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

 

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

KEY TAKE-AWAY: Conversion to a highly-urbanized city is substantial alteration of boundaries governed by Sec. 10, Art. X and resultantly, said provision applies, governs and prevails over Sec. 453 of the LGC.

PONENTE: VELASCO, JR., J. PETITIONER: AURELIO M. UMALI RESPONDENT: COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, JULIUS CESAR V. VERGARA, and THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF CABANATUAN

Petition: Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with prayer for injunctive relief

Factual Antecedents: On July 11, 2011, the Sangguniang Panglungsod of Cabanatuan City passed Resolution No. 183-2011, requesting the President to declare the conversion of Cabanatuan City from a component city of the province of Nueva Ecija into a highly urbanized city (HUC). Acceding to the request, the President issued Presidential Proclamation No. 418, Series of 2012, proclaiming the City of Cabanatuan as an HUC subject to "ratification in a plebiscite by the qualified voters therein, as provided for in Section 453 of the Local Government Code of 1991." COMELEC then issued a resolution requiring a plebiscite to convert the city to a highly urbanized city and that only those registered residents of Cabanatuan City should participate in the said plebiscite. (The COMELEC based this resolution on Sec. 453 of the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC).) Thus, Petitioner argues that maintaining that the proposed conversion in question will necessarily and directly affect the mother province of Nueva Ecija and according to Sec. 10, Art. X of the Constitution, it calls for the people of the local government unit (LGU) directly affected to vote in a plebiscite whenever there is a material change in their rights and responsibilities. The phrase "qualified voters therein" used in Sec. 453 of the LGC should then be interpreted to refer to the qualified voters of the units directly affected by the conversion and not just those in the component city proposed to be upgraded.

Private respondent Julius Cesar Vergara, city mayor of Cabanatuan, interposed an opposition on the ground that Sec. 10, Art. X does not apply to conversions, which is the meat of the matter. He likewise argues that a specific provision of the LGC, Sec. 453, as couched, allows only the qualified voters of Cabanatuan City to vote in the plebiscite. Lastly, private respondent pointed out that when Santiago City was converted in 1994 from a municipality to an independent component city pursuant to Republic Act No. (RA) 7720, the plebiscite held was limited to the registered voters of the then municipality of Santiago. COMELEC En Banc ruled in favor of the private respondent and orders to schedule the conduct of the Plebiscite.

ISSUES: W/N the qualified registered voters of the entire province of Nueva Ecija can participate in the plebiscite called for the conversion of Cabanatuan City from a component city into an HUC

HELD: Yes. The Court ruled that Sec. 453 of the LGC should be interpreted in accordance with Sec. 10, Art. X of the Constitution. Sec. 10, Art. X of the Constitution should be the basis for determining the qualified voters who will participate in the plebiscite to resolve the issue. Sec. 10, Art. X reads: Section 10, Article X. – 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.

And the statement “directly affected” does not include the city of Cabanatuan but also the entire Nueva Ecija. 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. With the twin criteria of standard and plebiscite satisfied in the case at bar, 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. This means that it should be the entire Nuva Ecija that should be included in the plebiscite as they are also directly affected when Cabanatuan is converted into a HUC.