GARCIA Sept.

30, 1994

V.

COMELEC

FACTS: On May 24, 1993, petitioners filed a petition with the Sangg niang !ayan of Morong to ann l "a#$ansang %apasyahan !lg& 1', Serye 1993 whi(h in(l des the M ni(ipaloty of Morong as part of the S $i( Spe(ial )(ono#i( *one in a((ord with the +A ,o& -22-& The # ni(ipality did not ta.e any a(tion on the petition within 3' days after its s $#ission/ so, they resorted to their power of initiati0e nder the 1o(al 2o0ern#ent Code of 1991& They soli(ited the re3 ired n #$er of signat res to repeal the said resol tion& 4owe0er, the 5i(e Mayor, 4on& )dil$erto de 1eon, and the "residing Offi(e of the Sangg niang !ayan ng Morong wrote a letter dated 6 ne 11, 1993 to deny the petition for lo(al initiati0e and7or referend #& On 6 ly 8, 1993, the Co#ele( denied the petition for lo(al initiati0e $e(a se its s $9e(t is :#erely a resol tion and not an ordinan(e&; <SS=): w7n the "a#$ansang %apasyahan !lg& 1', Serye 1993 is the proper s $9e(t of an initiati0e> S $?iss e: w7n the de(ision of the Co#ele( to deny the petition $e set aside> 4)1@: The petition is granted and the de(ision of the Co#ele( on 6 ly 8, 1993 is ann lled and set aside& +=1<,2: The 19A- Constit tion installed $a(. the power to the people regarding legislation $e(a se of the e0ent in Fe$r ary 19A8& The new Constit tion $e(a#e :less tr sting of p $li( offi(ials&; Thro gh initiati0e, the people were gi0en the power to a#end the Constit tion nder Se(& 2 Art& 1- whi(h pro0ides :a#end#ents to this Constit tion #ay li.ewise $e dire(tly proposed $y the people thro gh initiati0e pon a petition of at least 12B of the total n #$er of registered 0oters, of whi(h e0ery legislati0e distri(t # st $e represented $y at least 3B of the registered 0oter therein&; The Co#ele( was also e#powered to enfor(e and ad#inister all laws and reg lations relati0e to the (ond (t of an initiati0e and referend #&

On A g& 4, 19A9, the Congress appro0ed +A ,o& 8-3C entitled :An A(t "ro0iding for a Syste# of <nitiati0e and +eferend # and Appropriating F nds Therefor&; D)S& Se(& 32 of Art& 8 pro0ides : the Congress shall pro0ide for a syste# of initiati0e and referend #, and the eE(eptions therefro#, where$y the people (an dire(tly propose and ena(t laws or appro0e or re9e(t any a(t or law or part thereof passed $y the Congress or lo(al legislati0e $ody& =nder Se(& 32FaG of +A ,o& 8-3C it pro0ided the 3 syste#s of initiati0e, na#ely: 1& <nitiati0e on the Constit tion H petition to a#end the Constit tion 2& <nitiati0e on stat tes H petition proposing to ena(t a national legislation 3& <nitiati0e on lo(al legislation H petition proposing to ena(t a regional, pro0in(ial, (ity, # ni(ipal, or $arangay law, resol tion or ordinan(e =nder its Se(&18FaG, it pro0ided the li#itations on lo(al initiati0es, whi(h is :the power of lo(al initiati0e shall not $e eEer(ised #ore than on(e a year&; ASTERN SHIPPING LINES, INC., vs. PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENTADMINISTRATION (POEA 1!! SCRA "33, G.R. N#. $!!33, O%t#&e' 1(, 19((Pet)t)#*e'+ )astern Shipping 1ines, <n(& Fa(ts: 5italiano Sa(o was Chief Offi(er of the M75 )astern "olaris when he was .illed in an a((identin To.yo, 6apan on Mar(h 1C, 19AC&4is widow s ed for da#ages nder )Ee( ti0e Order ,o& -9- and Me#orand # Cir( lar ,o& 2of the "O)A&The petitioner, as owner of the 0essel, arg ed that the (o#plaint was (ogniIa$le not $y the"O)A $ t $y the So(ial Se( rity Syste# and sho ld ha0e $een filed against the State F nd<ns ran(e&The "O)A ne0ertheless ass #ed 9 risdi(tion and after (onsidering the position papers of theparties r led in fa0o r of the (o#plainant&The petition is @<SM<SS)@, with (osts against the petitioner& The te#porary restraining orderdated @e(e#$er 1', 19A8 is here$y 1<FT)@& <t is so ordered& <ss e: 1& Jhether or not the "O)A had 9 risdi(tion o0er the (ase as the h s$and was not an o0erseaswor.er&2& Jhether or not the 0alidity

of Me#orand # Cir( lar ,o& 2 itself as 0iolati0e of the prin(ipleof non?delegation of legislati0e power&

legislat re to the delegate&Two Tests of 5alid @elegation of 1egislati0e "owerThere are two a((epted tests to deter#ine whether or not there is a 0alid delegation of legislati0epower, 0iI , the (o#pleteness test and the s ffi(ient standard test& =nder the first test, the law# st $e (o#plete in all its ter#s and (onditions when it lea0es the legislat re s (h that when itrea(hes the delegate the only thing he will ha0e to do is to enfor(e it& =nder the s ffi(ientstandard test, there # st $e ade3 ate g idelines or stations in the law to #ap o t the $o ndaries of the delegateLs a thority and pre0ent the delegation fro# r nning riot& !oth tests are intended to pre0ent a total transferen(e of legislati0e a thority to the delegate, whois not allowed to step into the shoes of the legislat re and eEer(ise a power essentially legislati0e&The delegation of legislati0e power has $e(o#e the r le and its non?delegation the eE(eption&

4eld: 1& Des& The "hilippine O0erseas )#ploy#ent Ad#inistration was (reated nder )Ee( ti0e Order,o& -9-, pro# lgated on May 1, 19A2, to pro#ote and #onitor the o0erseas e#ploy#ent of Filipinos and to prote(t their rights& <t repla(ed the ,ational Sea#en !oard (reated earlier nderArti(le 2' of the 1a$or Code in 19-4& =nder Se(tion 4FaG of the said eEe( ti0e order, the "O)Ais 0ested with Koriginal and eE(l si0e 9 risdi(tion o0er all (ases, in(l ding #oney (lai#s,in0ol0ing e#ployee?e#ployer relations arising o t of or $y 0irt e of any law or (ontra(tin0ol0ing Filipino (ontra(t wor.ers, in(l ding sea#en&K These (ases, a((ording to the 19AC+ les and +eg lations on O0er seas )#ploy#ent iss ed $y the "O)A, in(l de, :(lai#s for death,disa$ility and other $enefits; arising o t of s (h e#ploy#ent& The award of "1A','''&'' for death $enefits and "12,'''&'' for $ rial eEpenses was #ade $ythe "O)A p rs ant to its Me#orand # Cir( lar ,o& 2, whi(h $e(a#e effe(ti0e on Fe$r ary 1,19A4& This (ir( lar pres(ri$ed a standard (ontra(t to $e adopted $y $oth foreign and do#esti(shipping (o#panies in the hiring of Filipino sea#en for o0erseas e#ploy#ent&2& ,o& Me#orand # Cir( lar ,o& 2 is an ad#inistrati0e reg lation& The #odel (ontra(tpres(ri$ed there$y has $een applied in a signifi(ant n #$er of the (ases witho t (hallenge $y thee#ployer& The power of the "O)A Fand $efore it the ,ational Sea#en !oardG in re3 iring the#odel (ontra(t is not nli#ited as there is a s ffi(ient standard g iding the delegate in theeEer(ise of the said a thority& That standard is dis(o0era$le in the eEe( ti0e order itself whi(h, in(reating the "hilippine O0erseas )#ploy#ent Ad#inistration, #andated it to prote(t the rightsof o0erseas Filipino wor.ers to Kfair and e3 ita$le e#ploy#ent pra(ti(es&K2),)+A1 +=1): ,on?delegation of powers/ eE(eption<t is tr e that legislati0e dis(retion as to the s $stanti0e (ontents of the law (annot $e delegated&Jhat (an $e delegated is the dis(retion to deter#ine how the law #ay $e enfor(ed, not what thelaw shall $e& The as(ertain#ent of the latter s $9e(t is a prerogati0e of the legislat re& Thisprerogati0e (annot $e a$di(ated or s rrendered $y the

+ationale for @elegation of 1egislati0e "owerThe reason is the in(reasing (o#pleEity of the tas. of go0ern#ent and the growing ina$ility of the legislat re to (ope dire(tly with the #yriad pro$le#s de#anding its attention& The growth of so(iety has ra#ified its a(ti0ities and (reated pe( liar and sophisti(ated pro$le#s that thelegislat re (annot $e eEpe(ted to reasona$ly (o#prehend& Spe(ialiIation e0en in legislation has$e(o#e ne(essary& Too #any of the pro$le#s attendant pon present?day nderta.ings, thelegislat re #ay not ha0e the (o#peten(e to pro0ide the re3 ired dire(t and effi(a(io s, not tosay, spe(ifi( sol tions& These sol tions #ay, howe0er, $e eEpe(ted fro# its delegates, who ares pposed to $e eEperts in the parti( lar fields&"ower of S $ordinate 1egislationThe reasons gi0en a$o0e for the delegation of legislati0e powers in general are parti( larlyappli(a$le to ad#inistrati0e $odies& Jith the proliferation of spe(ialiIed a(ti0ities and theirattendant pe( liar pro$le#s, the national legislat re has fo nd it #ore and #ore ne(essary toentr st to ad#inistrati0e agen(ies the a thority to iss e r les to (arry o t the general pro0isions of the stat te& This is (alled the :power of s $ordinate legislation&;

Jith this power, ad#inistrati0e $odies #ay i#ple#ent the $road poli(ies laid down in stat te $y :filling in; the details whi(h the Congress #ay not ha0e the opport nity or (o#peten(e to pro0ide& Me#orand # Cir( lar ,o& 2 is one s (h ad#inistrati0e reg lation&Ad#inistrati0e agen(ies are 0ested with two $asi( powers, the 3 asi?legislati0e and 3 asi? 9 di(ial& The first ena$les the# to pro# lgate i#ple#enting r les and reg lations, and these(ond ena$les the# to interpret and apply s (h reg lations

G.R. N#. (,(49 A-.-st ,, 19(9CE/0 O1YGEN 2 ACETYLENE CO., INC. (COACO petitioner,0s& S)C+)TA+D F+A,%1<, M& @+<1O, OF T4) @)"A+TM),T OF 1A!O+ A,@)M"1ODM),T, ASS<STA,T +)2<O,A1 @<+)CTO+ CA,@<@O C=M!A OF T4)@)"A+TM),T OF 1A!O+ A,@ )M"1ODM),T, +)2<O,A1 OFF<C) ,O& - A,@ C)!=OMD2),?AC)TD1),) N C),T+A1 5<SADAS )M"1OD))S ASSOC<AT<O, FCOAC5)AG respondents& & 2A,CADCO, 6&/ FACTS:"etitioner and the nion of its ran. and file e#ployees, Ce$ OEygen, A(etylene and Central5isayas )#ployees Asso(iation FCOA5)AG entered into a (olle(ti0e $argaining agree#entFC!AG (o0ering the years 19A8 to 19AA&1GFor the first year whi(h will $e paid on 6an ary 14, 19A8 O "2'' to ea(h (o0erede#ployee&2GFor the se(ond year whi(h will $e paid on 6an ary 18, 19A-?" 2'' to ea(h (o0erede#ployee&3G3G For the third year whi(h will $e paid on 6an ary 18, 19AA O "3'' to ea(h (o0erede#ployee&On @e(e#$er 14, 19A-, +ep $li( A(t ,o& 884' was passed in(reasing the #ini# # wage, ins #, Se(tion A of the i#ple#enting r les prohi$its the e#ployer fro# (rediting anni0ersarywage in(reases negotiated nder a (olle(ti0e $argaining agree#ent against s (h wagein(reases #andated $y +ep $li( A(t ,o& 884'&On Fe$r ary 22, 19AA, a 1a$or and )#ploy#ent @e0elop#ent Offi(er, p rs ant to <nspe(tionA thority ,o& 'CA?AA, (o##en(ed a ro tine inspe(tion of petitionerPs esta$lish#ent& =pon(o#pletion of the

inspe(tion on Mar(h 1', 19AA, and $ased on payrolls and other re(ords, hefo nd that petitioner (o##itted 0iolations of the law as follows:1& =nder pay#ent of !asi( Jage per +&A& ,o& 884' (o0ering the period of twoF2G #onths representing 2'A e#ployees who are not re(ei0ing wages a$o0e"1''7day prior to the effe(ti0ity of +&A& ,o& 884' in the aggregate a#o nt of )<24TD T4+)) T4O=SA,@ A,@ TJO 4=,@+)@ ")SOS F"A3,2''&''G/ and2& =nder pay#ent of 13th #onth pay for the year 19A-, representing 2'Ae#ployees who are not re(ei0ing wages a$o0e " 1''7day prior to the effe(ti0ityof +&A& ,o& 884' in the aggregate a#o nt of FO+TD )<24T T4O=SA,@ A,@FO+TD )<24T ")SOS F"4A,'4A&''G&<SS=):The prin(ipal iss e raised in this petition is whether or not an <#ple#enting Order of theSe(retary of 1a$or and )#ploy#ent F@O1)G (an pro0ide for a prohi$ition not (onte#plated $ythe law it see.s to i#ple#ent&4)1@: 28'

As to the iss e of the 0alidity of Se(tion A of the r les i#ple#enting +ep $li( A(t ,o& 884',whi(h prohi$its the e#ployer fro# (rediting the anni0ersary wage in(reases pro0ided in(olle(ti0e $argaining agree#ents, it is a f nda#ental r le that i#ple#enting r les (annot add or detra(t fro# the pro0isions of law it is designed to i#ple#ent& The pro0isions of +ep $li( A(t,o& 884', do not prohi$it the (rediting of C!A anni0ersary wage in(reases for p rposes of (o#plian(e with +ep $li( A(t ,o& 884'& The i#ple#enting r les (annot pro0ide for s (h aprohi$ition not (onte#plated $y the law& Ad#inistrati0e reg lations adopted nder legislati0ea thority $y a parti( lar depart#ent # st $e in har#ony with the pro0isions of the law, andsho ld $e for the sole p rpose of (arrying into effe(t its general pro0isions& The law itself (annot$e eEpanded $y s (h reg lations& An ad#inistrati0e agen(y (annot a#end an a(t of Congress& 3 Th s petitionerPs (ontention that the salary in(reases granted $y it p rs ant to the eEistingC!A in(l ding anni0ersary wage in(reases sho ld $e (onsidered in deter#ining (o#plian(ewith the wage in(rease #andated $y +ep $li( A(t ,o& 884', is (orre(t& 4owe0er, the a#o ntthat sho ld only $e (redited to petitioner is the wage in(rease for 19A- nder the C!A when thelaw too. effe(t& The wage in(rease for 19A8 had already a((r ed in fa0or

of the e#ployeese0en $efore the said law was ena(ted&J4)+)FO+), the petition is here$y 2+A,T)@& Se(tion A of the r les i#ple#enting +ep $li(884', is here$y de(lared n ll and 0oid in so far as it eE(l des the anni0ersary wage in(reasesnegotiated nder (olle(ti0e $argaining agree#ents fro# $eing (redited to the wage in(reasepro0ided for nder +ep $li( A(t ,o& 844'& This de(ision is i##ediately eEe( tory& The petitions assail the (onstit tionality of 0ario s pro0isions of +A A1A' entitiled the :@ownstrea# Oil <nd stry @ereg lation A(t of 1998&; =nder the dereg lated en0iron#ent, any person or entity #ay i#port or p r(hase any 3 antity of (r de oil and petrole # prod (ts fro# a foreign or do#esti( so r(e, lease or own and operate refineries and other downstrea# oil fa(ilities and #ar.et s (h (r de oil or se the sa#e for his own re3 ire#ent, s $9e(t only to #onitoring $y the @epart#ent of )nergy&

Constit tion, ha0e the inherent a thority to deter#ine whether a stat te ena(ted $y the legislat re trans(ends the li#it i#posed $y the f nda#ental law& Jhere a stat te 0iolates the Constit tion, it is not only the right $ t the d ty of the 9 di(iary to de(lare s (h a(t as n(onstit tional and 0oid&

The effort of respondents to 3 estion the legal standing of petitioners also failed& The Co rt has $rightlined its li$eral stan(e on a petitionerLs lo( s standi where the petitioner is a$le to (raft an iss e of trans(endental signifi(an(e to the people& <n the (ase, petitioners pose iss es whi(h are signifi(ant to the people and whi(h deser0e the Co rtLs forthright resol tion&

T3t34 vs. Se%'et3'5 #6 E*e'.5 <ss es: F1G Jhether or not the petitions raise a 9 sti(ia$le (ontro0ersy F2G Jhether or not the petitioners ha0e the standing to assail the 0alidity of the law F3G Jhether or not Se(& CF$G of +A A1A' 0iolates the one title one s $9e(t re3 ire#ent of the Constit tion F4G Jhether or not Se(& 1C of +A A1A' 0iolates the (onstit tional prohi$ition on nd e delegation of power FCG Jhether or not +A A1A' 0iolates the (onstit tional prohi$ition against #onopolies, (o#$inations in restraint of trade and nfair (o#petition

<t is also (ontended that Se(& CF$G of +A A1A' on tariff differential 0iolates the pro0ision of the Constit tion re3 iring e0ery law to ha0e only one s $9e(t whi(h sho ld $e eEpressed in its title& The Co rt did not (on( r with this (ontention& The title need not #irror, f lly indeE or (atalog e all (ontents and #in te details of a law& A law ha0ing a single general s $9e(t indi(ated in the title #ay (ontain any n #$er of pro0isions, no #atter how di0erse they #ay $e, so long as they are not in(onsistent with or foreign to the general s $9e(t, and #ay $e (onsidered in f rtheran(e of s (h s $9e(t $y pro0iding for the #ethod and #eans of (arrying o t the general s $9e(t& The Co rt held that Se(& C pro0iding for tariff differential is ger#ane to the s $9e(t of +A A1A' whi(h is the dereg lation of the downstrea# oil ind stry&

4eld: As to the first iss e, 9 di(ial power in(l des not only the d ty of the (o rts to settle a(t al (ontro0ersies in0ol0ing rights whi(h are legally de#anda$le and enfor(ea$le, $ t also the d ty to deter#ine whether or not there has $een gra0e a$ se of dis(retion a#o nting to la(. or eE(ess of 9 risdi(tion on the part of any $ran(h or instr #entality of the go0ern#ent& The (o rts, as g ardians of the

"etitioners also assail Se(& 1C of +A A1A' whi(h fiEes the ti#e fra#e for the f ll dereg lation of the downstrea# oil ind stry for $eing 0iolati0e of the (onstit tional prohi$ition on nd e delegation of power& There are two a((epted tests to deter#ine whether or not there is a 0alid delegation of legislati0e power: the (o#pleteness test and the s ffi(ient standard test& =nder the first test, the law # st $e (o#plete in all its ter#s and (onditions when it lea0es the legislati0e s (h that when it rea(hes the delegate the only thing he will ha0e to do is to enfor(e it& =nder the s ffi(ient standard test, there # st $e ade3 ate g idelines or li#itations in the law to #ap o t the $o ndaries of the delegateLs a thority and pre0ent the delegation fro# r nning riot& Se(tion 1C (an h rdle $oth the (o#pleteness

test and the s ffi(ient standard test& Congress eEpressly pro0ided in +A A1A' that f ll dereg lation will start at the end of Mar(h 199-, regardless of the o(( rren(e of any e0ent& F ll dereg lation at the end of Mar(h 199- is #andatory and the )Ee( ti0e has no dis(retion to postpone it for any p rported reason& Th s, the law is (o#plete on the 3 estion of the final date of f ll dereg lation& The dis(retion gi0en to the "resident is to ad0an(e the date of f ll dereg lation $efore the end of Mar(h 199-& Se(tion 1C lays down the standard to g ide the 9 dg#ent of the "resident& 4e is to ti#e it as far as pra(ti(a$le when the pri(es of (r de oil and petrole # prod (ts in the world #ar.et are de(lining and when the eE(hange rate of the peso in relation to the =S dollar is sta$le&

"etitioners also arg ed that so#e pro0isions of +A A1A' 0iolate Se(& 19, Art& M<< of the Constit tion& Se(tion 19, Art& M<< of the Constit tion espo ses (o#petition& The desira$ility of (o#petition is the reason for the prohi$ition against restraint of trade, the reason for the interdi(tion of nfair (o#petition, and the reason for reg lation of n#itigated #onopolies& Co#petition is th s the nderlying prin(iple of Se(& 19, Art& M<< of the Constit tion whi(h (annot $e 0iolated $y +A A1A'& "etron, Shell and CalteE stand as the only #a9or leag e players in the oil #ar.et& As the do#inant players, they $oast of eEisting refineries of 0ario s (apa(ities& The tariff differential of 4B on i#ported (r de oil and refined petrole # prod (ts therefore wor.s to their i##ense $enefit& <t ere(ts a high $arrier to the entry of new players& ,ew players that intend to e3 aliIe the #ar.et power of "etron, Shell and CalteE $y $ ilding refineries of their own will ha0e to spend $illions of pesos& Those who will not $ ild refineries $ t (o#pete with the# will s ffer the h ge disad0antage of in(reasing their prod (t (ost $y 4B& They will $e (o#peting on an ne0en field& The pro0ision on in0entory widens the $alan(e of ad0antage of "etron, Shell and CalteE against prospe(ti0e new players& "etron, Shell and CalteE (an easily (o#ply with the in0entory re3 ire#ent of +A A1A' in 0iew of their eEisting storage fa(ilities& "rospe(ti0e (o#petitors again will find (o#plian(e with this re3 ire#ent diffi( lt as it will entail a prohi$iti0e (ost&

The general r le is that where part of a stat te is 0oid as rep gnant to the Constit tion, while another part is 0alid, the 0alid portion, if separa$le fro# the in0alid, #ay stand and $e enfor(ed& The eE(eption to the general r le is that when the parts of a stat te are so # t ally dependent and (onne(ted, as (onditions, (onsiderations, ind (e#ents or (o#pensations for ea(h other, as to warrant a $elief that the legislat re intended the# as a whole, the n llity of one part will 0itiate the rest& +A A1A' (ontains a separa$ility (la se& The separa$ility (la se notwithstanding, the Co rt held that the offending pro0isions of +A A1A' so per#eate its essen(e that the entire law has to $e str (. down& The pro0isions on tariff differential, in0entory and predatory pri(ing are a#ong the prin(ipal props of +A A1A'& Congress (o ld not ha0e reg lated the downstrea# oil ind stry witho t these pro0isions& =nfort nately, (ontrary to their intent, these pro0isions on tariff differential, in0entory and predatory pri(ing inhi$it fair (o#petition, en(o rage #onopolisti( power and interfere with the free intera(tion of #ar.et for(es&

S#%)37 8-st)%e S#%)et5 vs D3*.e'#-s D'-.s /#3'4 3*4 P9)7)pp)*e D'-. E*6#'%e:e*t A.e*%5 NOTE+ This is (onsolidated with 1aserna 0s @@! and "@)A F G.R. N#. 1"(!33 G and "i#entel 0s COM)1)C F G.R. N#. 1!1!"( G <n 2''2, +A 918C or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 was i#ple#ented& Se( 38 thereof re3 ires #andatory dr g testing of (andidates for p $li( offi(e, st dents of se(ondary and tertiary s(hools, offi(ers and e#ployees of p $li( and pri0ate offi(es, and persons (harged $efore the prose( torLs offi(e with (ertain offenses& On 23 @e( 2''3, COM)1)C iss ed +esol tion ,o& 84A8, pres(ri$ing the r les and reg lations on the #andatory dr g testing of (andidates for p $li( offi(e in (onne(tion with the May 1', 2''4 syn(hroniIed national and lo(al ele(tions& "i#entel, 6r&, a senator and a (andidate for re? ele(tion in the May ele(tions, filed a "etition for Certiorari and "rohi$ition nder + le 8C& <n it, he see.s F1G to n llify Se(& 38FgG of +A 918C

The #ost i#portant 3 estion is whether the offending pro0isions (an $e indi0id ally str (. down witho t in0alidating the entire +A A1A'&

and COM)1)C +esol tion ,o& 84A8 dated @e(e#$er 23, 2''3 for $eing n(onstit tional in that they i#pose a 3 alifi(ation for (andidates for senators in addition to those already pro0ided for in the 19A- Constit tion/ and F2G to en9oin the COM)1)C fro# i#ple#enting +esol tion ,o& 84A8& A((ording to "i#entel, the Constit tion only pres(ri$es a #aEi# # of fi0e FCG 3 alifi(ations for one to $e a (andidate for, ele(ted to, and $e a #e#$er of the Senate& 4e says that $oth the Congress and COM)1)C, $y re3 iring, 0ia +A 918C and +esol tion ,o& 84A8, a senatorial aspirant, a#ong other (andidates, to ndergo a #andatory dr g test, (reate an additional 3 alifi(ation that all (andidates for senator # st first $e (ertified as dr g free& 4e adds that there is no pro0ision in the Constit tion a thoriIing the Congress or COM)1)C to eEpand the 3 alifi(ation re3 ire#ents of (andidates for senator& ISS0E+ Jhether or not Se( 38 of +A 918C is an a#end#ent to the Constit tion on the 3 alifi(ations of Senators& HELD+ "i#entelLs (ontention is 0alid& A((ordingly, Se(& 38 of +A 918C is n(onstit tional& <t is $asi( that if a law or an ad#inistrati0e r le 0iolates any nor# of the Constit tion, that iss an(e is n ll and 0oid and has no effe(t& The Constit tion is the $asi( law to whi(h all laws # st (onfor#/ no a(t shall $e 0alid if it (onfli(ts with the Constit tion& <n the dis(harge of their defined f n(tions, the three depart#ents of go0ern#ent ha0e no (hoi(e $ t to yield o$edien(e to the (o##ands of the Constit tion& Jhate0er li#its it i#poses # st $e o$ser0ed& The pro0ision :QnRo person ele(ted to any p $li( offi(e shall enter pon the d ties of his offi(e ntil he has ndergone #andatory dr g test&; <s not tena$le as it enlarges the 3 alifi(ations& COM)1)C (annot, in the g ise of enfor(ing and ad#inistering ele(tion laws or pro# lgating r les and reg lations to i#ple#ent Se(& 38, 0alidly i#pose 3 alifi(ations on (andidates for senator in addition to what the Constit tion pres(ri$es& <f Congress (annot re3 ire a (andidate for senator to #eet s (h additional 3 alifi(ation, the COM)1)C, to $e s re, is also witho t s (h power& The right of a (itiIen in the de#o(rati( pro(ess of ele(tion sho ld not $e defeated $y nwarranted i#positions of re3 ire#ent not otherwise spe(ified in the Constit tion& /ANAT v. COMELEC GR N#s. 1$9,$1 2 1$9,9", ,1 Ap')7 ,009 C3'p)#, 8.

;3%ts+ COMELEC 3pp7)e4 t9e ;e4e'3t)#* P3't5 v. COMELEC

Vete'3*s

for# la pon the (o#pletion of the (an0ass and party?list res lts, there$y pro(lai#ing 1C party?lists to ha0e o$tained 21 seats in Congress& !arangay Asso(iation for ,ational Ad0an(e#ent and Transparen(y F!A,ATG filed a petition to pro(lai# the f ll n #$er of party? listrepresentati0es Fall CC seats ha0e to $e pro(lai#edG pro0ided $y the Constit tion $efore the COM)1)C en $an(&The COM)1)C denied the said petition, stating that it had already $e(o#e #oot and a(ade#i(&<ss es and + ling:1&J7, the three?seat li#it pro0ided in Se(tion 11F$G of +A -941 is (onstit tional&D)S& The three?seat (ap, as a li#itation to the n #$er of seats that a 3 alified party?list organiIation #ay o(( py,re#ains a 0alid stat tory de0i(e that pre0ents any party fro# do#inating the party?list ele(tions&2&J7, the 2B threshold and 3 alifier 0otes pres(ri$ed in Se(tion 11F$G of +A -941 is (onstit tional& ,O& <n (o#p ting the allo(ation of additional seats, the (ontin ed operation of the 2B threshold for the distri$ tionof the additional seats as fo nd in the se(ond (la se of Se(tion 11F$G of +A -941 is n(onstit tional& The Co rtfinds that the 2B threshold #a.es it #athe#ati(ally i#possi$le to a(hie0e the #aEi# # n #$er of a0aila$le partylist seats when the n #$er of a0aila$le party list seats eE(eeds C'& The (ontin ed operation of the 2B threshold inthe distri$ tion of the additional seats fr strates the attain#ent of the per#issi0e (eiling that 2'B of the #e#$ers of the 4o se of +epresentati0es shall (onsist of party?list representati0es&The Co rt stri.es down the 2B threshold only in relation to the distri$ tion of the additional seats as fo nd in these(ond (la se of Se(tion 11F$G of +A -941& 1 The 2B threshold presents an nwarranted o$sta(le to the f lli#ple#entation of Se(tion CF2G, Arti(le 5< of the Constit tion and pre0ents the attain#ent of :the $roadest possi$lerepresentation of party, se(toral or gro p interests in the 4o se of +epresentati0es&3&4ow shall the party?list representati0es $e allo(ated><n deter#ining the allo(ation of seats for party?list representati0es nder Se(tion 11 of +A -941, the following pro(ed re shall $e o$ser0ed: F1G The parties, organiIations, and (oalitions shall $e ran.ed fro# the highest to the lowest $ased on then #$er of 0otes they garnered d ring

the ele(tions&F2GThe parties, organiIations, and (oalitions re(ei0ing at least 2B of the total 0otes (ast for the party?listsyste# shall $e entitled to one g aranteed seat ea(h&F3GThose garnering s ffi(ient n #$er of 0otes, a((ording to the ran.ing in paragraph 1, shall $e entitled toadditional seats in proportion to their total n #$er of 0otes ntil all the additional seats are allo(ated&F4G)a(h party, organiIation, or (oalition shall $e entitled to not #ore than 3 seats&<n (o#p ting the additional seats, the g aranteed seats shall no longer $e in(l ded $e(a se they ha0e already $eenallo(ated, at one seat ea(h, to e0ery two?per(enter& Th s, the re#aining a0aila$le seats for allo(ation as :additionalseats; are the #aEi# # seats reser0ed nder the "arty 1ist Syste# less the g aranteed seats& Fra(tional seats aredisregarded in the a$sen(e of a pro0ision in +A -941 allowing for a ro nding off of fra(tional seats& 4&@oes the Constit tion prohi$it the #a9or politi(al parties fro# parti(ipating in the party?list ele(tions> <f not, (an the #a9or politi(al parties $e $arred fro# parti(ipating in the party?list ele(tions> 1 Se(tion 11& , #$er of "arty?1ist +epresentati0es& <n deter#ining the allo(ation of seats for the se(ond 0ote, the following pro(ed re shall $eo$ser0ed:FaGThe parties, organiIations, and (oalitions shall $e ran.ed fro# the highest to thelowest $ased on the n #$er of 0otes they garnered d ring the ele(tions&F$GThe parties, organiIations, and (oalitions re(ei0ing at least 2B of the total 0otes (astfor the party?list syste# shall $e entitled to one seat ea(h: "ro0ided, that thosegarnering #ore than 2B of the 0otes shall $e entitled to additional seats inproportion to their total n #$er of 0otes: "ro0ided, finally, that ea(h party,organiIation, or (oalition shall $e entitled to not #ore than three seats&

:party; that parti(ipates in party?list ele(tions as either :a politi(al party or a se(toral party,; +A -941 also (learly intended that #a9or politi(al parties will parti(ipate in the party?list ele(tions& )E(l ding the #a9or politi(al parties in party?list ele(tions is #anifestly against the Constit tion,the intent of the Constit tional Co##ission, and +A -941& F rther#ore, nder Se(tion 9 of +A -941, it is notne(essary that the party?list organiIationLs no#inee :wallow in po0erty, destit tion, and infir#ity; as there is nofinan(ial stat s re3 ired in law& <t is eno gh that the no#inee of the se(toral party7organiIation7(oalition $elongs tothe #arginaliIed and nderrepresented se(tors& 4owe0er, $y a 0ote of A?-, the Co rt de(ided to (ontin e the r ling in 5eterans disallowing #a9or politi(al parties fro# parti(ipating in the party?list ele(tions, dire(tly or indire(tly& A((ording to Chief 6 sti(e " noLs dissent, the party?list representati0es are no #at(h to o r traditional politi(al parties in the politi(al arena/ and that if #a9or politi(al parties are allowed to parti(ipate in the party?list syste# ele(toral pro(ess, the 0oi(es of the #arginaliIed wo ld $e s rely s ffo(ated, and that the de#o(rati( spirit of the Constit tion wo ld $e $etrayed& 4e (ited the 2''1 party?list ele(tions where the #a9or politi(al parties fig red in the disproportionate distri$ tion of 0otes& A 6 sti(es(on( rred& Additional ,ote: 6 sti(e ,a(h ra (on( rs with 6 sti(e Carpio and f rther adds that the 2B threshold 0ote re3 ired for entitle#ent $y a politi(al party?list gro p to a seat in the 4+ in +A -941 is n(onstit tional $e(a se, a((ording to hi#, therewill ne0er $e a sit ation where the n #$er of party?list representati0es will eE(eed C', regardless of the n #$er of distri(t representati0es& 4e then s $#its the standard of :proportional representation; and the adoption of a grad ally regressi0e threshold 0ote re3 ire#ent, in0ersely proportional to the in(rease in the n #$er of party?list seats& 4e proposes this new for# la for the threshold:1''B Ftotal n #$er of 0otes (ast for party? listG???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? S1&A1ABCC party?list seats And that the #ini# # 0ote re3 ire#ent sho ld grad ally lessen as the n #$er of party?list seats in(reases& @o(trines: A "hilippine?style party?list ele(tion has at least fo r in0iola$le para#eters: 1& 2'B allo(ation

,O& "oliti(al parties, parti( larly #inority politi(al parties, are not prohi$ited to parti(ipate in the party list ele(tionif they (an pro0e that they are also organiIed along se(toral lines& ,either the Constit tion nor +A -941 prohi$its #a9or politi(al parties fro# parti(ipating in party?list ele(tions thro gh their se(toral wings& <n fa(t, the #e#$ers of the Constit tional Co##ission 0oted down any per#anent se(toral seats, and in the alternati0e the reser0ation of the party?list syste# to the se(toral gro ps& <n defining a

& The (o#$ined n #$er of all party?list (ongress#en shall not eE(eed 2'B of the

total#e#$ership of the 4o se of +epresentati0es, in(l ding those ele(ted nder the party list/ 2& 2B threshold & Only those parties garnering a #ini# # of 2B of the total 0alid 0otes (ast for the party? listsyste# are 3 alified to ha0e a seat in the 4o se of +epresentati0es/ 3& Three? seat li#it & )a(h 3 alified party, regardless of the n #$er of 0otes it a(t ally o$tained, is entitled to a#aEi# # of three seats/ that is, one 3 alifying and two additional seats/ 4& "roportional representation & The additional seats whi(h a 3 alified party is entitled to shall $e (o#p ted in proportion to their total n #$er of 0otes&<n de(laring the 2B threshold n(onstit tional, the Co rt does not li#it the allo(ation of additional seats to the two? per(enters& The per(entage of 0otes garnered $y ea(h party?list (andidate is arri0ed at $y di0iding the n #$er of 0otes garnered $y ea(h party $y the total n #$er of 0otes (ast for party?list (andidates& There are two steps in these(ond ro nd of seat allo(ation& First, the per(entage is # ltiplied $y the re#aining a0aila$le seats Fthe differen(e $etween the #aEi# # seats reser0ed nder the "arty?1ist Syste# and the g aranteed seats of the two? per(entersG&The whole integer of the prod (t of the per(entage and of the re#aining a0aila$le seats (orresponds to a partyLsshare in the re#aining a0aila$le seats& Se(ond, one party? list seat is assigned to ea(h of the parties neEt in ran. ntilall a0aila$le seats are (o#pletely distri$ ted& Finally, the three?seat (ap is applied to deter#ine the n #$er of seatsea(h 3 alified party?list (andidate is entitled&

and si#ply to gi0e the# a dire(t 0oi(e in Congress and in the larger affairs of the State&Ti#e (hanges and the laws (hange with it& H 6 sti(e ,a(h ra /3.3&-5# v C#:e7e% <n 2''8, +A 93-1 was pro# lgated $y Congress& <t was entitled :An A(t "ro0iding for the Apportion#ent of the 1one 1egislati0e @istri(t of the City of Cagayan @e Oro&; This was proposed $y +ep& 6ara la fro# Cagayan de Oro& <t in(reased Cagayan de OroLs legislati0e distri(t fro# one to two& <n the neEt ele(tion, Cagayan de OroLs 0oters wo ld $e (lassified as $elonging to either the first or the se(ond distri(t, depending on their pla(e of residen(e& The (onstit ents of ea(h distri(t wo ld ele(t their own representati0e to Congress as well as eight #e#$ers of the Sangg niang "angl ngsod& On 13 Mar(h 2''-, the COM)1)C en !an( pro# lgated +esol tion ,o& -A3i#ple#enting +&A& ,o& 93-1& !aga$ yo filed the present petition against the COM)1)C on Mar(h 2-, 2''- as.ing for the n llifi(ation of +&A& ,o& 93-1 and +esol tion ,o& -A3- on (onstit tional gro nds, the petitioner arg ed that 1&G Cagayan de Oro CityLs reapportion#ent nder +&A& ,o& 93-1 falls within the #eaning of (reation, di0ision, #erger, a$olition or s $stantial alteration of $o ndaries of (ities nder Se(tion 1', Arti(le M of the Constit tion/ 2&G the (reation, di0ision, #erger, a$olition or s $stantial alteration of $o ndaries of lo(al go0ern#ent nits in0ol0e a (o##on deno#inator H the #aterial (hange in the politi(al and e(ono#i( rights of the lo(al go0ern#ent nits dire(tly affe(ted, as well as of the people therein/ 3&G a 0oterLs so0ereign power to de(ide on who sho ld $e ele(ted as the entire (ityLs Congress#an was ar$itrarily red (ed $y at least one half $e(a se the 3 estioned law and resol tion only allowed hi# to 0ote and $e 0oted for in the distri(t designated $y the COM)1)C/ 4&G a 0oter was also ar$itrarily denied his right to ele(t the Congress#an and the #e#$ers of the (ity (o n(il for the other legislati0e distri(t, and C&G go0ern#ent f nds were illegally dis$ rsed witho t prior appro0al $y the so0ereign ele(torate of Cagayan @e Oro City& <SS=): Jhether or not +&A& ,o& 93-1 #erely pro0ide for the legislati0e reapportion#ent of Cagayan de Oro City, or does it in0ol0e the di0ision and (on0ersion of a lo(al go0ern#ent nit& Jhether or not it 0iolates the e3 ality of representation do(trine& 4)1@: 1egislati0e apportion#ent is defined $y !la(.Ls 1aw @i(tionary as the deter#ination of

The 2'B allo(ation of party?list representati0es is #erely a (eiling/ party?list representati0es (annot $e #ore than2'B of the #e#$ers of the 4o se of +epresentati0es& O$iter: <t is the intent of the so0ereign people that #atters in interpreting the Constit tion& <t is ironi(, therefore, that the #arginaliIed and nderrepresented in o r #idst are the #a9ority who wallow in po0erty, destit tion, and infir#ity& <t was for the# the party?list syste# was ena(tedOto gi0e the# not only gen inehope, $ t gen ine power/ to gi0e the# the opport nity to $e ele(ted and to represent the spe(ifi( (on(erns of their (onstit en(ies/

the n #$er of representati0es whi(h a State, (o nty or other s $di0ision #ay send to a legislati0e $ody& <t is the allo(ation of seats in a legislati0e $ody in proportion to the pop lation/ the drawing of 0oting distri(t lines so as to e3 aliIe pop lation and 0oting power a#ong the distri(ts& +eapportion#ent, on the other hand, is the realign#ent or (hange in legislati0e distri(ts $ro ght a$o t $y (hanges in pop lation and #andated $y the (onstit tional re3 ire#ent of e3 ality of representation& +A 93-1 does not ha0e the effe(t of di0iding the City of Cagayan de Oro into two politi(al and (orporate nits and territories& +ather than di0ide the (ity either territorially or as a (orporate entity, the effe(t is #erely to enhan(e 0oter representation $y gi0ing ea(h (ity 0oter #ore and greater say, $oth in Congress and in the Sangg niang "angl nsod& !efore, Cagayan de Oro had only one (ongress#an and 12 (ity (o n(il #e#$ers (itywide for its pop lation of approEi#ately C'','''& !y ha0ing two legislati0e distri(ts, ea(h of the# with one (ongress#an, Cagayan de Oro now effe(ti0ely has two (ongress#en, ea(h one representing 2C',''' of the (ityLs pop lation& This easily #eans $etter a((ess to their (ongress#an sin(e ea(h one now ser0i(es only 2C',''' (onstit ents as against the C'','''& The fewer (onstit ents represented translate to a greater 0oi(e for ea(h indi0id al (ity resident in Congress and in the Sangg nian& The City, for its part, now has twi(e the n #$er of (ongress#en spea.ing for it and 0oting in the halls of Congress& Sin(e the total n #$er of (ongress#en in the (o ntry has not in(reased to the point of do $ling its n #$ers, the presen(e of two (ongress#an Finstead of oneG fro# the sa#e (ity (annot $ t $e a 3 antitati0e and proportional i#pro0e#ent in the representation of Cagayan de Oro City in Congress& !aga$ yo f rther (ontends that +A 93-1 0iolates the e3 ality in representation do(trine as it appears that one distri(t has a higher n #$er of 0oters as (o#pared to the other and that one is r$aniIed the other is r ral& This is the (larifi(ation/ the law (learly pro0ides that the $asis for distri(ting shall $e the n #$er of the inha$itants of a (ity or a pro0in(e, not the n #$er of registered 0oters therein

V377es v C#:e7e% Fa(ts: "etitioner 3 estions the 3 alifi(ation of pri0ate respondent +osalindD$as(o 1opeI to r n for go0ernor of @a0ao Oriental on (itiIenship gro nds& +espondent was $orn in 1934 in A stralia to a Filipino father and an A stralian #other& <n 199A, she applied for an Alien Certifi(ate of +egistration FAC+G and <##igrant Certifi(ate of +esiden(e F<C+G and was iss ed an A stralian passport&

<ss e: JO, respondent is a Filipino/ and if she is, JO, she reno n(ed her (itiIenship $y applying for AC+ and <C+ and $eing iss ed an A stralian passport&

+ ling: +espondent is a Filipino& <n 1934, the (ontrolling laws of the "hilippines were the "hilippine !ill of 6 ly 1, 19'2 and the "hilippine A tono#y A(t of A g st 29, 1918 F6ones 1awG& =nder $oth organi( a(ts, all inha$itants of the "hilippines who were Spanish s $9e(ts on April 11, 1A99 and resided therein, in(l ding their (hildren, are (onsidered "hilippine (itiIens& +espondentTUVs father was therefore a Filipino, and (onse3 ently, her&

+espondent did not lose her (itiIenship& +en n(iation of (itiIenship # st $e eEpress& Applying for AC+, <C+, and A stralian passport are not eno gh to reno n(e (itiIenship& They are #erely a(ts of assertion of her A stralian (itiIenship $efore she effe(ti0ely reno n(ed the sa#e&

@ al (itiIenship in the 12C, Se( 4', #eans TUWd al allegian(eTU&