Case Summary (G.R. No. 111230)
Petitioners
Petitioners sought certiorari and mandamus to set aside COMELEC Resolutions (Res. 93-1623 and Res. 93-1676) that (a) disallowed initiation of a local initiative to annul Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10, and (b) directed the Provincial Election Supervisor to act on signature authentication. They alleged grave abuse of discretion and denial of due process by COMELEC and asserted COMELEC’s role in supervising and scheduling initiatives is ministerial under the Local Government Code.
Respondents
COMELEC opposed the petition, asserting under the Local Government Code (Sec. 120) that a resolution cannot be the subject of a local initiative because the statutory definition of local initiative uses the word “ordinance.” The Sangguniang Bayan of Morong likewise maintained that only ordinances are subject to local initiative.
Key Dates
May 24, 1993 — petition filed with the Sangguniang Bayan of Morong seeking annulment and conditional replacement of Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10; June 11, 1993 — Vice Mayor de Leon’s letter to COMELEC requesting denial of the initiative petition; July 6 and July 13, 1993 — COMELEC en banc resolutions acting on the petition and signature authentication.
Applicable Law (constitutional and statutory basis)
- 1987 Philippine Constitution (Article VI, Sections 1 and 32): reserves to the people the initiative and referendum power and directs Congress to provide a system whereby the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve/reject any act or law of a local legislative body.
- Republic Act No. 6735 (An Act Providing for a System of Initiative and Referendum): defines “initiative” to include local laws, resolutions, or ordinances, and establishes procedures and limitations.
- Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991): contains provisions governing local initiative and referendum (notably Secs. 120, 124, 125, 122).
- Republic Act No. 7227 (Bases Conversion Development Act): establishes the Subic Special Economic Zone and prescribes effects of local concurrence.
- COMELEC Resolution No. 2300 (rules governing initiatives and referenda): recognizes that initiatives may apply to laws, resolutions, or ordinances at various local levels.
Background Facts
The Sangguniang Bayan of Morong adopted Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10, Serye 1993, consenting to Morong’s inclusion in the Subic Special Economic Zone under R.A. 7227. Petitioners filed a petition on May 24, 1993 to annul that resolution and to replace it with a conditional resolution enumerating terms for Morong’s inclusion. The municipality took no action within thirty days, so petitioners began gathering signatures under the Local Government Code to invoke an initiative. Unknown to petitioners, Vice Mayor de Leon wrote COMELEC requesting denial, asserting that the Sangguniang Bayan had addressed the issues and that an initiative would be divisive and futile. COMELEC en banc resolved to deny the initiative on the ground the subject was “merely a resolution and not an ordinance,” and later directed signature authentication to proceed.
Issue Presented
Whether a municipal resolution (Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10, Serye 1993) is a proper subject of a local initiative under the 1987 Constitution and implementing statutes, and whether COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion and denied petitioners due process by issuing ex parte resolutions that impeded the initiative process.
Petitioners’ Legal Claims
Petitioners argued: (a) the Constitution (Art. VI, Secs. 1 and 32) expressly contemplates initiatives that can approve or reject any act or law of a local legislative body (an “act” includes resolutions); (b) RA 6735 implements the constitutional mandate and explicitly includes “resolution” as an object of local initiatives; (c) COMELEC’s actions were administrative and required to be ministerial in supervising signature gathering and setting dates once thresholds are met; and (d) COMELEC issued decisions ex parte without affording petitioners an opportunity to be heard, thereby denying due process and usurping the people’s original legislative power.
Respondents’ Legal Position
Respondents relied principally on Sec. 120 of the Local Government Code which defines local initiative as the process whereby registered voters may propose, enact, or amend “any ordinance,” arguing that this language excludes resolutions and thus COMELEC correctly refused to permit an initiative against a mere resolution.
Court’s Analysis — Constitutional and Statutory Interpretation
The Court rejected respondents’ narrow, literal reading of Sec. 120. It held that the 1987 Constitution’s Section 32 of Article VI contemplates initiatives not only on ordinances but on “any act or law or part thereof passed by Congress or [a] local legislative body,” and that an “act” includes resolutions. The Court noted RA 6735’s explicit definition including local “law, resolution or ordinance” as subject matter of local initiatives, and COMELEC’s own Rule (Resolution No. 2300) likewise recognized resolutions as proper subjects. Legislative history and congressional debates confirmed Congress intended local initiatives to cover resolutions down to the barangay level. The Local Government Code’s Sec. 120 does not constrain the subjects of initiative; Sec. 124 limits initiatives to subjects within the legal powers of the Sanggunians (a scope that includes resolutions), and Sec. 125’s use of the term “proposition” further supports inclusion. The Court also cited commentary by the principal drafter of the Code (Sen. Pimentel) interpreting the Code as allowing resolutions to be subjects o
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 111230)
Procedural Posture
- Petition for certiorari and mandamus filed with the Supreme Court (En Banc) seeking to set aside COMELEC Resolution Nos. 93-1676 and 93-1623 and to compel COMELEC to proceed with the local initiative and authentication of signatures.
- Petitioners appealed the COMELEC en banc resolutions that: (a) denied initiation of a local initiative on the ground that the subject was a resolution and not an ordinance (Res. 93-1623 dated July 6, 1993), and (b) directed the Provincial Election Supervisor to hold action on the authentication of signatures (Res. 93-1676 dated July 13, 1993).
- Respondents: Commission on Elections (COMELEC) and the Sangguniang Bayan of Morong, Bataan.
- Supreme Court (Puno, J.) GRANTED the petition: COMELEC Resolutions 93-1623 (July 6, 1993) and 93-1676 (July 13, 1993) were ANNULLED and SET ASIDE; no costs. Concurrences listed; three Justices on leave.
Material Facts
- The Sangguniang Bayan ng Morong, Bataan approved Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10, Serye 1993 agreeing to include the municipality of Morong as part of the Subic Special Economic Zone (SSEZ) pursuant to Republic Act No. 7227.
- On May 24, 1993, petitioners filed a petition with the Sangguniang Bayan of Morong to annul Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10, Serye 1993 and proposed replacement with a resolution conditioning Morong’s inclusion in the SSEZ on specified terms (Annex "A" and "B" in petition).
- The petitioners invoked the local initiative power under the Local Government Code of 1991 and began soliciting required signatures (Sec. 122, par. (e) R.A. No. 7160).
- Unknown to petitioners, Vice Mayor Edilberto M. de Leon wrote a letter dated June 11, 1993 to the COMELEC Executive Director requesting denial of the petition for a local initiative and/or referendum, arguing the exercise would "promote divisiveness, counter productive and futility" and enumerating actions the Sangguniang Bayan had already taken on the issues raised (Annex "G").
- COMELEC en banc resolved on July 6, 1993 to deny the petition for local initiative because its subject was "merely a resolution (pambayang kapasyahan) and not an ordinance" (Res. 93-1623).
- On July 13, 1993, COMELEC en banc resolved to direct the Provincial Election Supervisor to hold action on the authentication of signatures gathered by petitioners (Res. 93-1676).
Petitioners’ Requests and Legal Theories
- Sought certiorari to annul COMELEC Resolutions 93-1676 and 93-1623 insofar as they disallowed the initiation of a local initiative to annul Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10, Serye 1993 and to prevent gathering and authentication of signatures (Sec. 7, Art. IX of the Constitution invoked).
- Contended COMELEC acted ex parte and without affording petitioners the opportunity to be heard; the resolutions were issued with grave abuse of discretion.
- Asserted that a Sangguniang Bayan resolution is a proper subject of initiative under Sec. 32, Art. VI of the 1987 Constitution and implementing statutes/regulations.
- Sought mandamus to compel COMELEC to schedule continuation of the signing of the petition and, upon obtaining the required number of signatures, to set a date for the initiative within statutory timeframes (Sec. 22, par. (h) R.A. No. 7160 cited).
Respondents’ Position and Arguments
- COMELEC, through the Solicitor General, and the Sangguniang Bayan of Morong argued that under the Local Government Code of 1991 only an ordinance can be the subject of local initiative.
- They relied principally on Sec. 120, Chapter 2, Title XI, Book I of R.A. No. 7160 which defines "local initiative" as the process whereby registered voters may directly propose, enact, or amend any ordinance.
- Sangguniang Bayan emphasized that its actions on the petitioners’ issues were recommendatory and that it had taken or sought actions (e.g., resolutions requesting Congressional amendments, coordination with BCDA and President) addressing the petitioners’ concerns, as set out in Vice Mayor de Leon’s June 11, 1993 letter.
Legal Issues Presented
- Primary issue: Whether Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10, Serye 1993 (a Sangguniang Bayan resolution of Morong, Bataan) is a proper subject of local initiative under the Constitution, R.A. No. 6735, R.A. No. 7160, and COMELEC rules.
- Secondary issue: Whether petitioners were denied due process when COMELEC acted on the rival petition ex parte (without notice and opportunity to be heard) and whether such procedural lapse constituted grave abuse of discretion warranting annullment of COMELEC resolutions.
Constitutional and Statutory Framework (as stated in the source)
- 1987 Constitution:
- Section 1, Article VI vests legislative power in Congress "except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum."
- Section 32, Article VI mandates Congress to provide a system of initiative and referendum "whereby the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the Congress or local legislative body..."
- Section 2, Article XVII allows amendments by initiative upon petition of at least 12% of registered voters with representation requirements.
- Republic Act N