Mariano v.

COMELEC (1995) - reapportionment thru special law; Makati City

Petitioners are assailing Republic Act No. 7854: An Act Converting the Municipality of Makati
Into a Highly Urbanized City to be known as the City of Makati.
Petitioners believe that:
o reapportionment cannot be made by a special law and
o Makatis population in the 1990 census stands only 450,000. Petitioner contends that it is
unconstitutional.
Issue: Whether RA 7854 is unconstitutional.
HELD: No.
In Tobias vs. Abalos, we ruled that reapportionment of legislative districts may be made
through a special law
The Constitution clearly provides that Congress shall be composed of not more than two hundred
fifty (250) members, unless otherwise fixed by law.
Constitution did not preclude Congress from increasing its membership by passing a 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.
Additionally, the population of Makati stands at only four hundred fifty thousand (450,000).
Section 5(3), Article VI of the Constitution provides, inter alia, that a city with a population of at
least two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) shall have at least one representative
it has met the MINIMUM population requirement of two hundred fifty thousand (250,000).
section 3 of the Ordinance appended to the Constitution provides that a city whose
population has increased to more than two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) shall be
entitled to at least one congressional representative.

Sema v. COMELEC (2008) - (ARMM RLA power)

The Province of Maguindanao is part of ARMM.

Cotabato City is part of the province of Maguindanao but it is not part of ARMM
Cotabato City voted against its inclusion in a plebiscite held in 1989.
(RA 9054) was passed amending ARMMs Organic Act and vesting it with power to create
provinces, municipalities, cities and barangays.
Pursuant to this law, the ARMM Regional Assembly created Shariff Kabunsuan (Muslim
Mindanao Autonomy [MMA] Act 201)
o comprised of the municipalities of the 1st district of Maguindanao with the exception of
Cotabato City.
COMELEC initially stated that the 1st district is now only made of Cotabato City (because of
MMA 201).
later amended this stating that status quo should be retained however just for the purposes of
the elections, the first district should be called Shariff Kabunsuan with Cotabato City due to the
fact that they are still awaiting a decisive declaration from Congress as to Cotabatos status as
a legislative distric
Sema was a congressional candidate for the legislative district of S. Kabunsuan with Cotabato
(1st district).
Sema was contending that Cotabato City should be a separate legislative district
She contended that under the Constitution, upon creation of a province (S. Kabunsuan), that
province automatically gains legislative representation and since S. Kabunsuan excludes
Cotabato City in effect, Cotabato is being deprived of a representative in the HOR.
COMELEC maintained that the legislative district is still there and that regardless of S.
Kabunsuan being created, the legislative district is not affected and so is its representation.
 Issue: Whether Section 19, Article VI of RA 9054, delegating to the ARMM Regional Assembly
the power to create provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays, is constitutional.
HELD: RA 9054 is unconstitutional.
creation of local government units is governed by Section 10, Article X of the Constitution.
creation of any of the four local government units: province, city, municipality or barangay must
comply with three conditions
o First, the creation of a local government unit must follow the criteria fixed in the Local
Government Code.
o Second, such creation must not conflict with any provision of the Constitution.
o Third, there must be a plebiscite in the political units affected.
No express grant of authority in the Constitution for Congress to delegate to regional or local
legislative bodies the power to create local government units (such as done in the Muslim
Mindanao Autonomy Act 201)
ARMM cannot validly create Shariff Kabunsuan province.

Montejo v. Commission on Elections (1995) redistricting Leyte; mere minor adjustments

Cerilo Roy Montejo - representative of the first district of Leyte

pleads for the annulment of Section 1 of Resolution no. 2736,
Resolution no. 2736 - redistricting certain municipalities in Leyte
Ground: violates the principle of equality of representation.
Leyte is composed of 5 districts.
Biliran, located in the 3rd district of Leyte, was made its subprovince by virtue of RA 2141 Section
1 enacted on 1959. (Biliran belongs to 3rd district)
Under Local Government Code of 1992 the subprovince of Biliran became a regular province
after a majority of votes were cast in a plebiscite.
As a consequence of the conversion, it reduced the 3rd district to five municipalities with a total
population of 146,067 as per the 1990 census.
To remedy distribution of inhabitants, COMELEC transferred certain municipalities to different
districts.
Petitioner assails it violates the principle of equality of representation.
Issue: Whether Section 1 of Resolution No. 2736 is void.
HELD: YES.
legislative apportionment as it is lodged in the Congress.
relied on an Ordinance entitled "Apportioning the Seats of the House of Representatives of the
Congress of the Philippines to the Different Legislative Districts in Provinces and Cities and the
Metropolitan Manila Area,
Section 2: COMELEC to make minor adjustment to those under Section 3.
Under Section 3, it gives COMELEC the power to adjust any province that may hereafter be
created.
Power of reapportionment lies only to the Congress.
Minor adjustments does not involve change in the allocations per district.
the Ordinance did not also give the respondent COMELEC any authority to transfer
municipalities from one legislative district to another district

Herrera v. Commission on Elections (1999) Uniform and progressive ratio

Section 5. 1. The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who
shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of
their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall be elected through a party-
list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.
 two new municipalities are being added to Guimaras
creation of the new municipalities prompted Guimaras to split into two separate provincial district
splitting was done through Resolution 2950
o allotted 8 Sangguniang seats to Province of Guimaras.
Petitioners question the apportionment of the districts given that there is an unfair division
created
o 1st district only has a population of 56,218 compared to
o 2nd district that has 70,252.
The petitioners aver that they want a complete 1 to 1 ratio split giving both 63,000 thousand
inhabitants and equal 3 seats in Sangguniang Panlalawigan.
Issue: Did COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in issuing the assailed Resolution
that redistricted Guimaras.
HELD: No.
under law stated in R.A. 7166 the municipalities belonging to each district must be compact,
contiguous and adjacent
Contiguous and adjacent means adjoining, nearby, abutting, having a common border,
connected, and/or touching along boundaries often for considerable distances.
Thus it could be surmised that COMELEC adjusted the districts in accordance with RA
7166

Samson v. Aguirre (1999) - par. 3 absence of certification as to income, population and area not
fatal; presumed valid

Petitioner assert that certifications of income, population and land area (requirements for
creation of LGUs) were not presented to Congress during the deliberations that led to the
passage of RA No. 8535
RA No. 8535 - An Act Creating the City of Novaliches
petitioner assert that there were no certification attesting that the creation of Novaliches as a city
will not adversely affect the mother city of Quezon City
Issue: Whether RA No. 8535 is unconstitutional.
HELD: No.
all presumptions are indulged in favor of constitutionality.
Requisites for the creation of Local Government are placed in Section 7 of the Local Government
Code of 1991.
The rules are as follows:
Income - not less than 20,000,000 for the immediately preceding two (2) consecutive years
based on 1991 constant prices as verified by Department Of Finance (DOF).
Population - not less than 150,000 as certified by National Statistics Office (NSO).
OR Land area - must be contiguous and at least 100 kilometers as certified by the Land
Management Bureau (LBM) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
Petitioners did not present any proof but only allegations that no certificates were submitted to
the House Committee on Local Government
during the public hearings resource persons from NSO, Bureau of Local Government and
Finance, LBM and Department of Budget and Management (DBM) were present.
They attested that Novaliches achieved the requisites (Land area was not considered because
it was either Population OR Land area)
Their affirmation as well as their oath as witnesses in open session either in Senate or
House of Representatives give greater solemnity than certification submitted.
The adverse effect also to Quezon City was unlikely
executive head of QC Mel Mathay that did not even raise any negative concerns of the creation
 of Novaliches.
Plebiscite - no concerns raised.

Aldaba v. Commission on Elections (2010) par. 3 & 4 (3 - contiguous, compact, & adjacent
territory; 4 census; reapportionment)

RA 9591 - seeks to create a legislative district for the Malolos City.

requirement of 250,000 under the Constitution was achieved by an undated certification issued
by a Regional Director of the National Statistics Office (NSO) which states:
o Malolos will be 254, 030 by the year of 2010 using the population growth rate of 3.78
between 1995-2000.
Issue: Whether RA 9591 unconstitutional for being violative of Section 5(3), Article VI of the
1987 Constitution.
HELD: Yes.
undated Certification came from the Regional Director Alberto N. Miranda of Region III of the
National Statistics Office (NSO)
no authority to issue the Certification.
certifications based on demographic projections can be issued only by the NSO Administrator
or his designated certifying officer.
no showing that Regional Director Miranda has been designated by the NSO Administrator as a
certifying officer
The projections also seem unrealistic if one tries to compute the population size of Malolos.
The 2007 Census places the population of Malolos at 223,069 as of 1 August 2007.
Based on a growth rate of 3.78%, the population of Malolos will grow to only 248,365 as
of 1 August 2010. Even if the growth rate is compounded yearly, the population of Malolos
of 223,069 as of 1 August 2007 will grow to only 249,333 as of 1 August 2010.

Aquino III v. Commission on Elections

RA 9716 that seeks to reapportion the province of Camarines Sur.

Camarines Sur had 4 districts.
Following the enactment of RA 9716, the first district was divided into 2 districts creating then 5
districts in Camarines Sur.
st
etitioners contend the RA 9716 since the splitting of the 1 district created districts that are less
than 250,000 in population,
o contravention of the Constitutional requirement under Section 5 (3) Article VI of the 1987
Constitution stating that each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand,
Issue: Whether a population of at least 250,000 is required by the Constitution for such new
district.
HELD: No.
History shows that Congress decided on the number 250,000 because it was based on the 1986
census that reflected around 55 million in population.
number that yielded 250,000 per district on average.
The use of the comma before the words or each province shows that cities must first show that
they have the 250,000 requisite compared to the province that needs no proof of such.
o each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or each province, shall
have at least one representative.
It should be understood that in the apportionment of district the court does not condone
population of less than 250,000 as it only proves in this case that there are other factors needed
to be considered
 no abuse of grave discretion and that violation of 250,000 was not done sine qua non. (not an
essential ingredient/requisite)

Navarro v. Ermita (2011) population composition; Justice Carpio dissent

RA 9355 - An Act Creating the Province of Dinagat Islands

Held a plebiscite, granting of approval of its mother province of Surigao del Norte
Province of Dinagat elected their new set of provincial officials.
Petitioners Navarro et al. filed a motion to declare the creation of province of Dinagat as invalid.
petitioners succeeded in having RA 9355 declared unconstitutional
R.A. 9355 failed to comply with the requirements of land area and population
decision also declared Article 9 (2) of the Local Government Code Implementing Rules and
Regulations (LGC-IRR) as null and void.
LGC-IRR Article 9 (2) because it states that the land area requirement shall not apply where
the proposed province is composed of one (1) or more islands.
Issue: Whether LGC-IRR Article 9(2) is valid therefore R.A. 9355 in turn is constitutional?
HELD (Dissent): For the dissenting Justice Carpio, it is a NO.
The Dinagat Islands province simply does not meet the criteria for the creation of a province.
Section 461 of the Local Government Code bars the creation of provinces unless two of three
minimum requirements are fulfilled.
o Income, Land OR Population
The land area requirement is important since without it, it would reduce provinces to the level
of a rich municipality unable to host otherwise qualified new smaller local government
units for sheer lack of space.
Dinagat province also fails to satisfy the requirement for population.
rationale for this is that because the creation of a province will interact with the Constitutional
law that each province [,] shall have at least one representative since the power to create a
province or city inherently involves the power to create a legislative district.
o unfair system of democracy allowing those who did not achieve 250,000 minimum
requirement to be equal to those who satisfy the 250,000 requirement.
o one vote in Dinagat Islands has the weight of more than two votes in Metro Manila for the
purpose of representation in the House of Representatives.

Bagabuyo v. COMELEC (2008) - no need for plebiscite for apportionment or reapportionment)

RA No. 9371 - An Act Providing for the Apportionment of the Lone Legislative District of
the City of Cagayan De Oro
increased Cagayan de Oros legislative district from one to two
For the election of May 2007, CDOs voters would be classified as belonging to either the
first or the second district, depending on their place of residence.
COMELEC promulgated a resolution implementing the said act.
Bagabuyo filed a petition at the Supreme Court asking for the nullification
Petitioner argued that COMELEC cannot implement a law without the commencement of
a plebiscite
Issue: Does R.A. No. 9371 merely provide for the legislative reapportionment of Cagayan de
Oro City, or does it involve the division and conversion of a local government unit?
HELD: R.A. 9371 is reapportionment legislation passed in accordance with Art. VI, 5(4)
o not a creation, division, merger, abolition or alteration of a local government unit
which requires a plebiscite under Article X Section 10
Legislative apportionment - It is the allocation of seats in a legislative body in proportion
 to the population;
Reapportionment is the realignment or change in legislative districts brought about by
changes in population (made every census year)
PLEBESCITE IS NOT REQUIRED FOR APPORTIONMENT/REAPPORTIONMENT

Bengson v. HRET and Cruz (2001) - recovery of NBC status

Cruz was a natural born citizen of the Philippines (San Clemente, Tarlac).
he enlisted in the US marine- corps without the consent of the Philippines and took an
oath of allegiance to the US.
He lost his citizenship under Commonwealth Act. No. 63 (CA 63) by rendering service to
an armed forces of a foreign country. Cruz then reacquired his citizenship through
repatriation
He ran for and elected as Representative of the 2nd District of Pangasinan in 1998.
Bengson (petitioner) was running for reelection
Petitioner contends the citizenship that was referred as a requisite does not include those
who acquired citizenship through other means aside from birth that is contrary to Cruz's
repatriation.
Issue: Whether respondent Cruz, a natural-born Filipino who became an American citizen, can
still be considered a natural-born Filipino upon his reacquisition of Philippine citizenship.
HELD: Yes. Naturalization is a mode for both acquisition and reacquisition of Philippine
citizenship.
Repatriation results in the recovery of the original nationality.
o a naturalized Filipino who lost his citizenship will be restored to its prior status as a
naturalized Filipino.
o Given that he was a natural-born citizen on the onset, he just reacquired his original
status
under R.A. No. 2630, which provides:
o Section 1. Any person who had lost his Philippine citizenship by rendering service to, or accepting
commission in, the Armed Forces of the United States, or after separation from the Armed Forces of
the United States, acquired United States citizenship, may reacquire Philippine citizenship by taking
an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and registering the same with Local
Civil Registry in the place where he resides or last resided in the Philippines. The said oath of
allegiance shall contain a renunciation of any other citizenship.
Since Cruz was not required to go through the process of naturalization--then he is
ultimately a natural born Filipino. Due to this, he is qualified to be a member of the House
of Representatives under the Constitution.

Aquino v. Commission on Elections (1995)

petitioner Agapito A. Aquino filed his Certificate of Candidacy for the position of Representative
for the new Second Legislative District of Makati City
He provided in his certificate that he has resided for 10 months in Makati.
Move Makati (a political party) filed a petition to disqualify Agapito A. Aquino on the
ground that the latter lacked the residence qualification
the elections were held and the petitioner, Agapito Aquino, garnered 38,547 votes against
another candidate, Agusto Syjuco, who obtained 35,910 votes.
his victory was suspended by COMELEC due to the case.
declared Aquino ineligible and thus disqualified
The petitioner claims that COMELEC lost its jurisdiction on May 8, 1995, election day, and that
the original jurisdiction is in the House of Representative Electoral Tribunal (HRET),
 Issue: Whether the COMELECs finding of non- compliance with the residency requirement of
one year against the petitioner is contrary to evidence and to applicable laws and jurisprudence.
HELD: No. NOT ONLY RESIDENCE BUT DOMICILE (a place where you return) OF CHOICE
OF CANDIDATE MUST BE PROVED.
constitutional provision that requires that a candidate must reside in the Philippines for a certain
time pertain to domicile.
COMELEC found the following pieces of evidence to prove his residence is not in Makati:
o he was a resident of San Jose, Concepcion, Tarlac for 52 years. His certificate indicated
that he was also a registered voter of the same district.
o His birth certificate places Concepcion,Tarlac
o 2 yr. Lease Agreement of a Condominium in Makati instead of buying one. (shows his
lack of intention to permanent residence)
COMELEC says that residence is an aspect required since it allows the voters to exclude those
who are not sensitive to the needs of the community and prevents those who only want to take
advantage of circumstances in a certain locality.

Romualdez-Marcos v. COMELEC (1995)

Petitioner Imelda Romualdez filed Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for the Representative of the
1st District of Leyte
Stated she lived in Leyte for 7 months.
Montejo candidate of the same position contends that Mrs. Marcos lacked the one-year
residency
Mrs. Marcos amended CoC, she now claims that she has always maintained Tacloban as her
domicile of residence.
Montejos petition for disqualification meritorious, and found Marcos corrected certificate of
candidacy void, and her original certificate cancelled.
When election came, Marcos found out that she won by a landslide in the said elections and
prayed for her proclamation.
Issue: Whether petitioner was a resident, for election purposes, of the First District of Leyte for
a period of one year at the time of the May 9, 1995 elections.
HELD: YES.
Article 50 of the Civil Code states: Domicile - a permanent home or a place to which one returns
to--it includes the elements of residing in a fixed place.
o a person can only have one domicile.
Residency - the physical presence of a person in a given area or country.
o residence involves the intent to leave for purposes of pleasure, business or health
HOWEVER this court believes that that what the places Petitioner mentioned are various
places of residence and NOT domicile.
It may be true that during the past 4 decades she has different residences but the matter
of fact is that she never abandoned Tacloban as her domicile of origin.
proved by when she celebrated different milestones in Tacloban even if her family was in
Manila.
She merely gained a new home but not a domicile of origin.
Petitioner made an honest mistake when she filed her CoC. This mistake can be attributed to
the fact that the entry for residence is immediately followed by the entry for the number of years
and months in the residence where the candidate seeks to hold office immediately after the
elections.

Domino v. Commission on Elections (1999) - mere lease of house

 DOMINO filed his certificate of candidacy for the position of Representative of the Province of
Sarangani
Indicated that he had resided in the constituency where he seeks to be elected for one (1) year
and two (2) months immediately preceding the election.
Private respondents alleged that Domino was not a resident, much less a registered voter
of the province of Sarangani contrary to what is in his Certificate of Candidacy.
Contends that he has resided since 1997
Disqualified as candidate
However, DOMINO garnered the highest number of votes over his opponents for the position of
Congressman of the Province of Sarangani.
Issue: Whether petitioner herein has resided in the subject congressional district for at least one
(1) year immediately preceding the May 11, 1998 elections.
HELD: No.
The MTC of Quezon City exceeded its jurisdiction when it declared DOMINO a resident of
Sarangani
Records show that petitioners domicile of Origin is Condon, Ilocos Sur and that
sometime in 1991 he acquired a new domicile in Old Balara Quezon City as shown in his
Certificate of Candidacy of Quezon City.
Petitioner is now claiming that he abandoned his Quezon City
There must be a bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and
establishing a new one
There must be an animus manendi coupled with animus non reverendi.
Lease of Contract entered into in 1997 does not adequately support change of domicile.
It only conveys intention to reside but not to stay.
Also Dominos lack of intention is strengthened by the fact he is still a registered voter of Quezon
City.

Perez v. Commission on Elections (1999) - registration in another district

respondent filed his certificate of candidacy for the Representative of the Third District of
Cagayan.
petitioner as a voter and citizen, filed in the COMELEC a petition for the disqualification of
Aguinaldo on the ground that he had not fulfilled the requirement of being a resident of the district
for at least 1 year
Petitioner presented evidence of respondents certificate of candidacy for governor in the
rd
previous year in the Municipality of Gattaran (1st district outside 3 district of Cagayan)
CoC states also that he is a resident of said place.
Respondent, on the other hand, claims that he has apartments in the 3rd district in order to hide
his mistress since his former marriage was still subsisting.
Affidavits from lessors were presented, all of which show that he has been a resident of
Tugegarao (3rd district) Cagayan for at least one year
COMELEC decided the respondent was qualified to run
Petitioner filed a MR but was denied
this petition contends that COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion holding that
respondent had been a resident of Tugegarao since 1990.
Issue: Whether respondent has the residency qualification to run for HOR.
HELD: Yes.
respondent showed substantial evidence that he fulfilled the residence requirement.
The fact that a person is a registered voter in another district does not prove that he is not
domiciled in another district.
 COMELEC found that private respondent changed his residence from Gattaran to Tuguegarao
o the contract of lease of the residential apartment
o marriage certificate registered in Tugegarao
o certificate of live birth of their daughter was also registered in Tugegarao and;
o various letters between the respondent and his wife dating one year before the elections.
The fact that respondent voted in Gattaran is not proof of his domicile.
Considering the purpose of the residency requirement, to ensure that the person elected is
familiar with the needs and problems of his constituency, there can be no doubt that the
respondent is qualified, having been governor of Cagayan for ten years immediately before his
election as Representative of the Third District.

Fernandez v. HRET (2009)

When Fernandez filed for candidacy as Representative of the First District of Laguna, he
indicated that his residence was at Sta. Rosa, Laguna.
Respondent Jesus Vicente filed a Petition to deny due course to cancel Certificate of Candidacy
and Petition for Disqualification
The petition was denied for lack of merit. Petitioner Fernandez was proclaimed as the
duly elected Representative of the First District of Laguna.
Jesus Vicente filed a petition for quo warranto before the HRET, praying that petitioner be
declared ineligible to hold office as member of the House of Representatives and proclamation
be annulled and declared null and void.
The respondents ground for the petition was that Fernandez lacked the required one-year
residency requirement
The HRET ruled in favor of Vicente
Fernandezs alleged residence in Sta. Rosa was only leased therefore they said it was not
actually a permanent residence
Issues: (1) Whether HRET has jurisdiction over the case (2)Whether HRET acted with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack of or in excess of jurisdiction
HELD: (1) Yes. The HRET is the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns,
and qualifications of their respective members. Therefore, HRET has jurisdiction over the
case.
(2) Yes. The interpretation of HRET of the residency requirement had been too much.
law does not require a person to be at home all the time in order to fulfill the residency
requirement.
also alright that Fernandez would have other houses/ homes and it is even alright for the
petitioner to conduct business or receive visitors in his other houses.
important in matters like this would be the principle of animus revertendi or the intention to return.
It was seen that Fernandez has the intention to return to his residence in Sta. Rosa even though
the house was only leased because he has business interests in Sta. Rosa which is comprised
of restaurants and a residential property for lease
children of Fernandez are also studying in schools located in Sta. Rosa.