Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6K views

    Mariano vs. COMELEC Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    unbeatable38
    The Supreme Court ruled that increasing the legislative district of Makati through a special law (RA 7854) rather than a general reapportionment law was constitutional. The Constitution allows Congress to increase its membership through law other than general reapportionment. Additionally, holding that reapportionment can only occur through general law would deprive new cities representation. While Makati's population was 450,000 in 1990, the Constitution only requires 250,000 to have at least one representative, so increasing its district was valid.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Mariano vs. COMELEC Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    unbeatable38
    6K views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that increasing the legislative district of Makati through a special law (RA 7854) rather than a general reapportionment law was constitutional. The Constitution allows Congress to increase its membership through law other than general reapportionment. Additionally, holding that reapportionment can only occur through general law would deprive new cities representation. While Makati's population was 450,000 in 1990, the Constitution only requires 250,000 to have at least one representative, so increasing its district was valid.

    Original Title

    Mariano vs. COMELEC case digest

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that increasing the legislative district of Makati through a special law (RA 7854) rather than a general reapportionment law was constitutional. The Constitution allows Congress to increase its membership through law other than general reapportionment. Additionally, holding that reapportionment can only occur through general law would deprive new cities representation. While Makati's population was 450,000 in 1990, the Constitution only requires 250,000 to have at least one representative, so increasing its district was valid.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    6K views1 page

    Mariano vs. COMELEC Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    unbeatable38
    The Supreme Court ruled that increasing the legislative district of Makati through a special law (RA 7854) rather than a general reapportionment law was constitutional. The Constitution allows Congress to increase its membership through law other than general reapportionment. Additionally, holding that reapportionment can only occur through general law would deprive new cities representation. While Makati's population was 450,000 in 1990, the Constitution only requires 250,000 to have at least one representative, so increasing its district was valid.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Myla Ruth N.

    Sara

    MARIANO V. COMELEC

    Facts:
    Two petitions are filed assailing certain provisions of RA 7854, An Act Converting The Municipality of
    Makati Into a Highly Urbanized City to be known as the City of Makati, as unconstitutional.

    Section 52 of RA 7854 is said to be unconstitutional for it increased the legislative district of Makati only
    by special law in violation of Art. VI, Sec. 5(4) requiring a general reapportionment law to be passed by Congress
    within 3 years following the return of every census. Also, the addition of another legislative district in Makati is
    not in accord with Sec. 5(3), Art. VI of the Constitution for as of the 1990 census, the population of Makati stands
    at only 450,000.

    Issue: Whether or not the addition of another legislative district in Makati is unconstitutional

    Held:
    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 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 law. This is exactly what was done by
    Congress in enacting RA 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. The intolerable situations will deprive the people of a new city or province a particle of their sovereignty.

    Petitioner cannot insist that the addition of another legislative district in Makati is not in accord with Sec.
    5(3), Art. VI of the Constitution for as of the 1990 census, the population of Makati stands at only 450,000. Said
    section provides that a city with a population of at least 250,000 shall have at least one representative. Even
    granting that the population of Makati as of the 1990 census stood at 450,000, its legislative district may still be
    increased since it has met the minimum population requirement of 250,000.

    You might also like