Case Summary (G.R. No. 247610)
Key Dates
- RA 11259 enacted: April 5, 2019
- Published: May 20, 2019
- Scheduled plebiscite: Second Monday of May 2020
- Supreme Court decision: February 14, 2022 (En Banc)
Applicable Law
- 1987 Philippine Constitution:
• Article X, Section 10 (plebiscite requirement for LGU creation/division)
• Article X, Section 12 (HUC independence from province)
• Article II, Section 1 (sovereignty resides in the people)
• Article XIII, Section 16 (people’s right to participate in decision‐making) - Republic Act No. 11259: Sections 51 (plebiscite), 54 (exclusion of HUC voters)
- Local Government Code (LGC): Sections 25, 29, 39(b), 45, 152, 285, 292, 452(c), 453
Issues Presented
- Whether petitioners have standing and the petition is not premature.
- Whether RA 11259 violated the people’s right to public consultation.
- Whether voters of Puerto Princesa City, as a highly urbanized city (HUC), are “political units directly affected” entitled to vote in the plebiscite dividing Palawan.
Standing and Prematurity
- Standing requires (1) actual or threatened injury, (2) traceability to the challenged act, (3) redressability.
- Puerto Princesa voters lack standing: conversion to HUC severed political and electoral ties with the province; they neither vote in provincial elections nor in the plebiscite.
- Residents of Palawan municipalities (Alsa, Hassan, Colili) retain standing.
- Prematurity: Most substantive provisions of RA 11259 are contingent on plebiscite approval and remain inoperative; only Sections 51, 54, 58–60 (plebiscite preparations) are ripe for review.
Public Consultation Requirement
- Petitioners assert violation of Article XIII, Section 16.
- Legislature conducted consultations with elected municipal mayors, councils, and Provincial Board; records include meeting minutes and resolutions.
- Constitution does not require pre‐enactment hearings; ultimate expression of public will is via plebiscite.
Plebiscite Participation Test
Under Article X, Section 10, only “political units directly affected” by creation or division of an LGU vote in the plebiscite. Supreme Court jurisprudence applies a three‐factor test:
- Territorial alteration
- Political effects
- Economic (fiscal) effects
Territorial Alteration Analysis
- RA 11259 does not change Puerto Princesa’s metes and bounds.
- Redistricting for legislative purposes is not a boundary alteration triggering plebiscite participation.
Political Effects Analysis
- HUCs are constitutionally and statutorily independent of provinces (Art X, Sec 12; LGC Sec 29, 452(c)).
- Puerto Princesa’s conversion (2007) revoked provincial supervision; voters excluded from provincial elections as per LGC.
- City charter provisions allowing provincial voting are superseded by the Constitution and LGC.
Economic (Fiscal) Effects Analysis
- Fiscal independence: HUCs have separate taxing authority, Internal Revenue Allotment share, and resource‐sharing rights (LGC Secs 285, 292, 451–453).
- Potential socio‐economic im
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 247610)
Facts and Antecedents
- Republic Act No. 11259 (“Charter of the Provinces of Palawan del Norte, Palawan Oriental, and Palawan del Sur”) enacted April 5, 2019 and published May 20, 2019.
- Originated as House Bills Nos. 7413 and 8055 in the 17th Congress by Palawan district representatives.
- Section 51: creation of three provinces upon majority vote in plebiscite scheduled second Monday of May 2020. Costs charged to existing Province of Palawan.
- Section 54: residents of Puerto Princesa City, as a highly urbanized city (HUC), disqualified from voting in the plebiscite or for provincial elective positions. Continuation of existing district representatives until new ones elected in 2022.
Petitioners and Relief Sought
- Petitioners Del Rosario, Virgo, Baladad, Dioso, Davila are registered voters and taxpayers of Puerto Princesa City; Alsa, Hassan, and Colili are residents and voters of municipalities in Palawan.
- They challenge the constitutionality of RA 11259 and seek:
• Declaration of the law as unconstitutional and invalid
• Writ of prohibition against conducting the May 11, 2020 plebiscite without participation of Puerto Princesa electorate
• Injunction against disbursement of funds for that plebiscite
Issues Presented
- Violation of the people’s right to participate in public affairs through public hearings and consultations.
- Disqualification of Puerto Princesa voters from the plebiscite, allegedly contrary to Article X, Section 10 of the Constitution.
- Alteration of revenue‐sharing from national wealth, purportedly violating Article X, Section 7 of the Constitution.
Preliminary and Standing Rulings
- Respondents alleged prematurity and lack of standing.
- Standing define