Written by: OCLARIT, Jon Raymer P.

Residents of Puerto Princesa CANNOT Participate the Plebiscite for the Division of Palawan
(Backed-up with 5 Supreme Court Decisions)

It has been a disputable issue that the local government of Palawan seeks to divide the said
province into three, namely: Palawan del Norte, Palawan Oriental, and Palawan del Sur. In supporting the
proposed measure, Palawan Governor Jose Alvarez, had said that dividing Palawan into three provinces
would speed up the delivery of basic services to residents and further boost the provincial economy.
However, a civic group, most are residents of Puerto Princesa City, blocks the passage of House Bill 8055
dividing Palawan into three provinces. They contend that the bill, which the House of Representatives
approved in August, reached the Senate without undergoing prior public consultation. The leader of the
civic group, who is a Puerto Princesan, questioned a provision in the bill stripping city residents of their
right to vote in a plebiscite that would give them the chance to accept or reject the proposal.

While declared a highly urbanized city, the campaigner said Puerto Princesa is still defined as “a
political unit that will be ‘directly affected’” by the effects of division. However, on November 19, 2018,
Voting 14-1, the Senate approved on third and final reading the bill dividing Palawan into three new
provinces and is now waiting for the approval of President Duterte. However, the question still remains:
Can the residents of Puerto Princesa participate the Plebiscite for the Division of Palawan?

LEGAL BASIS

The power to create, divide, merge, abolish or substantially alter boundaries of provinces, cities,
municipalities or barangays, which is pertinent in the case at bar, is essentially legislative in nature. The
framers of the Constitution have, however, allowed for the delegation of such power in Sec. 10, Art. X of
the Constitution as long as (1) the criteria prescribed in the LGC is met and (2) the creation, division,
merger, abolition or the substantial alteration of the boundaries is subject to the approval by a majority
vote in a plebiscite.

True enough, Congress delegated such power to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Sangguniang
Panlungsod to create barangays pursuant to Sec. 6 of the LGC, which provides:

Section 6. Authority to Create Local Government Units. - A local government unit

may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundaries substantially altered either
by law enacted by Congress in the case of a province, city, municipality, or any other
political subdivision, or by ordinance passed by the sangguniang panlalawigan or
sangguniang panlungsod concerned in the case of a barangay located within its territorial
jurisdiction, subject to such limitations and requirements prescribed in this Code."
Written by: OCLARIT, Jon Raymer P.

Compliance with the plebiscite requirement under the Constitution has been directed by the Local
Government Code under its Sec. 10, which reads:

Section 10. Plebiscite Requirement. – No creation, division, merger, abolition, or

substantial alteration of boundaries of local government units shall take effect unless
approved by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite called for the purpose in the
political unit or units directly affected."

With the twin criteria of standard and plebiscite satisfied, the delegation to LGUs of the power to
create, divide, merge, abolish or substantially alter boundaries has become a recognized exception to the
doctrine of non-delegation of legislative powers.

PUERTO PRINCESA CHARTER AS HIGHLY URBANIZED CITY (HUC)

In view of the Presidential Declaration 1264 signed by former President Arroyo, majority of Puerto
Princesa’s constituents voted yes in 2007 making Puerto Princesa the country’s first component city to
become a highly urbanized city. Its Charter includes being not qualified to vote in the plebiscite and for
candidates for provincial elective positions by the Charter of Puerto Princesa as Highly Urbanized City
under its Sec. 54, provides:

Sec. 54. Residents of the City of Puerto Princesa. – The residents of the City of
Puerto Princesa, as a highly urbanized city, shall not be qualified to vote in the plebiscite
and for candidates for provincial elective positions.

JURISPRUDENCE

To elucidate the meaning of the phrase "political units directly affected" under Sec. 10, Art. X of
the Local Government Code, the following cases are our guide:

1. Tan v. COMELEC, No. L-73155, July 11, 1986, 142 SCRA 727

In identifying the LGU or LGUs that should be allowed to take part in the plebiscite, the Court
instructed that what should primarily be determined is whether or not the unit or units that desire to
participate will be "directly affected" by the change.

The Court ruled in Tan, involving the division of Negros Occidental for the creation of the new
province of Negros del Norte, that the LGUs whose boundaries are to be altered and whose economy
would be affected are entitled to participate in the plebiscite. As held:
Written by: OCLARIT, Jon Raymer P.

It can be plainly seen that the aforecited constitutional provision makes it

imperative that there be first obtained "the approval of a majority of votes in the
plebiscite in the unit or units affected" whenever a province is created, divided or merged
and there is substantial alteration of the boundaries. It is thus inescapable to conclude
that the boundaries of the existing province of Negros Occidental would necessarily be
substantially altered by the division of its existing boundaries in order that there can be
created the proposed new province of Negros del Norte. Plain and simple logic will
demonstrate than that two political units would be affected.

In the case of dividing Palawan into three, as a City independent of the Provincial Government,
Puerto Princesa will not be affected since no single boundary of it will be altered. The only affected entity
would be composed of those in the area divided from the Province of Palawan to constitute the proposed
provinces of Palawan del Norte (Coron, Culion, Busuanga, Linapacan, Taytay, & El Nido), Palawan Oriental
(Roxas, Araceli, Dumaran, Cuyo, Agutaya, Magsaysay, Cagayancillo, & San Vicente), and Palawan del Sur
(Aborlan, Narra, Quezon, Rizal, Sofronio Española, Brooke’s Point, Bataraza, Balabac, & Kalayaan).

Applying the principle in statutory construction expressio unius est exclusio alterius (when one or
more things of a class are expressly mentioned, others of the same class are excluded), the highly
urbanized city of Puerto Princesa is excluded, hence, will not be "directly affected" by the change.

2. Romualdez v. Marcelo, G.R. Nos. 165510-33, July 28, 2006

To further discuss the principle in statutory construction expressio unius est exclusio alterius, the
Court applied it in the case of Romualdez v. Marcelo:

Indeed, it is an elementary rule of statutory construction that the express

mention of one person, thing, act, or consequence excludes all others. This rule is
expressed in the familiar maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius. Where a statute, by
its terms, is expressly limited to certain matters, it may not, by interpretation or
construction, be extended to others. The rule proceeds from the premise that the
legislature would not have made specified enumerations in a statute had the intention
been not to restrict its meaning and to confine its terms to those expressly mentioned.

In the case of dividing the Province of Palawan into three provinces it enumerates their
composition, stipulated under Sec. 2, Art. I of House Bill No. 7413:

Section 2. Composition. – The Province of Palawan is hereby divided into three

provinces to be known as Palawan Del Norte, Palawan Oriental, and Palawan Del Sur, in
the following manner:
Written by: OCLARIT, Jon Raymer P.

The Province of Palawan Del Norte shall consist of that portion of the present
Province of Palawan which comprises the Municipalities of Coron, Culion, Busuanga,
Linapacan, Taytay, and El Nido;
The Province of Palawan Oriental, shall consist of the north eastern portion of the
present Province of Palawan, which comprises the Municipalities of Roxas, Araceli,
Dumaran, Cuyo, Agutaya, Magsaysay, Cagayancillo, and San Vicente;
The Province of Palawan Del Sur shall consist the remaining portion of the present
Province of Palawan which comprises the Municipalities of Aborlan, Narra, Quezon, Rizal,
Española, Brooke’s Point, Bataraza, Balabac, and Kalayaan.

In applying expressio unius est exclusio alterius to the mentioned bill by its terms, it is expressly
limited to the Municipalities of Coron, Culion, Busuanga, Linapacan, Taytay, El Nido, Roxas, Araceli,
Dumaran, Cuyo, Agutaya, Magsaysay, Cagayancillo, San Vicente, Aborlan, Narra, Quezon, Rizal, Española,
Brooke’s Point, Bataraza, Balabac, and Kalayaan. It does not, by interpretation or construction, be
extended to other matters.

Since, an express mention of one person, thing, or consequence implies the exclusion of all others:
where Puerto Princesa is not mentioned in the bill, it follows that it is deemed excluded and will not be
"directly affected" by the change. Hence, Puerto Princesa cannot participate the plebiscite for the division
of Palawan.

3. Paredes v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 55628. March 2, 1984

In the case of Paredes v. Executive Secretary, the Court held that where a local unit is to be
segregated from a parent unit, only the voters of the unit to be segregated should be included in the
plebiscite, as stated:

There is indeed an element of ambiguity in the use of the expression "units or

units affected." It is plausible to assert as petitioners do that when certain barangays are
separated from a parent municipality to form a new one, all voters therein are affected.
It is much more persuasive, however, to contend as respondents do that the acceptable
construction is for those voters, who are not from the barangays to be separated, should
be excluded in the plebiscite.

Again to reiterate, applying the principle in statutory construction expressio unius est exclusio
alterius, the highly urbanized city of Puerto Princesa does not belong to the Province of Palawan. Hence,
only the voters of the Province of Palawan, as a unit to be divided, should be included in the plebiscite.
Written by: OCLARIT, Jon Raymer P.

4. Miranda v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 133064, September 16, 1999

In the dissenting opinion of Justice Mendoza in the case of Miranda v. Aguirre, he states that:

Only if the reclassification involves changes in income, population, and land area
of the local government unit is there a need for such changes to be approved by the
people, for then there would be a creation, division, merger, abolition, or substantial
alteration of the boundary of a local government unit, as the case may be, within the
meaning of Art. X, 10 of the Constitution.

In dividing Palawan, as a highly urbanized city independent from the Province of Palawan, Puerto
Princesa will not lose taxes imposed within its constituents.

Furthermore, Justice Mendoza reiterates that an independent component city and an ordinary
component city are both component cities, as distinguished from highly urbanized cities, where according
to paragraph (c), Sec. 452 of the LGC, qualified voters of highly urbanized cities shall remain excluded from
voting for elective provincial officials.

5. Umali v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 203974, April 22, 2014

With regards the Decision of the Supreme Court in Umali v. Comelec, the case is not really
applicable to the situation in the division of Palawan. The issue in the said case is the voting of the
residents of the Province of Nueva Ecija in a plebiscite to make Cabanatuan City a highly urbanized city
(HUC). The Supreme Court said that the independence of Cabanatuan City will directly affect the Province
of Nueva Ecija in terms of territory and tax income. In the case of Puerto Princesa, it is already a highly
urbanized city and enjoys independence from the Province of Palawan.

However, I would like to include a law that was applied by the Supreme Court in this case
regarding the issue on the impact on economic rights. This is based on Sec. 151 of the LGC:

SECTION 151. Scope of Taxing Powers. – Except as otherwise provided in this

Code, the city, may levy the taxes, fees, and charges which the province or municipality
may impose: Provided, however, That the taxes, fees and charges levied and collected by
highly urbanized and independent component cities shall accrue to them and distributed
in accordance with the provisions of this Code.

Based on this provision, the taxes imposed by the HUC will accrue to itself. Puerto Princesa as
HUC, will not be deprived of its right to collect taxes from the rest of its territory, hence, the division of
the Province will not still reduce Puerto Princesa’s taxing jurisdiction. This non-reduction in both taxing
Written by: OCLARIT, Jon Raymer P.

jurisdiction does not pose a material and substantial change to its economic rights, disallowing its
participation in the plebiscite.

Finally, on the impact on political rights, the Supreme Court ruled in this case that:

Duties, privileges and obligations appertaining to HUCs will attach to Cabanatuan

City if it is converted into an HUC. This includes the right to be outside the general
supervision of the province and be under the direct supervision of the President. An HUC
is not subject to provincial oversight because the complex and varied problems in an HUC
due to a bigger population and greater economic activity require greater autonomy. The
provincial government stands to lose the power to ensure that the local government
officials of Cabanatuan City act within the scope of its prescribed powers and functions,
to review executive orders issued by the city mayor, and to approve resolutions and
ordinances enacted by the city council. The province will also be divested of jurisdiction
over disciplinary cases concerning the elected city officials of the new HUC, and the appeal
process for administrative case decisions against barangay officials of the city will also be
modified accordingly. Likewise, the registered voters of the city will no longer be entitled
to vote for and be voted upon as provincial officials.

In view of the changes in the economic and political rights of the province of Palawan and its
residents, the highly urbanized city of Puerto Princesa stands not to be directly affected by the division of
the Province of Palawan into three provinces. Following the doctrines in Tan, Romualdez, Paredes,
Miranda, and Umali, all the qualified registered voters of the Province of Palawan should then be allowed
to participate in the plebiscite called for that purpose, excluding the voters of the highly urbanized city
of Puerto Princesa.