Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 31 views

    Tan V COMELEC

    Uploaded by

    Jessie Albert Catapang
    The Supreme Court ruled that a planned plebiscite on the creation of the province of Negros del Norte was unconstitutional. The Court held that whenever a province is divided or its boundaries substantially altered, the approval of a majority of votes in the plebiscite of all units affected is required. In this case, both Negros Occidental province and the proposed Negros del Norte province would be affected units, so all voters in Negros Occidental should have been allowed to vote. As only voters in the Negros del Norte area were permitted to vote, the plebiscite violated the constitution and was declared a nullity.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Tan V COMELEC

    Uploaded by

    Jessie Albert Catapang
    31 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that a planned plebiscite on the creation of the province of Negros del Norte was unconstitutional. The Court held that whenever a province is divided or its boundaries substantially altered, the approval of a majority of votes in the plebiscite of all units affected is required. In this case, both Negros Occidental province and the proposed Negros del Norte province would be affected units, so all voters in Negros Occidental should have been allowed to vote. As only voters in the Negros del Norte area were permitted to vote, the plebiscite violated the constitution and was declared a nullity.

    Original Title

    Tan v COMELEC

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that a planned plebiscite on the creation of the province of Negros del Norte was unconstitutional. The Court held that whenever a province is divided or its boundaries substantially altered, the approval of a majority of votes in the plebiscite of all units affected is required. In this case, both Negros Occidental province and the proposed Negros del Norte province would be affected units, so all voters in Negros Occidental should have been allowed to vote. As only voters in the Negros del Norte area were permitted to vote, the plebiscite violated the constitution and was declared a nullity.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    31 views1 page

    Tan V COMELEC

    Uploaded by

    Jessie Albert Catapang
    The Supreme Court ruled that a planned plebiscite on the creation of the province of Negros del Norte was unconstitutional. The Court held that whenever a province is divided or its boundaries substantially altered, the approval of a majority of votes in the plebiscite of all units affected is required. In this case, both Negros Occidental province and the proposed Negros del Norte province would be affected units, so all voters in Negros Occidental should have been allowed to vote. As only voters in the Negros del Norte area were permitted to vote, the plebiscite violated the constitution and was declared a nullity.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Tan v.

    COMELEC

    TAN vs. COMELEC


    G.R. No. 73155 July 11, 1986
    Governing law: Art XI Sec. 3 of Constitution in relation to Sec. 197 of Local Government Code

    Facts:
    This case was prompted by the enactment of Batas Pambansa Blg. 885, An Act Creating a New
    Province in the Island of Negros to be known as the Province of Negros del Norte, effective
    Dec. 3, 1985. (Cities of Silay, Cadiz and San Carlos and the municipalities of Calatrava,
    Taboso, Escalante, Sagay, Manapla, Victorias, E.R. Magalona, and Salvador Benedicto
    proposed to belong to the new province).
    Pursuant to and in implementation of this law, the COMELEC scheduled a plebiscite for January
    3, 1986. Petitioners opposed, filing a case for Prohibition and contending that the B.P. 885 is
    unconstitutional and not in complete accord with the Local Government Code because:
    • The voters of the parent province of Negros Occidental, other than those living within the
    territory of the new province of Negros del Norte, were not included in the plebiscite.
    • The area which would comprise the new province of Negros del Norte would only be about
    2,856.56 sq. km., which is lesser than the minimum area prescribed by the governing statute,
    Sec. 197 of LGC.

    Issue:
    WON the plebiscite was legal and complied with the constitutional requisites of the Consititution,
    which states that — “Sec. 3. No province, city, municipality or barrio 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 the approval by a majority of the
    votes in a plebiscite in the unit or units affected”? NO.

    Held:
    Whenever a province is created, divided or merged and there is substantial alteration of the
    boundaries, “the approval of a majority of votes in the plebiscite in the unit or units affected”
    must first be obtained. The creation of the proposed new province of Negros del Norte will
    necessarily result in the division and alteration of the existing boundaries of Negros Occidental
    (parent province).

    Plain and simple logic will demonstrate that two political units would be affected. The first would
    be the parent province of Negros Occidental because its boundaries would be substantially
    altered. The other affected entity would be composed of those in the area subtracted from the
    mother province to constitute the proposed province of Negros del Norte. 
    Paredes vs. Executive (G.R. No. 55628) should not be taken as a doctrinal or compelling
    precedent. Rather, the dissenting view of Justice Abad Santos is applicable, to wit:
    “…when the Constitution speaks of “the unit or units affected” it means all of the people of the
    municipality if the municipality is to be divided such as in the case at bar or of the people of two
    or more municipalities if there be a merger.”

    The remaining portion of the parent province is as much an area affected. The substantial
    alteration of the boundaries of the parent province, not to mention the adverse economic effects
    it might suffer, eloquently argue the points raised by the petitioners.”
    SC pronounced that the plebscite has no legal effect for being a patent nullity.

    You might also like