 8urisdiction to determine factional controversies !ithin a political party !here a controlling statute or clear legal right is involved. Gerily& there is more than one la!& as !ell as a number of clear legal rights& that are at sta4e in the case at bar. /he la! accords special treatment to political parties. /he dominant ma8ority party& the dominant minority party as determined by the (O',J,(& for instance& is entitled to a copy of the election returns. /he si6 (@. accredited ma8or political parties may nominate the principal !atchers to be designated by the (ommission. /he t!o principal !atchers representing the ruling coalition and the dominant opposition coalition in a precinct shall& if available& affi6 their signatures and thumbmar4s on the election returns for that precinct. /hree (+. of the si6 accredited ma8or political parties are entitled to receive copies of the certificate of canvass. Registered political parties !hose candidates obtained at least ten percent ( =Q. of the total votes cast in the ne6t preceding senatorial election shall each have a !atcher andEor representative in the procurement and !atermar4ing of papers to be used in the printing of election returns and official ballots and in the printing& numbering& storage& and distribution thereof. 9inally& a candidate and his political party are authorized to spend more per voter than a candidate !ithout a political party. 3t is& therefore& in the interest of every political party not to allo! persons it had not chosen to hold themselves out as representatives of the party. (orollary to the right of a
C *D C -D C 7D C#=D C# D C##D C#+D C#)D

political party Lto identify the people !ho constitute the association and to select a standard bearer !ho best represents the partyRs ideologies and preferenceM is the right to e6clude persons in its association and to not lend its name and prestige to those !hich it deems undeserving to represent its ideals. A certificate of candidacy ma4es 4no!n to the (O',J,( that the person therein mentioned has been nominated by a duly authorized political group empo!ered to act and that it reflects accurately the sentiment of the nominating body. A candidateRs political party affiliation is also printed follo!ed by his or her name in the certified list of candidates. A candidate misrepresenting himself or herself to be a partyRs candidate& therefore& not only misappropriates the partyRs name and prestige but foists a deception upon the electorate& !ho may un!ittingly cast its ballot for him or her on the mista4en belief that he or she stands for the partyRs principles. /o prevent this occurrence& the (O',J,( has the po!er and the duty to step in and enforce the la! not only to protect the party but& more importantly& the electorate& in line !ith the (ommissionRs broad constitutional mandate to ensure orderly elections. Having revisited and clarified the 8urisdiction of (O',J,( to rule upon <uestions of party identity and leadership as an incident to its enforcement po!ers& this (ourt cannot help but be baffled by the (O',J,(Rs ruling declining to in<uire into !hich party officer has the authority to sign and endorse certificates of candidacy of the partyRs nominees. /he only issue in this case& as defined by the (O',J,( itself& is !ho as bet!een the Party (hairman and the Secretary General has the authority to sign certificates of candidacy of the official candidates of the party. 3ndeed& the petitionersR 'ani#estation and Petition before the (O',J,( merely as4ed the (ommission to recognize only those certificates of candidacy signed by petitioner Sen. Angara or his authorized representative& and no other. /o resolve this simple issue& the (O',J,( need only to turn to the Party (onstitution. 3t need not go so far as to resolve the root of the conflict bet!een the party officials. 3t need only resolve such <uestions as may be necessary in the e6ercise of its enforcement po!ers. /he JAP has a set of national officers composed of& among others& the Party (hairman and the Secretary General. /he Party (hairman is the (hief ,6ecutive Officer of the Party& !hose po!ers and functions include0
C#$D C#@D C#*D C#-D

214

5o represent the Party in all e*ternal affairs and concerns$ si"n %oc$ments (or an% on its &e'al($ and call the meetings and be the presiding officer of the )ational ongress and the )ational E*ecuti(e ouncilM.
H2+I

/he Secretary General& on the other hand& assists the Party (hairman in overseeing the day"to"day operations of the Party. Among his po!ers and functions is0

214

W'en em*o+ere% &) t'e Part) C'airman$ to sign documents for and on behalf of the PartyM.
H30I

/he Secretary GeneralRs authority to sign documents& therefore& is only a delegated po!er& !hich originally pertains to the Party (hairman. Rep. A<uino claims that he !as authorized to e6ercise to sign the party candidatesR certificates of candidacy in the previous elections. 3ndeed& the (O',J,( found that0

7n fact$ during the #ay 1,$ 2001 elections$ oppositor .gapito J"ut6N .Cuino$ as ?@P Secretary =eneral$ /as authori6ed by the ?@P to sign for the ertificates of )omination of the ?@P Senatorial andidates$ including the ertificate of )omination for Senatorial andidate Edgardo A. .ngara$ a copy of said ertificate of )omination and a copy of the ertificate for Senator Edgardo A. .ngara are attached as .nne*es . and "$ respecti(ely. 5his action by Secretary =eneral .Cuino is in accordance /ith the onstitution and "y'la/s of ?@P$ not Cuestioned by the ?@P signed by its Secretary =eneral. 5his re(ocation has not been re(o8ed or recalled by the )ational ongress of the ?@P /hich is the one authori6ed to nominate candidates for President and <ice'President$ respecti(ely.
H31I

Assuming that Rep. A<uino previously had such authority& this (ourt cannot share the (O',J,(Rs finding that the same Lhas not been revo4ed or recalled.M No revocation of such authority can be more e6plicit than the totality of Sen. AngaraRs 'ani#estations and Petition before the (O',J,(& through !hich he informed the (ommission that Rep. A<uinoRs had been placed on indefinite forced leave and that Ambassador Naldivar has been designated Acting Secretary General& !ho Lshall henceforth e6ercise all the po!ers and functions of the Secretary General under the (onstitution and 5y"Ja!s of the JAP.M As the prerogative to empo!er Rep. A<uino to sign documents devolves upon Sen. Angara& so he may choose& at his discretion& to !ithhold or revo4e such po!er. 5oth respondents Rep. A<uino and (O',J,( also cited Section @ of (O',J,( Resolution No. @)$+ as basis for the Party Secretary GeneralRs authority to sign certificates of candidacy. Said Section @ states0
C+#D C++D

SE . D. !erti"icate o" nomination o" o""icial can#i#ates by political party. P 5he certificate of nomination of registered political parties or coalitions of political parties of their official candidates shall be filed not later than the last day for filing of certificates of candidacy$ /hich is Aanuary 2$ 200, %$l) si"ne% an% atteste% $n%er oat' &) t'e *art) *resi%ent, c'airman, secretar)."eneral or an) ot'er %$l) a$t'ori/e% o((icer and shall bear the acceptance of the nominee by affi*ing his signature in the space pro(ided therein. HEmphasis and underscoring supplied.I
(learly& ho!ever& the above provision presupposes that the party president& chairman or secretary"general has been Lduly authorizedM by the party to sign the certificate of candidacy. (O',J,( Resolution No. @)$+ cannot grant a party official greater authority than !hat the party itself grants& lest such Resolution amount to a violation of the partyRs freedom of association. Neither does the Party Secretary General have the po!er to nominate the official candidates of the JAP. /hat po!er resides in the governing bodies of the Party. 3n particular& the National (ongress& !hich is the highest policy"ma4ing and governing body of the Party& has the po!er
C+)D

2D4

5o nominate the official candidates of the Party for President$ <ice President$ and Senators$ and$ /hene(er the corresponding con(entions fail to meet or to ma8e the reCuisite nominations$ to nominate the official

candidates for municipal city$ congressional district$ pro(incial and regional electi(e officesM.
H35I

Not only does Rep. A<uino insist on his po!er to sign (ertificates of (andidacy on behalf of the JAP but he !ould also deny Sen. Angara that po!er on account of the latterRs preventive suspension. 3t seems& ho!ever& that respondent has abandoned this tac4 by the silence of his 'emorandum on the matter. 3n any case& it appears that on November #-& #==+& Representative Role6 Suplico& JAP Region G3 Regional (hairman& filed a complaint !ith Rep. A<uino against Party (hairman Sen. Angara for disloyalty to the Party& gross violation of the Party (onstitution& and other divisive acts inimical to the interest of the party and its members. Rep. A<uino& as Secretary General& created a committee composed of three (+. members of the JAP National ,6ecutive (ouncil to investigate the complaint and recommend appropriate action thereon. On Aecember #& #==+& the investigating committee issued a resolution placing Sen. Angara under preventive suspension effective immediately and directing him to refrain from performing acts in behalf of the party until the committee finishes its investigation and submits its final recommendations. /he authority to create the investigating committee supposedly rests on Section 7 ().& Article G3 of the JAP (onstitution& !hich enumerates the po!ers and functions of the Secretary General0

2,4

Wit' t'e conc$rrence o( t'e Part) C'airman$ to enforce Party disciplineM. QEmphasis supplied.I

,vidently& 8ust as Rep. A<uino has no po!er to sign and nominate candidates in behalf of the JAP& neither does he have the po!er to enforce Party discipline or& as an incident thereto& to create an investigating committee& !ithout the Party (hairmanRs concurrence. 'uch less does the investigating committee so created have the po!er to place the Party (hairman under preventive suspension since its authority stems from a nullity. Simply put& the spring has no source. /he lac4 of Rep. A<uinoRs authority to sign documents or to nominate candidates for the JAP !ould not result in the denial of due course to or the cancellation of the certificates of candidacy he may have signed on behalf of the JAP. /he e6clusive ground for the denial of due course to or the cancellation of a certificate of candidacy for any elective office is that any material representation contained therein as re<uired by la! is false. Since the signature of Rep. A<uino !as affi6ed either prior to& or on the basis of& the challenged Resolution recognizing his authority to sign on behalf of the JAP& the same !ould not constitute material representation that is false. 3n such case& the candidates are simply deemed as not nominated by the JAP and are considered independent candidates pursuant to Section * of (O',J,( Resolution No. @)$+0
C+@D C+*D

SE . -. $""ect o" "iling certi"icate o" nomination. P . candidate /ho has not been nominated by a registered political party or its duly authori6ed representati(e$ or /hose nomination has not been submitted by a registered political partyM shall be considered as an independent candidate.
(O',J,( (ommissioner Sadain referred to the above provision in his Dissentin% Opinion& and this (ourt finds refreshing !isdom ? so sorely !anting in the ma8ority opinion ? in his suggestion that0

.ll other party members representing themsel(es to be candidates of the party shall not be depri(ed of their right to file their respecti(e certificates of candidacy and run for office$ if so Cualified$ but that they shall not be accorded the rights and pri(ileges reser(ed by election la/s for official nominees of registered political parties. 7nstead$ they shall be treated as independent candidates.
H3FI

9rom the foregoing& it is plain that the (O',J,( misapplied e<uity in the present case. 9or all its conceded merits& e<uity is available only in the absence of la! and not as its replacement. ,<uity is described as 8ustice !ithout legality& !hich simply means that it cannot supplant& although it may& as often happens& supplement the la!. /he (O',J,( should have decided the case on the basis of the party constitution and election la!s. 3t chose not to because of its irrational fear of treading& as respondent A<uino put it& on LuncharteredM territories. 5ut& as sho!n above& these territories have long been 1.*#-/, by 8urisprudence and& in any case& the (O',J,( need not have sailed far from the shore to arrive at the correct conclusion. 3n truth& the (O',J,( Resolution is indecision in the guise of e<uity. 1orse& the (O',J,( divided the JAP into L!ings&M each of !hich may nominate candidates for every elective position. 5oth !ings are also entitled to representatives in the election committees that the (ommission may create. 3n the event that the JAP is accorded dominant minority party election status& election returns of odd"numbered precincts shall be furnished the Angara !ing and those of even"numbered precincts& the A<uino !ing. 5y creating the t!o !ings& the (O',J,( effectively diffused the JAPRs strength and undeniably emasculated its chance of obtaining the (ommissionRs nod as the dominant minority party. 5y allo!ing each !ing to nominate different candidates& the (O',J,( planted the seeds of confusion among the electorate& !ho are apt to be confounded by t!o candidates from a single political party. 3n Reca"o, Jr. v. Commission on Elections & this (ourt declared that the electoral process envisions one candidate from a political party for each position& and disunity and discord amongst members of a political party should not be allo!ed to create a moc4ery thereof. /he admonition against moc4ing the electoral process not only applies to political parties but !ith greater force to the (O',J,(. 5y according both !ings representatives in the election committees& the (O',J,( has eroded the significance of political parties and effectively divided the opposition. /he (O',J,( has lost sight of the uni<ue political situation of the Philippines !here& to paraphrase >ustice PerfectoRs concurring opinion in Sotto& supra& the administration party has al!ays been unnecessarily and dangerously too big and the opposition party too small to be an effective chec4 on the administration. /he purpose of according dominant status and representation to a minority party is precisely to serve as an effective chec4 on the ma8ority. /he (O',J,( performed a disservice to the opposition and& ultimately& to the voting public& as its Resolution facilitated& rather than forestalled& the division of the minority party. 5y splitting copies of the election returns bet!een the t!o factions& the (O',J,( has fractured both !ings. /he practical purpose of furnishing a party !ith a copy of the election returns is to allo! it to tally the results of the elections at the precinct
C+7D C)=D C) D C)#D

level. Iltimately& it is a guard against fraud. /hus& resort to copies thereof may be had !hen the election returns are delayed& lost or destroyed& or !hen they appear to be tampered or falsified. A split party !ithout a complete set of election returns cannot successfully help preserve the sanctity of the ballot. 3t bears reminding respondent (ommission of this (ourtRs pronouncement in Peralta v. Commission on Elections& !hich& !hile made in the bac4drop of a parliamentary form of government& holds e<ually true under the present government structure0
C)+D C))D C)$D

M political parties constitute a basic element of the democratic institutional apparatus. =o(ernment deri(es its strength from the support$ acti(e or passi(e$ of a coalition of elements of society. 7n modern times the political party has become the instrument for the organi6ation of societies. 5his is predicated on the doctrine that go(ernment e*ists /ith the consent of the go(erned. Political parties perform an Jessential function in the management of succession to po/er$ as /ell as in the process of obtaining popular consent to the course of public policy. 5hey amass sufficient support to buttress the authority of go(ernmentsE or$ on the contrary$ they attract or organi6e discontent and dissatisfaction sufficient to oust the go(ernment. 7n either case they perform the function of the articulation of the interests and aspirations of a substantial segment of the citi6enry$ usually in /ays contended to be promoti(e of the national /eal.K
/he assailed (O',J,( Resolution does not advance& but subverts& this philosophy behind political parties. As if to rationalize its folly& the (O',J,( invo4es the constitutional policy to!ards a free and open party system. /his policy& ho!ever& envisions a system that shall Levolve according to the free choice of the people&M not one molded and !hittled by the (O',J,(. 1hen the (onstitution spea4s of a multi"party system& it does not contemplate the (O',J,( splitting parties into t!o. 9or doing 8ust that& this pretender to the throne of King Solomon acted !himsically and capriciously. Certiorari lies against it& indeed. @HEREFORE& the assailed (O',J,( Resolution is ANNIJJ,A and the Petition is GRAN/,A 3N PAR/. Respondent (ommission on ,lections is directed to recognize as official candidates of the Jaban ng Aemo4rati4ong Pilipino only those !hose (ertificates of (andidacy are signed by JAP Party (hairman Senator ,dgardo >. Angara or his duly authorized representativeEs. SO ORDERED. 2itu%, Pan%ani"an, Juisum"in%, -nares(Santia%o, Carpio, ,ustria('artine+, Carpio('orales, Calle0o, Sr., and ,+cuna, JJ., concur. Davide, Jr., C.J., in the result. Puno, J., on leave. 2itu%, J., please see separate opinion. Sandoval( utierre+, J., please see dissenting opinion. Corona, J., 8oins the dissenting opinion of >. Gutierrez.
C)@D C)*D

Laban v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161265. February 24, 2004

Diges e!

by

Mr.

"are!

Facts: #rior

o $e M%y 2004 e&e' ions, $e L%ban ng De(o)ra i)ong #i&i*ino +LD#, $as been !ivi!e! be'ause o- a s rugg&e o- au $ori y be .een #ar y C$air E!gar!o %ngara an! #ar /e're ary Genera& %ga*i o %0uino, bo $ $aving en!orse! .o !i--eren se s o'an!i!a es un!er $e sa(e *ar y, LD#. 1$e (a er .as broug$ o $e COMELEC. 1$e Co((ission in i s reso&u ion, $as re'ogni2e! $e -a' ions 'rea ing .o sub3*ar ies4 LD# %ngara 5ing an! LD# %0uino 5ing.

Issue: 5$e $er or no

re'ogni2ing $e

$e COMELEC 'o((i e! a grave abuse o- !is're ion in .o se s o- no(ina ions an! en!ose(en s by $e sa(e *ar y.

Held: 1$e COMELEC erre! in i s reso&u ion. On&y

$ose Cer i-i'a es o- Can!i!a'y +COC, signe! by $e LD# #ar y C$air(an %ngara or $is !u&y au $ori2e! re*resen a ive6s s$a&& be re'ogni2e!.