Title
Supreme Court
Province of Sulu vs. Medialdea
Case
G.R. No. 242255
Decision Date
Nov 26, 2024
The Court upheld Sulu Province's rejection of inclusion in BARMM, declaring the inclusion unconstitutional based on the plebiscite vote against ratifying the Bangsamoro Organic Law, affirming local autonomy.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 242255)

Plebiscite Results and Decisional Framework

The plebiscite’s outcome revealed that the constituents of Sulu voted against ratifying the Bangsamoro Organic Law. According to the court, this result reflects the people's will and underscores the principle that the creation of an autonomous region must be based on the independent will of each province or city. The Court emphasized that disregarding this will undermines self-determination and fails to acknowledge the distinct historical, cultural, and political characteristics inherent in the Bangsamoro region.

Initial Court Ruling and Constitutional Violations

In its decision dated September 9, 2024, the Court unanimously declared the inclusion of the Province of Sulu in BARMM as unconstitutional. The ruling recognized that the legislation violated the 1987 Philippine Constitution, particularly Article X, Section 18, which stipulates that only provinces, cities, and geographic areas voting favorably should be included in the autonomous region. Consequently, the Court acknowledged that the Province of Sulu could not have its political status altered without its affirmative vote.

Motions for Partial Reconsideration

Following the decision, multiple parties filed Motions for Partial Reconsideration, arguing various points. The BARMM government contended that treating former ARMM provinces as a single voting unit was constitutional, while others asserted that excluding Sulu would disrupt services and funding essential for the province. These parties sought to have the court reverse its earlier decision and include Sulu in BARMM.

Judicial Review and Self-Determination

The Court reaffirmed its commitment to upholding the constitutional directive that mandates constituent units decide their participation in such governance frameworks through affirmative votes, thus reinforcing the essence of self-determination. The Constitution's provisions, as clarified by the Court, do not permit the imposition of an autonomous region on unwilling local government units, emphasizing the need for public consent.

Analysis of Legislative Powers and the Function of Democracy

The Court outlined that while the legislative branch holds the authority to define the territorial boundaries of an autonomous region, this exercise of power must align with constitutional provisions. The principle of democracy mandates that the constituents of a political unit possess the right to affirm what forms of governance they wish to associate with, reinforcing that local autonomy should not be undermined.

Application of the Doctrine of Operative Fact

The ruling acknowledges the implications of the Province of Sulu's previous inclusion in BARMM, particularly regarding governance, service delivery, and resource allocation. Although the inclusion has been declared unconstitutional, the Court will apply the doctrine of operati

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.