Suntay For Petitioner. Barrios and Fule For Respondent
Suntay For Petitioner. Barrios and Fule For Respondent
Suntay For Petitioner. Barrios and Fule For Respondent
L-28089 October 25, 1967 Dianaton, Lanao del Sur shall comprise the barrios of Kapatagan, Bongabong, Aipang,
Dagowan, Bakikis, Bungabung, Losain, Matimos, and Magolatung situated in the municipality
BARA LIDASAN, petitioner, of Balabagan, Lanao del Sur, the barrios of Togaig and Madalum situated in the municipality
vs. of Buldon, Cotabato, the barrios of Bayanga, Langkong, Sarakan, Kat-bo, Digakapan, Magabo,
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent. Tabangao, Tiongko, Colodan and Kabamakawan situated in the municipality of Parang, also of
Cotabato.
Suntay for petitioner.
Barrios and Fule for respondent. Doubtless, as the statute stands, twelve barrios — in two municipalities in the province of
Cotabato — are transferred to the province of Lanao del Sur. This brought about a change in
the boundaries of the two provinces.
SANCHEZ, J.:
Apprised of this development, on September 7, 1967, the Office of the President, through
The question initially presented to the Commission on Elections,1 is this: Is Republic Act 4790,
the Assistant Executive Secretary, recommended to Comelec that the operation of the
which is entitled "An Act Creating the Municipality of Dianaton in the Province of Lanao del
statute be suspended until "clarified by correcting legislation."
Sur", but which includes barrios located in another province — Cotabato — to be spared
from attack planted upon the constitutional mandate that "No bill which may be enacted
into law shall embrace more than one subject which shall be expressed in the title of the Comelec, by resolution of September 20, 1967, stood by its own interpretation, declared that
bill"? Comelec's answer is in the affirmative. Offshoot is the present original petition for the statute "should be implemented unless declared unconstitutional by the Supreme
certiorari and prohibition. Court."
On June 18, 1966, the Chief Executive signed into law House Bill 1247, known as Republic Act This triggered the present original action for certiorari and prohibition by Bara Lidasan, a
4790, now in dispute. The body of the statute, reproduced in haecverba, reads: resident and taxpayer of the detached portion of Parang, Cotabato, and a qualified voter for
the 1967 elections. He prays that Republic Act 4790 be declared unconstitutional; and that
Comelec's resolutions of August 15, 1967 and September 20, 1967 implementing the same
Sec. 1. Barrios Togaig, Madalum, Bayanga, Langkong, Sarakan, Kat-bo, Digakapan, Magabo,
for electoral purposes, be nullified.
Tabangao, Tiongko, Colodan, Kabamakawan, Kapatagan, Bongabong, Aipang, Dagowan,
Bakikis, Bungabung, Losain, Matimos and Magolatung, in the Municipalities of Butig and
Balabagan, Province of Lanao del Sur, are separated from said municipalities and constituted 1. Petitioner relies upon the constitutional requirement aforestated, that "[n]o bill which may
into a distinct and independent municipality of the same province to be known as the be enacted into law shall embrace more than one subject which shall be expressed in the
Municipality of Dianaton, Province of Lanao del Sur. The seat of government of the title of the bill."2
municipality shall be in Togaig.
It may be well to state, right at the outset, that the constitutional provision contains dual
Sec. 2. The first mayor, vice-mayor and councilors of the new municipality shall be elected in limitations upon legislative power. First. Congress is to refrain from conglomeration, under
the nineteen hundred sixty-seven general elections for local officials. one statute, of heterogeneous subjects. Second. The title of the bill is to be couched in a
language sufficient to notify the legislators and the public and those concerned of the import
of the single subject thereof.
Sec. 3. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.
Of relevance here is the second directive. The subject of the statute must be "expressed in
It came to light later that barrios Togaig and Madalum just mentioned are within the
the title" of the bill. This constitutional requirement "breathes the spirit of command."3
municipality of Buldon, Province of Cotabato, and that Bayanga, Langkong, Sarakan, Kat-bo,
Compliance is imperative, given the fact that the Constitution does not exact of Congress the
Digakapan, Magabo, Tabangao, Tiongko, Colodan and Kabamakawan are parts and parcel of
obligation to read during its deliberations the entire text of the bill. In fact, in the case of
another municipality, the municipality of Parang, also in the Province of Cotabatoand not of
House Bill 1247, which became Republic Act 4790, only its title was read from its introduction
Lanao del Sur.
to its final approval in the House of Representatives4 where the bill, being of local
application, originated.5
Prompted by the coming elections, Comelec adopted its resolution of August 15, 1967, the
pertinent portions of which are:
Of course, the Constitution does not require Congress to employ in the title of an enactment,
language of such precision as to mirror, fully index or catalogue all the contents and the
For purposes of establishment of precincts, registration of voters and for other election minute details therein. It suffices if the title should serve the purpose of the constitutional
purposes, the Commission RESOLVED that pursuant to RA 4790, the new municipality of
demand that it inform the legislators, the persons interested in the subject of the bill, and constitutional dimensions in writing down the title of the bill. Transfer of a sizeable portion of
the public, of the nature, scope and consequences of the proposed law and its operation. territory from one province to another of necessity involves reduction of area, population
And this, to lead them to inquire into the body of the bill, study and discuss the same, take and income of the first and the corresponding increase of those of the other. This is as
appropriate action thereon, and, thus, prevent surprise or fraud upon the legislators.6 important as the creation of a municipality. And yet, the title did not reflect this fact.
In our task of ascertaining whether or not the title of a statute conforms with the Respondent asks us to read Felwa vs. Salas, L-16511, October 29, 1966, as controlling here.
constitutional requirement, the following, we believe, may be taken as guidelines: The Felwa case is not in focus. For there, the title of the Act (Republic Act 4695) reads: "An
Act Creating the Provinces of Benguet, Mountain Province, Ifugao, and Kalinga-Apayao." That
The test of the sufficiency of a title is whether or not it is misleading; and, which technical title was assailed as unconstitutional upon the averment that the provisions of the law
accuracy is not essential, and the subject need not be stated in express terms where it is (Section, 8 thereof) in reference to the elective officials of the provinces thus created, were
clearly inferable from the details set forth, a title which is so uncertain that the average not set forth in the title of the bill. We there ruled that this pretense is devoid of merit "for,
person reading it would not be informed of the purpose of the enactment or put on inquiry as surely, an Act creating said provinces must be expected to provide for the officers who shall
to its contents, or which is misleading, either in referring to or indicating one subject where run the affairs thereof" — which is "manifestly germane to the subject" of the legislation, as
another or different one is really embraced in the act, or in omitting any expression or set forth in its title. The statute now before us stands altogether on a different footing. The
indication of the real subject or scope of the act, is bad. lumping together of barrios in adjacent but separate provinces under one statute is neither a
natural nor logical consequence of the creation of the new municipality of Dianaton. A
change of boundaries of the two provinces may be made without necessarily creating a new
xxx xxx xxx
municipality and vice versa.
Separate Opinions
Such a trend has been reflected in subsequent decisions beginning with Sumulong v.
Commission on Elections,5 up to and including Felwa vs. Salas, a 1966 decision,6 the opinion
FERNANDO, J., dissenting: coming from Justice Concepcion.
With regret and with due recognition of the merit of the opinion of the Court, I find myself It is true of course that in Philconsa v. Gimenez,7 one of the grounds on which the invalidity
unable to give my assent. Hence these few words to express my stand. of Republic Act No. 3836 was predicated was the violation of the above constitutional
provision. This Retirement Act for senators and representatives was entitled "AN ACT
Republic Act No. 4790 deals with one subject matter, the creation of the municipality of AMENDING SUB-SECTION (c), SECTION TWELVE OF COMMONWEALTH ACT NUMBERED ONE
Dianaton in the province of Lanao del Sur. The title makes evident what is the subject matter HUNDRED EIGHTY-SIX, AS AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NUMBERED THIRTY HUNDRED
of such an enactment. The mere fact that in the body of such statute barrios found in two NINETY-SIX." As we noted, the paragraph in Republic Act No. 3836 deemed objectionable
other municipalities of another province were included does not of itself suffice for a finding "refers to members of Congress and to elective officers thereof who are not members of the
of nullity by virtue of the constitutional provision invoked. At the most, the statute to be free Government Service Insurance System. To provide retirement benefits, therefore, for these
from the insubstantial doubts about its validity must be construed as not including the officials, would relate to a subject matter which is not germane to Commonwealth Act No.
barrios, located not in the municipalities of Butig and Balabagan, Lanaodel Sur, but in Parang 186. In other words, this portion of the amendment ( re retirement benefits for Members of
and Baldon, Cotabato. Congress and appointive officers, such as the Secretary and Sergeants-at-arms for each
house) is not related in any manner to the subject of Commonwealth Act No. 186
The constitutional requirement is that no bill which may be enacted into law shall embrace establishing the Government Service Insurance System and which provides for both
more than one subject which shall be expressed in the title of the bill.1This provision is retirement and insurance benefits to its members." Nonetheless our opinion was careful to
similar to those found in the Constitution of many American States. It is aimed against the note that there was no abandonment of the principle of liberality. Thus: "we are not
evils, of the so-called omnibus bills, and log-rolling legislation, and against surreptitious or unmindful of the fact that there has been a general disposition in all courts to construe the
unconsidered enactments.2Where the subject of a bill is limited to a particular matter, the constitutional provision with reference to the subject and title of the Act, liberally."
It would follow therefore that the challenged legislation Republic Act No. 4790 is not doubts as to [their] validity."11 From the pen of the articulate jurist, Frankfurter:12
susceptible to the indictment that the constitutional requirement as to legislation having only "Accordingly, the phrase "lobbying activities" in the resolution must be given the meaning
one subject which should be expressed in his title was not met. The subject was the creation that may fairly be attributed to it, having special regard for the principle of constitutional
of the municipality of Dianaton. That was embodied in the title. adjudication which makes it decisive in the choice of fair alternatives that one construction
may raise serious constitutional questions avoided by another." His opinion in the Rumely
It is in the light of the aforementioned judicial decisions of this Court, some of the opinions case continues with the above pronouncement of Stone and two other former Chief Justices:
coming from jurists illustrious for their mastery of constitutional law and their acknowledged "In the words of Mr. Chief Justice Taft, '(i)t is our duty in the interpretation of federal statutes
erudition, that, with all due respect, I find the citation from Corpus JurisSecundum, to reach conclusion which will avoid serious doubt of their constitutionality', Richmond Screw
unnecessary and far from persuasive. The State decisions cited, I do not deem controlling, as Anchor Co. v. United States, 275 US 331, 346, 48 S. Ct. 194, 198, 72 L. ed. 303. . . . As phrased
the freedom of this Court to accept or reject doctrines therein announced cannot be by Mr. Chief Justice Hughes, "if a serious doubt of constitutionality is raised, it is a cardinal
doubted. principle that this Court will first ascertain whether a construction of the statute is fairly
possible by which the question may be avoided.' Crowell v. Benson, 285, 296, 76 L. ed. 598,
and cases cited." The prevailing doctrine then as set forth by Justice Clark in a 1963
Wherein does the weakness of the statute lie then? To repeat, several barrios of two
decision,13 is that courts "have consistently sought an interpretation which supports the
municipalities outside Lanaodel Sur were included in the municipality of Dianaton of that
constitutionality of legislation." Phrased differently by Justice Douglas, the judiciary favors
province. That itself would not have given rise to a constitutional question considering the
"that interpretation of legislation which gives it the greater change of surviving the test of
broad, well-high plenary powers possessed by Congress to alter provincial and municipal
constitutionality."14
boundaries. What justified resort to this Court was the congressional failure to make explicit
that such barrios in two municipalities located in Cotabato would thereafter form part of the
newly created municipality of Dianaton, Lanaodel Sur. It would follow then that both Philippine and American decisions unite in the view that a
legislative measure, in the language of Van Devanter "should not be given a construction
which will imperil its validity where it is reasonably open to construction free from such
To avoid any doubt as to the validity of such statute, it must be construed as to exclude from
peril."15 Republic Act No. 4790 as above construed incurs no such risk and is free from the
Dianaton all of such barrios mentioned in Republic Act No. 4790 found in municipalities
peril of nullity.
outside Lanaodel Sur. As thus interpreted, the statute can meet the test of the most rigid
scrutiny. Nor is this to do violence to the legislative intent. What was created was a new
municipality from barrios named as found in Lanaodel Sur. This construction assures So I would view the matter, with all due acknowledgment of the practical considerations
precisely that. clearly brought to light in the opinion of the Court.
This mode of interpreting Republic Act No. 4790 finds support in basic principles underlying
precedents, which if not precisely controlling, have a persuasive ring. In Radiowealth v.
Agregado,8 certain provisions of the Administrative Code were interpreted and given a
"construction which would be more in harmony with the tenets of the fundamental law." In
Sanchez v. Lyon Construction,9 this Court had a similar ruling: "Article 302 of the Code of
Commerce must be applied in consonance with [the relevant] provisions of our
Constitution." The above principle gained acceptance at a much earlier period in our
constitutional history. Thus in a 1913 decision, In re Guariña:10 "In construing a statute
enacted by the Philippine Commission we deem it our duty not to give it a construction
which would be repugnant to an Act of Congress, if the language of the statute is fairly
susceptible of another construction not in conflict with the higher law. In doing so, we think
we should not hesitate to disregard contentions touching the apparent intention of the
legislator which would lead to the conclusion that the Commission intended to enact a law in
violation of the Act of Congress. However specious the argument may be in favor of one of
two possible constructions, it must be disregarded if on examination it is found to rest on the
contention that the legislator designed an attempt to transcend the rightful limits of his
authority, and that his apparent intention was to enact an invalid law."
American Supreme Court decisions are equally explicit. The then Justice, later Chief Justice,
Stone, construed statutes "with an eye to possible constitutional limitations so as to avoid