Mariano v. COMELEC

Mariano v. COMELEC

G.R. No. 118577 March 7, 1995

Puno, J.

Facts:

                Petitioners assail as unconstitutional sections 2, 51, and 52 of R.A. No. 7854 entitled “An Act Converting the Municipality of Makati Into a Highly Urbanized City to be known as the City of Makati” on the following grounds, among others:

1.        Section 52 of R.A. No. 7854 is unconstitutional for:

(a)    it increased the legislative district of Makati only by special law (the Charter in violation of the constitutional provision requiring a general reapportionment law to be passed by Congress within three (3) years following the return of every census;

(a)

(b)   the increase in legislative district was not expressed in the title of the bill; and

(c)    the addition of another legislative district in Makati is not in accord with Section 5 (3), Article VI of the Constitution for as of the latest survey (1990 census), the population of Makati stands at only 450,000.

Section 52 of the Charter provides:

Sec. 52. Legislative Districts. — Upon its conversion into a highly-urbanized city, Makati shall thereafter have at least two (2) legislative districts that shall initially correspond to the two (2) existing districts created under Section 3(a) of Republic Act. No. 7166 as implemented by the Commission on Elections to commence at the next national elections to be held after the effectivity of this Act. Henceforth, barangays Magallanes, Dasmariñas and Forbes shall be with the first district, in lieu of Barangay Guadalupe-Viejo which shall form part of the second district. (emphasis supplied)

They contend. that the addition of another legislative district in Makati is unconstitutional for: (1) reapportionment ⁶cannot made by a special law, (2) the addition of a legislative district is not expressed in the title of the bill ⁷ and (3) Makati’s population, as per the 1990 census, stands at only four hundred fifty thousand (450,000).

Issue:

                whether the assailed provision contravenes Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution

Held:

                No. Reapportionment of legislative districts may be made through a special law, such as in the charter of a new city. The Constitution clearly provides that Congress shall be composed of not more than two hundred fifty (250) members, unless otherwise fixed by law. As thus worded, the Constitution did not preclude Congress from increasing its membership by passing a law, other than a general reapportionment of the law. This is its exactly what was done by Congress in enacting R.A. No. 7854 and providing for an increase in Makati’s legislative district. Moreover, to hold that reapportionment can only be made through a general apportionment law, with a review of all the legislative districts allotted to each local government unit nationwide, would create an inequitable situation where a new city or province created by Congress will be denied legislative representation for an indeterminate period of time.