Umali vs. COMELEC, 723 SCRA 170 (2014)
By: G-one T. Paisones
Salient Feature:
2016 Bar Examination; Question No. 3
Facts:
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.”
Respondent COMELEC, acting on the
proclamation, issued the assailed Minute Resolution No. 12-0797 which reads:
WHEREFORE, the Commission RESOLVED,
as it hereby RESOLVES, that for purposes of the plebiscite for the conversion
of Cabanatuan City from component city to highly-urbanized city, 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), citing conversion cases
involving Puerto Princesa City in Palawan, Tacloban City in Southern Leyte, and
Lapu-Lapu City in Cebu, where only the residents of the city proposed to be
converted were allowed to vote in the corresponding plebiscite.
Petitioner Aurelio M. Umali, Governor of Nueva Ecija, filed
a Verified Motion for Reconsideration, maintaining that the proposed conversion
in question will necessarily and directly affect the mother province of Nueva
Ecija. His main argument is that Section 453 of the LGC should be interpreted
in conjunction with Sec. 10, Art. X of the Constitution. He argues that while
the conversion in question does not involve the creation of a new or the
dissolution of an existing city, the spirit of the Constitutional provision
calls for the people of the 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. Petitioner Umali justified his position by enumerating the various
adverse effects of the Cabanatuan City’s conversion and how it will cause
material change not only in the political and economic rights of the city and
its residents but also of the province as a whole.
On October 4, 2012, the COMELEC
En Banc on October 16, 2012, in E.M No. 12-045 (PLEB), by a vote of 5-2
ruled in favor of respondent Vergara through the assailed Minute Resolution
12-0925.
Issue:
Whether
the qualified registered voters of the entire province of Nueva Ecija or only
those in Cabanatuan City can participate in the plebiscite called for the
conversion of Cabanatuan City from a component city into a Highly Urbanized
City (HUC).
Held:
Entire province
of Nueva Ecija
Ratio:
The upward
conversion of a component city, in this case Cabanatuan City, into an HUC will
come at a steep price. It can be gleaned from the above-cited rule that
the province will inevitably suffer a corresponding decrease in territory
brought about by Cabanatuan City’s gain of independence. With the city’s
newfound autonomy, it will be free from the oversight powers of the province,
which, in effect, reduces the territorial jurisdiction of the latter. What once
formed part of Nueva Ecija will no longer be subject to supervision by the
province. In more concrete terms, Nueva Ecija stands to lose 282.75 sq. km. of
its territorial jurisdiction with Cabanatuan City’s severance from its mother
province. This is equivalent to carving out almost 5% of Nueva Ecija’s
5,751.3 sq. km. area. This sufficiently satisfies the requirement that the
alteration be “substantial.”
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento