Title: Defensor Santiago V.
COMELEC  This omission indicates that the matter of people’s initiative to
Promulgation: 1997
Petitioner: Miriam Defensor Santiago
Respondent: COMELEC
Relevant Provision/s:
Sec 32, Article VI
Section 32. The Congress shall, as early as possible, provide for a
system of initiative and referendum, and the exceptions therefrom,
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 after the registration of a petition therefor signed by
at least 10 per centum of the total number of registered voters, of
which every legislative district must be represented by at least 3 per
centum of the registered voters.
Facts:
 6 Dec 1996- Atty. Jesus S. Delfin filed with COMELEC a
“Petition to Amend the Constitution to Lift Term Limits of
elective Officials by People’s Initiative”
 The COMELEC then, upon its approval, a.) set the time and
dates for signature gathering all over the country, b.) caused
the necessary publication of the said petition in papers of
general circulation, and c.) instructed local election registrars to
assist petitioners and volunteers in establishing signing
stations.
 18 Dec 1996- Santiago filed a special civil action for
prohibition against the Delfin Petition.
 Santiago argues that
1.) The constitutional provision on people’s initiative to amend the
constitution can only be implemented by law to be passed by Congress
and no such law has yet been passed by Congress,
2.) RA 6735 indeed provides for three systems of initiative
namely, initiative on the Constitution, on statues and on local
legislation.
 The two latter forms of initiative were specifically provided for
in Subtitles II and III thereof but no provisions were
specifically made for initiatives on the Constitution.
amend the Constitution was left to some future law – as
pointed out by former Senator Arturo Tolentino.
Issues:
Whether or not RA 6735 was intended to include initiative on
amendments to the constitution and if so whether the act, as worded,
adequately covers such initiative.
Held/Ratio:
 RA 6735 is intended to include the system of initiative on
amendments to the constitution but is unfortunately inadequate
to cover that system.
 Sec 2 of Article 17 of the Constitution provides: “Amendments
to this constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the
people through initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per
centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every
legislative district must be represented by at least there per
centum of the registered voters therein. . . The Congress shall
provide for the implementation of the exercise of this right”
 This provision is obviously not self-executory as it needs an
enabling law to be passed by Congress. Joaquin Bernas, a
member of the 1986 Con-Con stated “without implementing
legislation Section 2, Art 17 cannot operate.
 Thus, although this mode of amending the constitution is a
mode of amendment which bypasses Congressional action in
the last analysis is still dependent on Congressional action.”
 Bluntly stated, the right of the people to directly propose
amendments to the Constitution through the system of initiative
would remain entombed in the cold niche of the constitution
until Congress provides for its implementation.
 The people cannot exercise such right, though constitutionally
guaranteed, if Congress for whatever reason does not provide
for its implementation.