Scribd
Upload
55 views1 page

BENIGNO AQUINO III vs. COMELEC

The petitioners challenged the constitutionality of a law that created an additional legislative district in Camarines Sur province. They argued the new district had a population of less than 250,000 people, which is the minimum population required by the Constitution for a new district. The respondents countered that the 250,000 population requirement does not apply to provinces, only cities. The Supreme Court ruled the 250,000 population minimum is an indispensable constitutional requirement for the creation of any new legislative district, whether in a province or city.

Uploaded by

Tamara Claudette Bautista
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
55 views1 page

BENIGNO AQUINO III vs. COMELEC

The petitioners challenged the constitutionality of a law that created an additional legislative district in Camarines Sur province. They argued the new district had a population of less than 250,000 people, which is the minimum population required by the Constitution for a new district. The respondents countered that the 250,000 population requirement does not apply to provinces, only cities. The Supreme Court ruled the 250,000 population minimum is an indispensable constitutional requirement for the creation of any new legislative district, whether in a province or city.

Uploaded by

Tamara Claudette Bautista
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/ 1

TITLE: Senator Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III & Mayor Jesse Robredo vs. COMELEC, G.R. No.

189793, April 7, 2010


FACTS: On October 12, 2009, R.A. 9716 was signed into law by President Arroyo and took
effect on October 31, 2009, 15 days following its publication in the Manila Standard. The said
law created an additional legislative district for the Province of Camarines Sur by reconfiguring
the existing first and second legislative districts of the province. From 4 districts, Camarines Sur
has now 5 districts.
Petitioners contend that the reapportionment introduced by Republic Act No. 9716, runs afoul of
the explicit constitutional standard that requires a minimum population of two hundred fifty
thousand (250,000) for the creation of a legislative district. The petitioners claim that the
reconfiguration by Republic Act No. 9716 of the first and second districts of Camarines Sur is
unconstitutional, citing the Section 5(3), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution as basis for the cited
250,000 minimum population standard, because the proposed first district will end up with a
population of less than 250,000 or only 176,383.
On the other hand, the respondents, through the Office of the Solicitor General, seek the
dismissal of the present petition based on procedural and substantive grounds. On procedural
matters, the petitioners are guilty of two (2) fatal technical defects: first, petitioners committed an
error in choosing to assail the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 9716 via the remedy of
Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court; and second, the petitioners have
no locus standi to question the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 9716. On substantive
matters, the respondents call attention to an apparent distinction between cities and provinces
drawn by Section 5(3), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution. The respondents deny the existence
of a fixed population requirement for the reapportionment of districts in provinces. Therefore,
Republic Act No. 9716, which only creates an additional legislative district within the province of
Camarines Sur, should be sustained as a perfectly valid reapportionment law.
ISSUE: Whether or not the population of 250,000 an indispensable constitutional requirement
for the creation of a new legislative district in a province?
RULING: Yes, it is an indispensable constitutional requirement. The second sentence of
Section 5(3), Article VI of the Constitution, succinctly provides: "Each city with a population of at
least two hundred fifty thousand, or each province, shall have at least one representative."
However, the provision draws a plain and clear distinction between the entitlement of a city to a
district on one hand, and the entitlement of a province to a district on the other. For while a
province is entitled to at least a representative, with nothing mentioned about population, a city
must first meet a population minimum of 250,000 to be similarly entitled. The use by the subject
provision of a comma to separate the phrase "each city with a population of at least two
hundred fifty thousand" from the phrase "or each province" point to no other conclusion than
that the 250,000 minimum population is only required for a city, but not for a province.

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