G.R. No. 189793. April 07, 2010 (Case Brief _ Digest)
G.R. No. 189793. April 07, 2010 (Case Brief _ Digest)
G.R. No. 189793. April 07, 2010 (Case Brief _ Digest)
### Title: Senator Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III and Mayor Jesse Robredo vs. Commission
on Elections
### Facts:
In the case of Senator Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III and Mayor Jesse Robredo vs.
Commission on Elections (COMELEC), the facts are as follows:
1. **Legislation Background:**
– Republic Act No. 9716, which originated from House Bill No. 4264, was signed into law by
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo on October 12, 2009.
– The law created a new legislative district for the Province of Camarines Sur by
reconfiguring its first and second legislative districts.
2. **Reconfiguration Details:**
– Before Republic Act No. 9716, Camarines Sur’s population of 1,693,821 was distributed
across four legislative districts.
– The reconfiguration transferred several municipalities between districts to create a new,
fifth district. This resulted in the revisit of population distribution as follows:
– **1st District:** 176,383
– **2nd District:** 276,777
– **3rd District:** 439,043
– **4th District:** 372,548
– **5th District:** 429,070
3. **Petitioners’ Argument:**
– Senator Aquino and Mayor Robredo argued that the reapportionment violates Section
5(3), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution, which requires a minimum population of 250,000
for creating a legislative district.
– The newly apportioned first district only has a population of 176,383, which does not meet
the said requirement.
4. **Respondent’s Argument:**
– COMELEC, through the Office of the Solicitor General, contended that the 250,000
population requirement only applies to cities, not provinces.
5. **Procedural Posture:**
© 2024 - batas.org | 1
G.R. No. 189793. April 07, 2010 (Case Brief / Digest)
– Petitioners filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule 65 of the Rules of
Court, challenging the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 9716 and seeking to restrain
COMELEC from implementing it.
### Issues:
The Supreme Court was tasked to resolve the following legal issues:
1. **Whether the 250,000 minimum population requirement set forth in Section 5(3), Article
VI of the 1987 Constitution applies to the creation of legislative districts in provinces.**
2. **Whether the petitioners have the legal standing and chose the correct legal remedy.**
© 2024 - batas.org | 2
G.R. No. 189793. April 07, 2010 (Case Brief / Digest)
### Doctrine:
The primary doctrine established/reiterated by this decision includes:
– **Distinct Population Requirements for Cities vs. Provinces:** The 250,000 minimum
population requirement explicitly applies to creating legislative districts for cities, **not**
for provinces.
– **Paramount Public Interest and Procedural Deviation:** When a case involves
transcendental public importance, the Supreme Court may relax procedural rules and
requirements for locus standi.
**Key Statutes:**
– **1987 Constitution, Article VI, Section 5(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.”
– **Local Government Code:** Provides guidelines on the creation of new provinces,
specifying requirements like income and population.
© 2024 - batas.org | 3
G.R. No. 189793. April 07, 2010 (Case Brief / Digest)
© 2024 - batas.org | 4