Concurring Justice Abad

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion of Puno, J. in Macalintal v.
COMELEC The decisions of COMELEC are reviewable only by petition for certiorari on grounds
of grave abuse of discretion.
Illustrations of the Application of the Principle of Blending of Powers| July 10, 2003|
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The COMELEC is, however subject to congressional scrutiny especially during budget
hearing. But congress cannot Kernell M. Ortega abolish COMELEC as it’s a mere
creature of the legislature; it owes its origin from the Constitution.
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE (FACTS & MAIN DECISION):
- Both COMELEC and the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) agree with Congress has no power to call the commissioners of the COMELEC to a question hour
the petitioner that sections 19 and 25 of Rep. Act No. 9189 are but COMELEC is mandated to “submit to the President and the Congress
unconstitutional on the ground that they violate the independence of the comprehensive report on the conduct of each election, plebiscite, initiative,
COMELEC. referendum and recall.” This provision allows the Congress to review and assess the
- The challenged provisions require the public respondent COMELEC to effectivity of election laws and if necessary, enact new laws or amend existing
submit its Implementing Rules and Regulations to the Joint Congressional statuses.
Oversight Committee for review, revision, amendment, or approval.
- Public respondents maintain that as an independent constitutional, the Be that as it may… legislative veto power or congressional oversight power over the
COMELEC is not under the control of the executive or the legislative in authority of COMELEC to issue rules and regulations in order to enforce election laws
the performance of its constitutional function to “enforce and administer is unconstitutional.
all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election.
- The Solicitor shares the same view that the role of legislature ends with The COMELEC occupies a distinct place in our scheme of government. As the
the finished task of legislation. Noting, nothing in Article VI of the 1987 constitutional body charged with the administration of our election laws, it is
Constitution suggests that the Congress is empowered to enforce and endowed with independence in the exercise of some of its powers and the discharge
administer election laws concurrent with the COMELEC. of its responsibilities. The power to promulgate rules and regulations in order to
- Section 17.1 of RA 9189 subjects the implementation of voting by mail to administer laws belong to this category of powers as this has been vested exclusively
prior review and approval of the Joint Oversight Committee. COMELEC by the 1987 Constitution to the COMELEC. It cannot be trenched upon by Congress in
maintains that voting by mail involves “administration of election laws” the exercise of its oversight function.
and falls squarely within its exclusive functions.
- Majority sustains that the petitioner as it holds that “by vesting itself with “I join the majority in holding that the section 17.1 of Rep. Act No. 9189 is
powers to approve, review, amend and revise the IRR for the Overseas unconstitutional for it allows Congress to negate exclusive power of the COMELEC to
Voting Act of 2003, Congress went beyond the scope of its constitutional administer and enforce election laws and regulations granted by the Constitution
authority. Congress trampled upon the constitutional mandate of itself.”
independence of the COMELEC.
ISSUE/S RAISED BY J. PUNO:
1. Whether or not Congress has oversight functions over constitutional bodies like the
COMELEC; and assuming that it has, whether Congress exceeded the permissible exercise of its
oversight functions.
Ratio Decidendi:
1. No. COMELEC is a constitutional body exclusively charged with the enforcement and
administration of “all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election,
plebiscite, initiative, referendum, and recall, and is invested with the power to decide
all questions affecting elections save those involving the right to vote.
COMELEC was purposely constituted as a body separate from the executive,

legislative, and judiciary branches of government given its important role in
preserving the sanctity of the right of suffrage.
The 1973 Constitution broadened the power of the COMELEC by making it the sole
judge of all election contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of
members of the national legislature and elective provincial and city officials. Thus, the
COMELEC was given judicial power aside from its traditional administrative and
executive functions. The trend towards strengthening the COMELEC continued with
the 1987 Constitution.

Concurring Justice Abad

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Concurring Justice Abad

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Concurring Justice Abad

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion of Puno, J. in Macalintal v.

ISSUE/S RAISED BY J. PUNO:

COMELEC was purposely constituted as a body separate from the executive,

You might also like