Effect of Reapportionment



Republic Act No. 9716 separated eight out of its ten towns comprising a legislative district and renamed them as another district.  Thereafter, a provincial board member was elected to the same position for the third and fourth time, but now in representation of the renamed district. The Supreme Court in Naval v. Commission on Elections[1] held that the fourth election was a violation of the three-term limit rule because the renamed district is the same one which brought him to office. The Supreme Court added that the actual difference in the population of the old Second District from that of the current Third District amounts to less than 10% of the population of the latter. This fact renders “the new Third District as essentially, although not literally, the same as the old Second District.”


[1] Naval v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 207851, July 8, 2014. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Justice Puno's Call for Charter Change

Former Chief Justice Reynato Puno's call for renewed debate for constitutional amendment was disappointing. Justice Puno made his call during the inaugural lecture of the UP College of Law's Centennial Lecture Series. However, he cited no new reasons for the debate and there was an unsettling JDV-esque ring to his entire lecture. Many of these grounds he cited as reasons for change have already been examined and debunked by scholars . One recycled argument--legislative gridlock is presently being addressed by the Aquino administration by holding a Cabinet workshop to identify priority bills that will be presented to the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council. These steps are being taken precisely to address potential gridlock. I expected more from the first lecture that starts the UP College of Law's centennial lecture series. I thought it should have been a scholarly forum that examines important legal issues and not a venue for political posturing.
Read more

Alternative to Oposa

I do not mean to suggest that the Philippine Supreme Court has abandoned the environment. Sometimes the solutions to our problems need not be remedies that straddle generations or excite international attention. There is still one alternative that the Supreme Court has preserved: local governments. Local governments in the Philippines are not all allies of the environment. Too many local officials equate economic development with large-scale resource extraction activities such as mining and logging. But when cases reach the Supreme Court, the Court has been remarkably supportive of local governments and community efforts to protect the environment. Two decisions of the Court come to mind. The first is Tano v Socrates (G.R. No. 110249, August 21, 1997). In that case the Supreme Court upheld the power of the local governments to enact laws to protect the environment pursuant to the general welfare clause of the Local Government Code of 1991. The Court pointed out that the Code seeks “to...
Read more