Province of Sulu v. Medialdea
G.R. No. 242255/243246/243693
September 9, 2024
FACTS:
These consolidated petitions challenge the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 11054 (Bangsamoro Organic Law) which provides that the territorial jurisdiction of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) shall be composed of inter alia of the present geographical area known as the ARMM created under RA 6734 as amended by RA 9054. This includes the Province of Sulu. On October 17, 2018, the Province of Sulu filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with an Urgent Prayer for the Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order and/or writ of Preliminary Injunction before this Court. It urges this Court to declare unconstitutional the Bangsamoro Organic Law and to enjoin the conduct of the plebiscite for its ratification. On December 11, 2018, the Philippine Constitution Association (PHILCONSA) also filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with a Prayer for the Issuance of a TRO and/or WPI before this Court, assailing the constitutionality of the Bangsamoro Organic Law and praying that all “projects or activities grounded or emanating from RA 11054 and EO 120 be halted. The Philippine Association of Islamic Accountants, Inc. and Latiph et al. filed a Mation for Leave to File Intervention. On January 25, 2019, the National Plebiscite Board of Canvassers (NPBOC) revealed the results of the January 21, 2019 plebiscite, where majority of the votes cast were in favor of the Bangsamoro Organic Law. The majority of the votes cast in Isabela City, Basilan rejected its inclusion. Maguindanao Governor Mangudadatu filed a Mation for Leave of Court to Intervene, praying that this Court admit their Comment-in-Intervention opposing the Province of Sulu’s Petition. Several proclamations by NPBOC were held thereafter. The League of Bangsamoro Organizations also intervened.
ISSUE:
1. Whether or not the petitioners have satisfactorily discharged their burden of showing that this case is justiciable.
2. Whether or not the Bangsamoro Organic Law violates Article X of the Constitution.
3. Whether or not the inclusion of the Province of Sulu in BARMM despite its rejection of the Bangsamoro Organic Law is unconstitutional.
4. Whether or not the Bangsamoro Organic Law violates indigenous peoples’ rights when they were subsumed in the Bangsamoro identity.
HELD:
1. No. PHILCONSA did not allege any injury it stands to suffer with the enactment of the Bangsamoro Organic Law. While PHILCONSA stated that its mission is to defend the Constitution, this Court cannot be expected to speculate on the injury PHILCONSA stands to suffer. In Senator Pangilinan v. Cayetano, the Court recognized that an association may file petitions on behalf of its members on the basis of third party standing. However, to do so, the association must meet the following requirements: (1) “the party bringing suit must have suffered an ‘injury-in-fact,’ thus giving it a sufficiently concrete interest’ in the outcome of the issue in dispute”; (2) “the party must have a close relation to the third party”; and (3) “there must exist some hindrance to the third party’s ability to protect his or her own interests.”
In public suits, such as the case before this Court, petitioner may assert a “public right” in assailing an allegedly illegal official action, as a representative of the general public. This may be a person who is affected no differently from any other citizen, suing in the category of a “citizen,” or “taxpayer.” However, petitioners must show that they are entitled to seek judicial protection. Here, PHILCONSA failed to convince this Court why it must be heard as an association. Its invocation of its duty falls short of demonstrating that it has suffered or will suffer a direct injury resulting from the passage and implementation of the Bangsamoro Organic Law. It did not plead any special reason or exhibit actual or imminent injury from which its members stand to suffer.
2. No. To determine the validity of enacting the Bangsamoro Organic Law, it must be sound on the following points: (1) its enactment must be legal; (2) the text of the law must conform to the Constitution; (3) it must not conflict with other laws; and (4) it must withstand judicial review.
The Constitution provides for two types of local governance: (1) the territorial and political subdivisions composed of provinces, cities, municipalities, barangays; and (2) autonomous regions. Further territorial and political subdivisions are allowed within autonomous regions. Pursuant to the Constitution, RA 6649 established the Regional Consultative Commission for Muslim Mindanao, which subsequently drafted RA 6734 (ARMM). RA 6734 was later amended by RA 9054, which both detailed the powers of the national government, in relation to those reserved for the regional government. Congress may repeal, modify, or replace an earlier organic act provided that the text remains consistent with the Constitution and subject to the affected people’s ratification. While the Constitution does not precisely define the boundaries of autonomy for autonomous regions, Article X, Section 20 specifies the powers vested in their legislative assemblies under the Constitution:
Sec. 20 “Within its territorial jurisdiction and subject to the provisions of this Constitution and national laws, the organic act of autonomous regions shall provide for legislative powers over:
(1) Administrative organization;
(2) Creation of sources of revenues;
(3) Ancestral domain and natural resources;
(4) Personal, family, and property relations;
(5) Regional urban and rural planning development;
(6) Economic, social, and tourism development;
(7) Educational policies;
(8) Preservation and development of the cultural heritage; and
(9) Such other matters as may be authorized by law for the promotion of the general welfare of the people of the region.
These powers were reiterated in Article V, Section 2 of the Bangsamoro Organic Law, to be exercised by the Bangsamoro government, without prejudice to the president’s general supervision. Further, the national government retains all powers, functions, and responsibilities that are not granted to the Bangsamoro government by the Constitution or national laws. The national government retains authority over matters including, but not limited to, national defense and security, citizenship, foreign affairs, and foreign trade.
3. Yes. It was erroneous to include the Province of Sulu in BARMM, when its people did not favorably vote to ratify the Bangsamoro Organic Law.
In the assailed plebiscite to ratify the organic law, while all the political units directly affected must favorably vote for its inclusion in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region by a majority, the provinces and cities of the present ARMM voted as one geographical area. In the votes cast in the entire ARMM, 1,540,017 voted “yes” which overwhelmingly won in the region, as opposed to the 198,750 “no” votes. The Province of Sulu rejected the measure, as the “yes” votes narrowly lost at 137,630 against the 163,526 “no” votes. This created the absurd situation where petitioner’s constituents did not ratify the organic law, but it was nonetheless made part of the newly created Bangsamoro Autonomous Region.
In considering the ARMM as one geographical area, the Bangsamoro Organic Law transgressed the Constitution and disregarded the autonomy of each constituent unit of what used to comprise the ARMM. The Province of Sulu, as a political subdivision under the ARMM, did not lose its character as such and as a unit that was granted local autonomy. The Constitution and the Local Government Code provide for how political entities may be abolished. The Province of Sulu cannot be deemed abolished upon its rejection of the Bangsamoro Organic Law. Thus, it was illegally included in the autonomous region, and the Organic Law explicitly violated the constitutional provision that “only provinces, cities, and geographic areas voting favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous region.
4. No. Section 1 of the Bangsamoro Organic Law defines who the Bangsamoro people are: ”those who, at the advent of the Spanish colonization, were considered natives or original inhabitants of Mindanao and the Sulu archipelago and its adjacent islands, whether of mixed or of full blood, shall have the right to identify themselves, their spouses and descendants, as Bangsamoro.”
BARMM is a political entity that provides for its basic structure of government, recognizing the “justness and legitimacy of the cause of the Bangsamoro people and the aspirations of Muslim Filipinos and all indigenous cultural communities in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.” The aim is to “secure their identity and posterity,” enabling “meaningful self-governance within the framework of the Constitution and the national sovereignty, as well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines.”
No comments:
Post a Comment