CASE DIGEST

Sema v. COMELEC
Constitutional Law

Date July 16, 2008

FACTS:
 Petition seeks to annul Resolution No. 7902, dated May 10, 2007 of COMELEC
- Treats Cotabato City as part of the legislative district of the Province of Shariff Kabunsuan
 There are 2 legislative districts for the province of Maguindanao
- Based on the Ordinance appended to the 1987 Constitution
- 1st district consists of Cotabato City and 8 municipalities
 Cotabato City is not part of Maguindanao (independent component city)
- Maguindanao is part of ARMM under its Organic Act, RA 6734 (as amended by RA 9054)
- However Cotabato is not part of ARMM but of Region XII
 Voted against inclusion in the plebiscite in Nov. 1989
 ARMM Legislature, the ARMM Regional Assembly created the province of Shariff Kabunsuan
- By virtue of Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act No. 201 (MMA Act 201)
- Composed of 8 municipalities in the 1st district of Maguindanao
 Thereafter, 3 more municipalities were included in the province of Shariff Kabunsuan
- Exercise of its power to create provinces
- Voters of Maguindanao ratified the creation of this new province in a plebiscite held on Oct. 29, 2006
- This left only municipalities in the 2nd district as part of Maguindanao
 Cotabato City requested COMELEC to clarify its status
- In view of MMA Act 201
- Conversion of the 1st district of Maguindanao into a regular province
 COMELEC issued resolutions in reply
- Resolution No. 07-0407 = maintain status quo with Cotabato City as part of Shariff Kabunsuan in the 1 st
District, pending the enactment of the appropriate law by Congress
- Resolution No. 7845 = 1st District is composed only of Cotabato City due to MMA Act 201
- Resolution No. 7902 = amends 1st resolution, renaming the 1st district as “Shariff Kabunsuan Province
with Cotabato City”
 Formerly “1st District of Maguindanao with Cotabato City”
 Petitioner prayed for nullification of Resolution No. 7902
- She was candidate in the 2007 elections for representative of the 1st District
- Prayed for exclusion from canvassing of the votes cast in Cotabato City
 COMELEC, through OSG, responds that:
- Petition has become moot with the proclamation of private respondent as representative of the 1 st District
 The Court presented the following issues to the parties:
- WON RA 9054’s delegation of the power to create provinces to the ARMM Regional Assembly is
constitutional
- WON a province created under RA 9054 is entitled to 1 representative in the HOR without the need of a
national law creating a legislative district for such new province
 Petitioner contends that:
- RA 9054 is constitutional as a valid delegation by Congress to the ARMM of the power to create provinces
uncer Sec. 20 (9), Art. X of the Constitution and as an amendment to RA 7160
- However, RA 9054 should be construed as prohibiting the ARMM Regional Assembly from prescribing
standards that do not comply with the minimum criteria under RA 7160
 Private respondent contends that:
- RA 9054 is unconstitutional
- Power to create provinces is not among powers granted to autonomous regions under Art. X of the
Constitution
- Grant to the ARMM Regional Assembly of the power to prescribe standards lower than those mandated
under RA 7160 on the creation of provinces contravenes Art. X of the Constitution and the equal
protection clause
 COMELEC sides with private respondent

Page 1 of 3
CASE DIGEST
Sema v. COMELEC
Constitutional Law

ISSUE – HELD – RATIO:

ISSUES HELD
1) WON RA 9054 is unconstitutional insofar as it grants to the ARMM YES
Regional Assembly the power to create provinces and cities

2) WON MMA Act 201 is void YES

3) WON COMELEC Resolution No. 7902 is valid YES

RATIO:
 Proclamation of private respondent does not moot the petition
- Issue is not with the election of private respondent but the validity of Resolution No. 7902 and the
constitutionality of MMA Act 201 and Sec 19, Art. VI of RA 9054
- Ruling in this case will affect not only the recently concluded election but also all other succeeding
elections for the office in question
 The creation of LGUs is governed by Sec. 10, Art. X of the Constitution
- 3 conditions
1. Creation must follow criteria under the LGU
2. Creation must not conflict with any provision of the Constitution
3. There must be a plebiscite in the political units affected
 No express prohibition nor express grant of authority to Congress to delegate the power to create LGUs to
regional or local legislative bodies
- Under its plenary legislative powers, Congress can delegate to local legislative bodies the power to create
LGUs subject to reasonable standards and provided no conflict arises with any provision of the
Constitution
 Provincial boards and city/municipal councils have been delegated the power to create barangays
within their jurisdiction
- However, under the LGU, “only an Act of Congress can create provinces, cities, or municipalities”
 No provision in the Constitution that conflicts with the delegation of such power to the regional legislative
bodies
- Creation of provinces and cities is another matter
- A province cannot be created without a legislative district as it violates Sec. 5(3), Art. VI of the Constitution
and Sec. 3 of the Ordinance appended thereto
 Each province shall have at least one representative
- It follows that the power to create a province (or a city) also requires the power to create legislative
districts. The power to create a province or city inherently involves the power to create a legislative district
 For Congress to validly delegate the power to create a city or province, it must also, at the same time,
validly delegate the power to create a legislative district
- Power to increase the allowable membership in the HOR and to reapportion legislative districts is vested
exclusively in Congress under Sec. 5(1), Art. VI of the Constitution and Sec. 3 of the Ordinance appended
thereto
- In Montejo v. COMELEC, the Court held that “the power of redistricting is traditionally regarded as part of
the power of Congress to make laws”, thus vested exclusively in Congress
- Power to create provinces and cities necessarily includes the power to create legislative districts, a power
only Congress can exercise
 Congress is a national legislature
- Increase in membership through creation of legislative districts must be embodied in a national law
enacted only by Congress
- An inferior legislative body, created by a superior legislative body, cannot change the membership of the
superior legislative body
- Office of a legislative district representative to Congress is a national office. It would be incongruous for a
regional legislative body like the ARMM Regional Assembly to create a national office when its legislative
powers extend only to its regional territory
- Sec. 20, Art. X of the Constitution expressly limits the coverage of the Regional Assembly’s legislative
powers within its territorial jurisdiction and subject to the provisions of the Constitution and national laws
 Representative districts may be created:
1. Indirectly, through a special law enacted by Congress creating a province
2. By direct creation of representative districts within a province (reapportionment)
Page 2 of 3
CASE DIGEST
Sema v. COMELEC
Constitutional Law

 Cotabato City cannot be the lone component of its district

RULING:
WHEREFORE, we declare Section 19, Article VI of RA 9054 UNCONSTITUTIONAL insofar as it grants to the
Regional Assembly of the ARMM the power to create provinces and cities. Thus, we declare VOID MMA Act 201
creating the province of Shariff Kabunsuan. Consequently, we rule that COMELEC Resolution No. 7902 is VALID.

Page 3 of 3