SEMA vs.

COMELEC
Doctrine of the Case: The Court stressed out that only Congress can
create provinces and cities because the creation of provinces and
cities necessarily includes the creation of legislative districts.
Facts: The ARMM's legislative arm, the ARMM Regional Assembly, enacted
Muslim Mindanao Act 201 which created the Province of Shariff Kabunsuan.
The power to create the said provinces was pursuant to Section 19, Article VI
of RA 9054. A plebiscite was conducted to which the electorate voted in favor
of the creation of the province.
However, the Petitioner questions the validity of the power of the ARMM
Regional Assembly to create the province. He also questions the resolution of
the COMELEC which combines Shariff Kabunsuan and Cotabato City into one
legislative district during the 2007 election.
Issue: Whether or not the ARMM Regional Assembly has the power to create
a new province and assuming that the creation of the province is valid, is the
COMELEC's act of combining two separate provinces into one legislative
district valid
Ruling: The Court ruled on the unconstitutionality of both Muslim Mindanao
Act 201 and Section 19, Article VI of RA 9054. The ARMM Regional Assembly
is not allowed to create any legislative district or provinces. The Court
stressed out that only Congress can create provinces and cities because the
creation of provinces and cities necessarily includes the creation of
legislative districts. Creation of province or a city inherently involves the
power to create a legislative district. The Constitution mandates that a
province or a city with at least 250,000 inhabitants is entitled to at least one
representative.
The Court also ruled that COMELEC's act of combining the separate but
geographically connected provinces is valid s it merely complies with Section
5 of Article VI and Section 20 of Article X of the Constitution.
Mariano vs COMELEC
242 SCRA 211
Doctrine of the Case: A general reapportionment law is not required
to increase the number of legislative districts.
Facts: The Petitioners assail RA 78541 as unconstitutional for being a
special law that increases the legislative district of Makati. The Petitioner
points out in their petition that a general reapportionment law shall be
1

An Act Converting the Municipality of Makati Into a Highly Urbanized City to be known as the City of Makati.

passed by Congress first to increase legislative districts and not a special law
such as the assailed statute.
Issue: Whether or not a general reapportionment law is necessary to
increase the number of legislative districts.
Ruling: No, it is not. The Constitution clearly provides that Congress shall
be composed of not more than two hundred fifty (250) members, unless
otherwise fixed by law. As thus worded, the Constitution did not preclude
Congress from increasing its membership by passing a law, other than a
general reapportionment of the law. This is its exactly what was done by
Congress in enacting R.A. No. 7854 and providing for an increase in Makati's
legislative district.
Moreover, to hold that reapportionment can only be made through a general
apportionment law, with a review of all the legislative districts allotted to
each local government unit nationwide, would create an inequitable situation
where a new city or province created by Congress will be denied legislative
representation for an indeterminate period of time. The intolerable situations
will deprive the people of a new city or province a particle of their
sovereignty. Sovereignty cannot admit of any kind of subtraction. It is
indivisible. It must be forever whole or it is not sovereignty.