0% found this document useful (0 votes)
119 views3 pages

League of Cities vs. COMELEC

The Supreme Court ruled the Cityhood Laws unconstitutional for violating the Constitution and equal protection clause. The Constitution requires all criteria for creating cities be established in the Local Government Code, not other laws. The Local Government Code increased the income requirement for municipalities to convert to cities to 100 million pesos. The Cityhood Laws exempted 16 municipalities from this, violating equal protection by not applying uniformly to all similarly situated municipalities.

Uploaded by

Elyn Apiado
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
119 views3 pages

League of Cities vs. COMELEC

The Supreme Court ruled the Cityhood Laws unconstitutional for violating the Constitution and equal protection clause. The Constitution requires all criteria for creating cities be established in the Local Government Code, not other laws. The Local Government Code increased the income requirement for municipalities to convert to cities to 100 million pesos. The Cityhood Laws exempted 16 municipalities from this, violating equal protection by not applying uniformly to all similarly situated municipalities.

Uploaded by

Elyn Apiado
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

LEAGUE OF CITIES vs.

COMELEC
G.R. Nos. 176951, 177499, & 178056; November 18, 2008
CARPIO, J.:

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
During the 12th Congress, Congress enacted into law RA 9009 amending Section 450 of
the Local Government Code by increasing the annual income requirement for conversion of a
municipality into a city from Php20 million to Php100 million to restrain the “mad rush” of
municipalities to convert into cities solely to secure a larger share in the Internal Revenue
Allotment despite the fact that they are incapable of fscal independence.
Prior to its enactment, a total of 57 municipalities had cityhood bills pending in Congress.
Congress did not act on 24 cityhood bills during the 11th Congress.
During the 12th Congress, the House of Representatives adopted Joint Resolution No. 29.
This Resolution reached the Senate. However, the 12th Congress adjourned without the Senate
approving Joint Resolution No. 29.
During the 13th Congress, 16 of the 24 municipalities mentioned in the unapproved Joint
Resolution No. 29 fled between November and December of 2006, through their respective
sponsors in Congress, individual cityhood bills containing a common provision, as follows:

Exemption from Republic Act No. 9009. - The City of x x x shall be exempted from the
income requirement prescribed under Republic Act No. 9009.

These cityhood bills lapsed into law on various dates from March to July 2007 after
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo failed to sign them.

Petitioners fled the present petitions to declare the Cityhood Laws unconstitutional for
violation of Section 10, Article X of the Constitution, as well as for violation of the equal
protection clause. Petitioners also lament that the wholesale conversion of municipalities into
cities will reduce the share of existing cities in the Internal Revenue Allotment because more
cities will share the same amount of internal revenue set aside for all cities under Section 285 of
the Local Government Code.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE:

These are consolidated petitions for prohibition with prayer for the issuance of a writ of
preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order fled by the League of Cities of the
Philippines, City of Iloilo, City of Calbayog, and Jerry P. Treñas assailing the constitutionality of
the subject Cityhood Laws and enjoining the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) and
respondent municipalities from conducting plebiscites pursuant to the Cityhood Laws.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the Cityhood Laws violate Section 10, Article X of the Constitution and the
Equal protection clause

APIADO, ELYN D.
RULING:

Yes, the Cityhood Laws violate both the Constitution and the equal protection clause
Section 10, Article X of the 1987 Constitution provides that, “No province, city,
municipality, or barangay shall be created, divided, merged, abolished or its boundary
substantially altered, except in accordance with the criteria established in the local government
codeand subject to approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units
directly afected”.

The Constitution is clear. The creation of local government units must follow the criteria
established in the Local Government Code and not in any other law. There is only one Local
Government Code. The Constitution requires Congress to stipulate in the Local Government
Code all the criteria necessary for the creation of a city, including the conversion of a
municipality into a city. Congress cannot write such criteria in any other law, like the Cityhood
Laws.

Section 450 of the Local Government Code provides:

Section 450. Requisites for Creation. – (a) A municipality or a cluster of barangays may be
converted into a component city if it has a locallygenerated average annual income, as
certifed by the Department of Finance, of at least One hundred million pesos
(Php100,000,000.00) for the last two (2) consecutive years based on 2000 constant prices,
and if it has either of the following requisites:

(i) a contiguous territory of at least one hundred (100) square kilometers, as


certifed by the Land Management Bureau; or

(ii) a population of not less than one hundred ffty thousand (150,000) inhabitants,
as certifed by the National Statistics Ofce.

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 territorial jurisdiction of a newly-created city shall be properly identifed by metes
and bounds. The requirement on land area shall not apply where the city proposed to be
created is composed of one (1) or more islands. The territory need not be contiguous if it
comprises two (2) or more islands.

(c) The average annual income shall include the income accruing to the general fund,
exclusive of special funds, transfers, and non-recurring income.

Thus, RA 9009 increased the income requirement for conversion of a municipality into a
city from Php20 million to Php100 million. Section 450 of the Local Government Code, as
amended by RA 9009, does not provide any exemption from the increased income requirement.

APIADO, ELYN D.
The equal protection clause of the 1987 Constitution permits a valid classifcation under
the following conditions:

1. The classifcation must rest on substantial distinctions;

2. The classifcation must be germane to the purpose of the law;

3. The classifcation must not be limited to existing conditions only; and

4. The classifcation must apply equally to all members of the same class.

Limiting the exemption only to the 16 municipalities violates the requirement that the
classifcation must apply to all similarly situated. Municipalities with the same income as the 16
respondent municipalities cannot convert into cities, while the 16 respondent municipalities can.
Clearly, as worded the exemption provision found in the Cityhood Laws, even if it were written in
Section 450 of the Local Government Code, would still be unconstitutional for violation of the
equal protection clause.

PRINCIPLES/DOCTRINES:

The Constitution is clear. The creation of local government units must follow the criteria
established in the Local Government Code and not in any other law. There is only one Local
Government Code. The Constitution requires Congress to stipulate in the Local Government
Code all the criteria necessary for the creation of a city, including the conversion of a
municipality into a city. Congress cannot write such criteria in any other law, like the Cityhood
Laws.

APIADO, ELYN D.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy