BAI SANDRA S. A. SEMA, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND DIDAGEN P. DILANGALEN, RESPONDENTS.

Sema versus Commission on Elections

The Case

This is a special civil action of certiorari and prohibition filed by Bai Sandra Sema against the Commission on Elections and Didagen Dilangalen, questioning the validity of a Commission resolution that treated Cotabato City as part of the legislative district of the newly created Province of Shariff Kabunsuan. The case matters because it settles two foundational questions of constitutional law: whether Congress may delegate to the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao Regional Assembly the power to create provinces and cities, and whether a province so created is automatically entitled to a representative in the House of Representatives. The Court's answer reshaped the map of legislative representation in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.

Procedural History

The case began as a petition before the Supreme Court, not in a trial court. Sema filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition directly with the Supreme Court, praying for the nullification of Commission on Elections Resolution No. 7902 and for the exclusion from canvassing of the votes cast in Cotabato City. A second petition, filed by other petitioners, raised the same challenge and was later consolidated with Sema's petition. The Commission on Elections, through the Office of the Solicitor General, moved to dismiss on the ground that certiorari was the wrong remedy and that the proclamation of Dilangalen had rendered the petition moot. The Supreme Court required the parties to comment on whether a province created by the Regional Assembly is entitled to one representative without a national law, heard them in oral arguments, and thereafter resolved the consolidated petitions.

Facts

The Ordinance appended to the 1987 Constitution apportioned two legislative districts for the Province of Maguindanao. The first district consisted of Cotabato City and eight municipalities. Maguindanao formed part of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, but Cotabato City did not, having voted against inclusion in the plebiscite held in November 1989.

On 28 August 2006, the Regional Assembly of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, invoking its power to create provinces under its organic act, enacted Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act No. 201, creating the Province of Shariff Kabunsuan out of the eight municipalities of the first district. The voters of Maguindanao ratified the creation in a plebiscite held on 29 October 2006. Later, three new municipalities were carved out of the original nine, leaving Maguindanao with only its second district.

Cotabato City then asked the Commission on Elections to clarify its status. The Commission first maintained the status quo, treating Cotabato City as part of Shariff Kabunsuan. In preparation for the May 2007 elections, however, it issued a resolution stating that the first district was composed only of Cotabato City. It then issued Resolution No. 7902, renaming the district Shariff Kabunsuan Province with Cotabato City. Sema, a candidate for representative of that district, challenged the resolution, and Dilangalen, who was proclaimed winner, defended it.

Issues

• Whether or not the writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus are proper to test the constitutionality of Commission on Elections Resolution No. 7902.
• Whether or not the proclamation of Dilangalen mooted the petition.
• Whether or not Section 19, Article VI of Republic Act No. 9054, delegating to the Regional Assembly the power to create provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays, is constitutional.
• Whether or not a province created by the Regional Assembly under that provision is entitled to one representative in the House of Representatives without a national law creating a legislative district.
• Whether or not Commission on Elections Resolution No. 7902 is valid in maintaining the status quo in the first legislative district of Maguindanao.

Applicable Provisions

Section 10, Article X of the Constitution provides:

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.

This fixes the three conditions for creating a local government unit and frames the inquiry into whether the Regional Assembly may create provinces.

Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution provides:

SECTION 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations. (3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact, and adjacent territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or each province, shall have at least one representative. (4) Within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative districts based on the standards provided in this section.

This is the textual basis for the Court's holding that the power to create and reapportion legislative districts belongs exclusively to Congress.

Section 3 of the Ordinance appended to the Constitution provides:

Any province that may hereafter be created, or any city whose population may hereafter increase to more than two hundred fifty thousand shall be entitled in the immediately following election to at least one Member.

This confirms that a province cannot be created without a corresponding legislative district.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that while certiorari and mandamus were unavailable because the Commission acted in an administrative capacity, prohibition was proper, since it has long been recognized as the remedy for testing the constitutionality of election laws, rules, and regulations.

On the second issue, the Court held that the proclamation did not moot the petition. The case concerns the validity of the resolution and the constitutionality of the autonomy act, and its outcome affects not only the recent elections but all succeeding ones.

On the third issue, the Court held that Section 19, Article VI of Republic Act No. 9054 is unconstitutional insofar as it grants the Regional Assembly the power to create provinces and cities. The creation of a province or city inherently involves the power to create a legislative district, and that power belongs exclusively to Congress. The Court explained that the creation of local government units must follow the criteria in the Local Government Code, must not conflict with the Constitution, and must be ratified in a plebiscite. Because a province cannot be created without a legislative district, Congress cannot delegate the power to create provinces without also delegating the power to create legislative districts, which it cannot do. Consequently, Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act No. 201, creating the Province of Shariff Kabunsuan, is void.

On the fourth issue, the Court held that a province created by the Regional Assembly is not entitled to a representative without a national law, because only Congress may create legislative districts.

On the fifth issue, the Court held that Resolution No. 7902 is valid. Since Shariff Kabunsuan was never validly created, the first legislative district of Maguindanao remains as originally apportioned, composed of Cotabato City and the eight municipalities.

Doctrine

The creation of a province or city inherently involves the power to create a legislative district, because every province and every city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand is entitled to at least one representative. Congress cannot delegate to a regional or local legislative body the power to create legislative districts, as that power is vested exclusively in Congress under Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution. A law enacted by a regional assembly creating a province is therefore void, and the province so created is not entitled to representation in the House of Representatives.

Disposition

The petitions were dismissed. The Court upheld the validity of Commission on Elections Resolution No. 7902, declared Section 19, Article VI of Republic Act No. 9054 unconstitutional insofar as it grants the power to create provinces and cities, and declared Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act No. 201 void.

Remember This

The single line to memorize: the power to create legislative districts is exclusively Congress's, so a province cannot be created by a regional assembly. Examiners use this case to test the limits of delegation to autonomous regions and the interplay between local government creation and legislative apportionment.