Republic of the
Supreme Court
|
RODOLFO
G. NAVARRO, VICTOR F. BERNAL, and RENE O. MEDINA, Petitioners, -
versus – EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA, representing
the President of the Philippines; SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES, represented
by the SENATE PRESIDENT; HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES, represented by the HOUSE SPEAKER; GOVERNOR ROBERT ACE S.
BARBERS, representing the Mother Province of Surigao del Norte; GOVERNOR
GERALDINE ECLEO VILLAROMAN, representing the new Province of Dinagat Islands,
Respondents. |
G.R. No.
180050 Present:
Puno, C.J., CARPIO, CARPIO MORALES, velasco, jr., nachura, LEONARDO-DE
CASTRO, BRION,
PERALTA, BERSAMIN,
ABAD,
VILLARAMA, JR., perez, and MENDOZA,
JJ. Promulgated:
May 12, 2010 |
x----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
RESOLUTION
PERALTA, J.:
Before
us are two Motions for Reconsideration of the Decision dated February 10, 2010 −
one filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) in behalf of public
respondents, and the other filed by respondent Governor Geraldine Ecleo
Villaroman, representing the Province of Dinagat Islands. The dispositive portion of the Decision
reads:
WHEREFORE, the
petition is GRANTED. Republic Act No. 9355, otherwise known as An Act Creating the Province of Dinagat
Islands, is hereby declared unconstitutional. The proclamation of the Province of Dinagat
Islands and the election of the officials thereof are declared NULL and VOID. The provision in Article 9 (2) of the Rules and Regulations
Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991 stating, “The land area
requirement shall not apply where the proposed province is composed of one (1)
or more islands,” is declared NULL
and VOID.
The arguments of the
movants are similar. The grounds for reconsideration of Governor
Villaroman can be subsumed under the grounds for reconsideration of the OSG,
which are as follows:
I.
The Province of
Dinagat Islands was created in accordance
with the provisions of the 1987 Constitution and the Local Government Code of
1991. Article 9 of the Implementing
Rules and Regulations is merely interpretative of Section 461 of the
Local Government Code.
II.
The power to create a local government unit is vested
with the Legislature. The acts of the
Legislature and Executive in enacting into law RA 9355 should be respected as
petitioners failed to overcome the presumption of validity or constitutionality.
III.
Recent and prevailing jurisprudence considers the
operative fact doctrine as a reason for upholding the validity and
constitutionality of laws involving the creation of a new local government unit
as in the instant case.
As regards the first
ground, the movants reiterate the same
arguments in their respective Comments that aside from the undisputed
compliance with the income requirement, Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9355, creating
the Province of Dinagat Islands, has also complied with the population and
land area requirements.
The arguments are
unmeritorious and have already been passed upon by the Court in its Decision,
ruling that R.A. No. 9355 is unconstitutional, since it failed to comply with
either the territorial or population requirement contained in Section 461 of
R.A. No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local
Government Code of 1991.
When the
Although the Provincial Government of Surigao del Norte
conducted a special census of population in
less than the minimum requirement
prescribed by law at the time of the creation of the new province.[2]
Less than a year after the proclamation of
the new province, the NSO conducted the 2007
Census of Population. The NSO certified that as of
Based on the foregoing, R.A. No. 9355
failed to comply with the population requirement of 250,000 inhabitants as
certified by the NSO.
Moreover, the land area of the
province failed to comply with the statutory requirement of 2,000
square kilometers. R.A. No. 9355 specifically states
that the Province of Dinagat Islands contains an approximate land area of 802.12
square kilometers. This was not disputed by the respondent Governor of the
Province of Dinagat Islands in her Comment.
She and the other respondents instead asserted that the province, which
is composed of more than one island, is exempted from the land area requirement based on the provision in the Rules and
Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991 (IRR), specifically
paragraph 2 of Article 9 which states that
“[t]he land area requirement shall not apply where the proposed province is
composed of one (1) or more islands.”
The certificate of compliance issued by the Lands Management Bureau was also based on the
exemption under paragraph 2, Article 9 of the IRR.
However, the Court held that
paragraph 2 of Article 9 of the IRR
is null and void, because the exemption is not found in Section 461 of
the Local Government Code.[4] There is no dispute that in case of
discrepancy between the basic law and the rules and regulations implementing
the said law, the basic law prevails, because the rules and regulations cannot
go beyond the terms and provisions of the basic law.[5]
The movants now argue that the
correct interpretation of Section 461 of the Local Government Code is the one
stated in the Dissenting Opinion of
Associate Justice Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura.
In his
Dissenting Opinion, Justice Nachura agrees that R.A. No. 9355 failed to comply
with the population requirement.
However, he contends that the Province of Dinagat Islands did not fail to comply with
the territorial requirement because it
is composed of a group of islands;
hence, it is exempt from compliance not only with the territorial contiguity
requirement, but also with the 2,000-square-kilometer land area criterion
in Section 461 of the Local Government
Code, which is reproduced for easy reference:
SEC. 461. Requisites for Creation. -- (a) A province may be created if it has an average annual income, as certified by the Department of Finance, of not less
than Twenty million pesos (P20,000,000.00) based on 1991
constant prices and either of the following requisites:
(i) a contiguous
territory of at
least two thousand (2,000) square kilometers, as certified by the
Lands Management Bureau; or
(ii) a population of
not less than two hundred fifty thousand
(250,000) inhabitants as certified
by the National Statistics Office:
Provided, That, the creation thereof shall not reduce the
land area, population, and income of the
original unit or units at the time of said creation to less than the minimum requirements prescribed herein.
(b) The
territory need not be contiguous if it comprises two (2) or more islands or is separated by a chartered city
or cities which do not contribute to the income of the province.
(c) The average annual income shall include the
income accruing to the general fund, exclusive of
special funds, trust funds, transfers,
and non-recurring income.[6]
Justice
Nachura contends that the stipulation in paragraph (b) qualifies not merely the word “contiguous” in paragraph (a) (i) in
the same provision, but rather the entirety of
paragraph (a) (i) that reads:
(i)
a contiguous territory of
at least two thousand (2,000) square
kilometers, as certified by the Lands Management Bureau[.][7]
He argues that the
whole paragraph on contiguity and land area in paragraph (a) (i) above is the
one being referred to in the exemption from the territorial requirement in
paragraph (b). Thus, he contends that if the province to be created is composed
of islands, like the one in this case, then, its territory need not be
contiguous and need not have an area of at least 2,000 square kilometers. He
asserts that this is because as the law is worded, contiguity and land area are
not two distinct and separate requirements, but they qualify each other. An
exemption from one of the two component requirements in paragraph (a) (i)
allegedly necessitates an exemption from the other component requirement,
because the non-attendance of one results in the absence of a reason for the other
component requirement to effect a qualification.
Similarly, the OSG contends that when
paragraph (b) of Section 461 of the Local Government Code provides that the
“territory need not be contiguous if it comprises two (2) or more islands,” it
necessarily dispenses the 2,000-sq.-km. land area requirement, lest such
exemption would not make sense. The OSG
argues that in stating that a “territory need not be contiguous if it comprises
two (2) or
more islands,” the law could not have meant to define the obvious. The land mass of two or more islands will
never be contiguous as it is covered by bodies of water. It is then but logical that the territory of
a proposed province that is composed of one or more islands need not be
contiguous or be at least 2,000 sq. kms.
The Court is
not persuaded.
Section 7, Chapter 2 (entitled General
Powers and Attributes of Local Government Units) of the Local Government
Code provides:
SEC. 7. Creation
and Conversion. — As a general rule, the
creation of a local government unit or its conversion from one level to another
level shall be based on verifiable indicators of viability and projected
capacity to provide services, to
wit:
(a) Income. — It must be sufficient, based on acceptable
standards, to provide for all essential government facilities and services and
special functions commensurate with the size of its population, as expected of
the local government unit concerned;
(b) Population. — It shall be determined as the total number of inhabitants
within the territorial jurisdiction of the local government unit concerned; and
(c) Land area. — It must
be contiguous, unless it comprises two (2) or more islands, or is separated
by a local government unit independent of the others; properly identified by
metes and bounds with technical descriptions; and sufficient to provide for such basic services and facilities
to meet the requirements of its populace.
Compliance with the foregoing
indicators shall be attested to by the Department of Finance (DOF), the
National Statistics Office (NSO), and the Lands Management Bureau (LMB) of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).[8]
It must be emphasized that
Section 7 above, which provides for the general
rule in the
creation of a local government unit, states in paragraph (c) thereof that the land area must be contiguous
and sufficient to provide for
such basic services and facilities to meet the requirements of its populace.
Therefore, there are two requirements for land area: (1) the land area must be contiguous; and (2)
the land area must be sufficient to provide for such basic services and facilities
to meet the requirements of its populace.
A sufficient land area in the creation of a province is at least 2,000
square kilometers, as provided by Section 461 of the Local Government Code .
Thus, Section 461 of the Local Government Code, providing the
requisites for the creation of a province, specifically states the requirement
of “a contiguous territory of at least two thousand (2,000) square
kilometers.”
Hence, contrary to the arguments of both
movants, the requirement of a contiguous territory and the requirement of a
land area of at least 2,000 square kilometers
are distinct and
separate requirements for land
area under paragraph (a) (i) of Section 461 and Section 7 (c) of the
Local Government Code.
However, paragraph (b) of Section 461
provides two instances of exemption from
the requirement of territorial contiguity, thus:
(b) The territory need not be contiguous
if it comprises two (2) or more islands, or is
separated by a chartered city or cities which do not
contribute to the income of the
province.[9]
Contrary to the contention of the movants, the exemption above pertains
only to the requirement of territorial contiguity. It clearly states that the requirement of
territorial contiguity may be dispensed with in the case of a province
comprising two or more islands, or is
separated by a chartered city or cities which do not contribute to the income
of the province.
Nowhere in
paragraph (b) is it expressly stated or may it be implied that when a province is composed of two or
more islands, or when the territory of a
province is separated by a chartered
city or cities, such province need not comply with the land area requirement of
at least 2,000 square kilometers or the requirement in paragraph (a) (i) of
Section 461of the Local Government Code.
Where the law is free from ambiguity, the court may not introduce
exceptions or conditions where none is provided from considerations of
convenience, public welfare, or for any laudable purpose;[10] neither may it engraft into the law
qualifications not contemplated,[11]
nor construe its provisions by taking into account questions of expediency,
good faith, practical utility and other similar reasons so as to relax
non-compliance therewith.[12] Where the law speaks in clear and
categorical language, there is no room for interpretation, but only for
application.[13]
Moreover, the OSG contends that since
the power to create a local government unit is vested with the Legislature, the
acts of the Legislature and the Executive branch in enacting into law R.A. No.
9355 should be respected as petitioners failed to overcome the presumption of
validity or constitutionality.
The contention lacks merit.
Section 10, Article X of the
Constitution states:
SEC. 10. No
province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its
boundary substantially altered, except
in accordance with the criteria
established in the local government code and subject to approval by a
majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly affected.”[14]
As the law-making branch of the
government, indeed, it was the Legislature that imposed the criteria for the
creation of a province as contained in Section 461 of the Local Government
Code. No law has yet been passed
amending Section 461 of the Local Government Code, so only the criteria stated
therein are the bases for the creation of a province. The Constitution clearly mandates that the
criteria in the Local Government Code must be followed in the creation of a
province; hence, any derogation of or deviation from the criteria prescribed in
the Local Government Code violates Section 10, Article X of the Constitution.
Contrary to the contention of the movants, the
evidence on record proved that R.A. No. 9355 failed to comply with either the population or territorial requirement prescribed in Section 461 of the Local
Government Code for the creation of the Province of Dinagat Islands; hence, the
Court declared R.A. No. 9355
unconstitutional.
In Fariñas v. The Executive Secretary,[15]
the Court held:
Every statute is presumed valid. The presumption is that
the legislature intended to enact a valid, sensible and just law and one which
operates no further than may be necessary to effectuate the specific purpose of
the law.
It is
equally well-established, however, that the courts, as guardians of the
Constitution, have the inherent authority to determine whether a statute
enacted by the legislature transcends the limit imposed by the fundamental law.
And where the acts of the other branches of government run afoul of the
Constitution, it is the judiciary’s solemn and sacred duty to nullify the same.
Citing League of Cities of the Philippines v. Commission on Elections,[16] the
movants further contend that under the operative fact doctrine, the
constitutionality of R.A No. 9355, creating the Province of Dinagat Islands,
should be upheld.
The Court is not persuaded.
In
League of Cities of the
Philippines v. Commission on Elections, the Court held that the 16 cityhood
laws, whose validity were questioned therein, were constitutional mainly because it found that the said
cityhood laws merely carried out the intent of R.A. No. 9009, now Section 450
of the Local Government Code, to exempt therein respondents local government
units (LGUs) from the P100 million income requirement, since the
said LGUs had pending cityhood bills
long before the enactment of R.A. No. 9009.
Each one of the 16 cityhood laws contained a provision exempting the
municipality covered from the P100 million income requirement.
In this case, R.A. No. 9355 was
declared unconstitutional because there was utter failure to comply with either
the population or territorial requirement
for the creation of a province under Section 461 of the Local Government
Code.
The Court, while respecting the
doctrine of separation of powers, cannot renege on its duty to determine
whether the other branches of the government have kept themselves within the
limits of the Constitution, and determine whether illegality attached to the
creation of the province in question. To
abandon this duty only because the Province of Dinagat Islands has began its
existence is to consent to the passage of a law that is violative of the provisions of the
Constitution and the Local Government Code,
rendering the law and the province created null and void. The Court cannot tolerate such nullity to be
in existence. Where the acts of other
branches of the government go beyond the limit imposed by the Constitution, it
is the sacred duty of the judiciary to nullify the same.[17]
Tan v. Comelec[18] held:
x x x [T]he fact that such plebiscite had been held and a new province proclaimed and its officials appointed, the case before Us cannot truly be viewed as already moot and academic. Continuation of the existence of this newly proclaimed province, which petitioners strongly profess to have been illegally born, deserves to be inquired into by this Tribunal so that, if indeed, illegality attaches to its creation, the commission of that error should not provide the very excuse for perpetuation of such wrong. For this court to yield to the respondents’ urging that, as there has been fait accompli then this Court should passively accept and accede to the prevailing situation, is an unacceptable suggestion. Dismissal of the instant petition, as respondents so propose, is a proposition fraught with mischief. Respondents’ submission will create a dangerous precedent. Should this Court decline now to perform its duty of interpreting and indicating what the law is and should be, this might tempt again those who strut about in the corridors of power to recklessly and with ulterior motives, create, merge, divide and/or alter the boundaries of political subdivisions, either brazenly or stealthily, confident that this Court will abstain from entertaining future challenges to their acts if they manage to bring about a fait accompli.
WHEREFORE, in
view of the foregoing, the Motions for Reconsideration of the Decision dated
February 10, 2010 are hereby DENIED
for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED.
DIOSDADO M.
PERALTA
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
|
ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate Justice |
RENATO C. CORONA Associate Justice |
|
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES Associate
Justice |
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate
Justice |
|
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA Associate
Justice |
TERESITA J.
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO Associate
Justice |
|
ARTURO D. BRION Associate
Justice |
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Associate
Justice |
|
MARIANO C. Associate
Justice |
ROBERTO A. ABAD Associate
Justice |
|
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR. Associate
Justice |
JOSE Associate Justice |
JOSE CATRAL
Associate Justice
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, I certify
that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before
the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.
REYNATO
S. PUNO
Chief Justice
[1] SEC. 7. Creation
and conversion.
– As a general rule, the creation of a local government unit or its
conversion from one level to another shall be based on verifiable indicators of
viability and projected capacity to
provide services, to wit:
(a) Income. – It must be sufficient, based on acceptable standards, to provide for all essential
government facilities and services and special functions commensurate with the
size of its population, as expected of the local government unit
concerned;
(b) Population. – It
shall be determined as the total number
of inhabitants within the territorial jurisdiction of the local government unit
concerned; and
(c) Land area. – It must
be contiguous, unless it comprises two (2) or more islands, or is separated by
a local government unit independent of the others; properly identified by metes
and bounds with technical descriptions and sufficient to provide for such basic
services and facilities to meet the requirements of its populace.
Compliance
with the foregoing indicators shall be attested to by the Department of Finance
(DOF), the National Statistics Office (NSO), and the Lands Management
Bureau (LMB) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
SEC. 461. Requisites for Creation. - (a) A
province may be created if it has an average annual income, as certified by the
Department of Finance, of not less than Twenty million pesos (P20,000,000.00)
based on 1991 constant prices and either of the following requisites:
(i) a contiguous territory of at least
two thousand (2,000) square kilometers, as certified by the Lands Management Bureau; or
(ii) a population
of not less than two hundred
fifty thousand (250,000) inhabitants as certified by the National Statistics Office:
Provided, That, the creation thereof shall not reduce the land area,
population, and income of the original unit or units at the time of said
creation to less than the minimum requirements prescribed herein. (Emphasis supplied.)
[2]
[3] Annex “AA,” rollo,
p. 498. (Emphasis supplied.)
[4] For comparison, Sec. 461 of the Local
Government Code of 1991 and Art. 9 of the Rules and
Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991 are
reproduced:
The
Local Government Code
SEC. 461. Requisites
for Creation. − (a) A province may be created if it has an average annual income, as certified by the Department of Finance, of not less than Twenty
million pesos (P20,000,000.00)
based on 1991 constant prices and either of the
following requisites:
(i)
a contiguous territory of at least two thousand (2,000) square kilometers, as certified by the Lands Management Bureau; or
(ii)
a population of
not less than two hundred fifty
thousand (250,000) inhabitants as certified
by the National Statistics Office: Provided, That, the creation thereof shall
not reduce the land area, population, and income of the original unit or units at the time of
said creation to less than the minimum
requirements prescribed herein.
(b) The
territory need not be contiguous if it comprises two (2) or more islands or is
separated by a chartered city or cities
which do not contribute to the income of the province.
(c) The average annual income shall include
the income accruing to the general fund, exclusive of special funds, trust funds,
transfers, and non-recurring income.
Rules and Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991
ART. 9.
Provinces. — (a) Requisites for creation. — A province shall not
be created unless the following requisites on income and either population or
land area are present:
(1)
Income
— An average annual income of not less than Twenty Million Pesos (P20,000,000.00)
for the immediately preceding two (2) consecutive years based on 1991 constant
prices, as certified by the DOF. The average
annual income shall include the income accruing to the general fund, exclusive
of special funds, special accounts, transfers, and non-recurring income; and
(2) Population or land area − Population
which shall not be less than two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) inhabitants,
as certified by the National Statistics Office; or land area which must be contiguous with an area of at least two
thousand (2,000) square kilometers, as certified by the LMB. The territory need
not be contiguous if it comprises two (2) or more islands, or is separated by a
chartered city or cities which do not contribute to the income of the province.
The
land area requirement shall not apply where the proposed province is composed
of one (1) or more islands. The territorial jurisdiction of a province
sought to be created shall be properly identified by metes and bounds.
(Emphasis supplied.)
[5] Hijo Plantation, Inc. v. Central Bank,
G.R. No. L-34526,
[6] Emphasis supplied.
[7] Emphasis supplied.
[8] Emphasis
supplied.
[9] Emphasis supplied.
[10] University of the
[11] Ramos v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. L-53766,
[12] Republic v. Go. Ban Lee, 111 Phil. 805 (1961).
[13] Cebu Portland Cement Company v. Municipality of Naga, Cebu, G.R. Nos. 24116-17, August 22, 1968, 24 SCRA 708, 712; Ruben E. Agpalo, Statutory Construction (1986), p. 47.
[14] Emphasis supplied.
[15] 463 Phil. 179, 197 (2003).
[16] G.R.
Nos. 176951, 177499 & 178056,
[17] Fariñas v. The Executive Secretary, supra note 15.
[18] 226 Phil. 624, 637-638 (1986).