Constitutional Law
Aquino v. Comelec
G.R. No. 189793: April 7, 2010
FACTS:
Petitioners Senator Benigno Simeon Aquino III and Mayor Jesse Robredo seek the
nullification as unconstitutional of Republic Act No. 9716, entitled “An Act Reapportioning
the Composition of the First and Second Legislative Districts in the Province of Camarines
Sur and Thereby Creating a New Legislative District from Such Reapportionment. “They
pray that the Comelec be prohibited from implementing R.A. No. 9716.
R.A. No. 9716 reconfigured the original composition of the first and second districts
of Camarines Sur to create a new district. Previously, the first district was composed of: Del
Gallego, Ragay, Lupi, Sipocot, Cabusao, Libmanan, Minalabac, Pamplona, Pasacao, and San
Fernando, while the second district was composed of Gainza, Milaor, Naga, Pili, Ocampo,
Canaman, Camaligan, Magarao, Bombon, and Calabanga. Now, these districts have been
divided into three districts: 1) Del Gallego, Ragay, Lupi, Sipocot, and Cabusao, 2) Libmanan,
Minalabac, Pamplona, Pasacao, San Fernando, Gainza, Milaor, and 3) Naga, Pili, Ocampo,
Canaman, Camaligan, Magarao, Bombon, and Calabanga.
Petitioners allege that a legislative district ought to have at least 250,000 inhabitants,
allegedly to be in accordance with the constitutional requirement. The resulting new first
district created by R.A. No. 9716 only has 176,383 inhabitants, thus, said law must be
stricken down as unconstitutional.
ISSUE:
Whether or not R.A. No. 9716 runs afoul of the explicit constitutional standard that
requires a minimum population of 250,000 for the creation of a legislative district
RULING:
Section 5(3) of Art. VI of the 1987 Constitution states:
Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact and
adjacent territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand,
or each province, shall have at least one representative.
The Section 5(3) of Article VI of the 1987 Constitution draws a plain and clear
distinction between the entitlement of a city to a district on one hand, and the entitlement of a
province to a district on the other. For while a province is entitled to at least a representative,
with nothing mentioned about population, a city must first meet a population minimum of
250,000 in order to be similarly entitled.
The use by the subject provision of a comma to separate the phrase “each city with a
population of at least two hundred fifty thousand” from the phrase “or each province” point
to no other conclusion than that the 250,000 minimum population is only required for a city,
but not for a province.
Plainly read, Section 5(3) of the Constitution requires a 250,000 minimum population
only for a city to be entitled to a representative, but not so for a province.