17 Chiongvian-V - Orbos
17 Chiongvian-V - Orbos
17 Chiongvian-V - Orbos
MENDOZA, J :
Facts:
These suits challenge the validity of a provision of the Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in
Muslim Mindanao (RA No. 6734), authorizing the President of the Philippines to “merge” by
administrative determination the region as remaining after the establishment of the Autonomous
Region, and the Executive Order issued by the President pursuant to such authority, “Providing for
the Reorganization of Administrative Regions in Mindanao”.
Congress passed R.A 6734 calling for a plebiscite to be held in certain provinces in Mindanao. In the
ensuing plebiscite held on November 16, 1989, four provinces voted in favor of creating an
autonomous region (Provinces of Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi). These areas
became the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).
On the other hand, there are provinces and cities who did not vote in favor of ARMM, Art. XIX, Sec.
13 of R.A No. 6734, provides that they shall remain in the existing administrative regions. Provided,
that the President may, by administrative determination, merge the existing regions.
The President on October 12, 1990 issued Executive Order No. 429, “Providing for the
Reorganization of the Administrative Regions in Mindanao.”, as amended by EO No. 439. In this EO,
certain provinces and cities in Mindanao were transferred or merged to the other regions.
Issue:
1. Whether or not the power to “merge” administrative regions is not a legislative in character.
2. Whether or not the power granted to the president authorizes the reorganization of regions of the
provinces and cities which did not take part in the plebiscite on the creation of the Autonomous region
or did not vote in favor of it.
Ruling:
1. No, the power to “merge” by the president is a legislative in character.
There was no abdication by Congress of its legislative power in conferring on the President the power
to merge administrative regions.
This court observe in the case of Abbas v. COMELEC, that “While the power to merge administrative
regions is not expressly provided for in the Constitution, it is a power which as traditionally been
lodged with the President to facilitate the exercise of the power of general supervision over local
governments (Art. X, Sec. 4 of the 1987 Constitution).”
The regions themselves are not territorial and political divisions like provinces, cities, municipalities
and barangays but are “mere groupings of contiguous provinces for administrative purposes.”
2. Yes, the power granted to the president authorizes the reorganization of regions of the
provinces and cities which did not take part in the plebiscite on the creation of the
Autonomous region or did not vote in favor of it.
Article XIX, Sec. 13 of R.A 6734 provides that “The provinces and cities which do not vote for
inclusion in the Autonomous Region shall remain in the existing administrative regions,” this provision
is subject to the qualification that “the President may by administrative determination merge the
existing regions.”
This means that while non-assenting provinces and cities are to remain in the regions as designated
upon the creation of the Autonomous Region, they may nevertheless be regrouped with contiguous
provinces forming other regions as the exigency of administration may require.
The petitioners do not claim that the reorganization of the regions in EO No. 429 is irrational. The
reorganization of administrative regions in EO No. 429 is based on relevant criteria, to wit:
1. Contiguity and geographical features; 2. transportation and communications facilities; 3. Cultural
and language groupings; 4. Land area and population; 5. Existing regional centers adopted by
several agencies; 6. Socio-economic development programs in the regions; and 7. Number of
provinces and cities.