Facts: A plebiscite in thirteen (13) provinces
and nine (9) cities in Mindanao and Palawan, was scheduled for November 19,
1989, in implementation of RA 6734, entitled "An Act Providing for an
Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao" (Organic Act).
These consolidated petitions pray that the Court: (1) enjoin the COMELEC from
conducting the plebiscite; and (2) declare RA 6734, or parts thereof,
unconstitutional. The arguments against R.A. 6734 raised by petitioners may
generally be categorized into either of the following: (a) that R.A. 6734, or
parts thereof, violates the Constitution, and (b) that certain provisions of
R.A. No. 6734 conflict with the Tripoli Agreement.
Issue:
Whether or not certain provisions of
the Organic Act are unconstitutional.
Held:
The petition has no merit and the law
is constitutional.
1.
Petitioner contends that the tenor of a provision in the Organic Act makes the creation
of an autonomous region absolute, such that even if only two provinces vote
in favor of autonomy, an autonomous region would still be created composed of
the two provinces where the favorable votes were obtained. there is a specific
provision in the Transitory Provisions (Article XIX) of the Organic Act, which
incorporates substantially the same requirements embodied in the Constitution
and fills in the details, thus:
SEC. 13. The creation of the Autonomous
Region in Muslim Mindanao shall take effect when approved by a majority of the
votes cast by the constituent units provided in paragraph (2) of Sec. 1 of
Article II of this Act in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than
ninety (90) days or later than one hundred twenty (120) days after the approval
of this Act: Provided, That only the provinces and cities voting
favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the Autonomous Region in
Muslim Mindanao. The provinces and cities which in the plebiscite do not vote
for inclusion in the Autonomous Region shall remain the existing administrative
determination, merge the existing regions.
Thus,
under the Constitution and R.A. No 6734, the creation of the autonomous region
shall take effect only when approved by a majority of the votes cast by the
constituent units in a plebiscite, and only those provinces and cities where a
majority vote in favor of the Organic Act shall be included in the autonomous
region. The provinces and cities wherein such a majority is not attained shall
not be included in the autonomous region. It may be that even if an autonomous
region is created, not all of the thirteen (13) provinces and nine (9) cities
mentioned in Article II, section 1 (2) of R.A. No. 6734 shall be included
therein. The single plebiscite contemplated by the Constitution and R.A. No.
6734 will therefore be determinative of (1) whether there shall be an autonomous
region in Muslim Mindanao and (2) which provinces and cities, among those
enumerated in R.A. No. 6734, shall compromise it.
2.
The question has been raised as to what this majority means. Does it
refer to a majority of the total votes cast in the plebiscite in all the
constituent units, or a majority in each of the constituent units, or both?
The
1987 Constitution provides: The creation of the autonomous region shall be
effective when approved by majority of the votes cast by the constituent units
in a plebiscite called for the purpose, provided that only provinces, cities
and geographic areas voting favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in
the autonomous region. [Art. X, sec, 18, para, 2]. It will readily be seen that
the creation of the autonomous region is made to depend, not on the total
majority vote in the plebiscite, but on the will of the majority in each of the
constituent units and the proviso underscores this.
3.
Petitioner avers that not all of the thirteen (13) provinces and nine (9)
cities included in the Organic Act, possess such concurrence in historical and
cultural heritage and other relevant characteristics. By including areas,
which do not strictly share the same characteristic as the others, petitioner
claims that Congress has expanded the scope of the autonomous region which the
constitution itself has prescribed to be limited.
Petitioner's
argument is not tenable. The Constitution lays down the standards by which
Congress shall determine which areas should constitute the autonomous region.
Guided by these constitutional criteria, the ascertainment by Congress of the
areas that share common attributes is within the exclusive realm of the
legislature's discretion. Any review of this ascertainment would have to go
into the wisdom of the law.
4.
Both petitions also question the validity of R.A. No. 6734 on the ground that
it violates the constitutional guarantee on free exercise of religion
[Art. III, sec. 5]. The objection centers on a provision in the Organic Act
which mandates that should there be any conflict between the Muslim Code and
the Tribal Code on the one had, and the national law on the other hand, the
Shari'ah courts created under the same Act should apply national law.
Petitioners maintain that the islamic law (Shari'ah) is derived from the Koran,
which makes it part of divine law. Thus it may not be subjected to any
"man-made" national law. Petitioner Abbas supports this objection by
enumerating possible instances of conflict between provisions of the Muslim
Code and national law, wherein an application of national law might be
offensive to a Muslim's religious convictions.
In
the present case, no actual controversy between real litigants exists. There
are no conflicting claims involving the application of national law resulting
in an alleged violation of religious freedom. This being so, the Court in this
case may not be called upon to resolve what is merely a perceived potential
conflict between the provisions the Muslim Code and national law.
5.
According to petitioners, said provision grants the President the power to
merge regions, a power which is not conferred by the Constitution upon the
President.
While
the power to merge administrative regions is not expressly provided for in the
Constitution, it is a power which has traditionally been lodged with the
President to facilitate the exercise of the power of general supervision over
local governments. There is no conflict between the power of the President to
merge administrative regions with the constitutional provision requiring a
plebiscite in the merger of local government units because the requirement of a
plebiscite in a merger expressly applies only to provinces, cities,
municipalities or barangays, not to administrative regions.
6.
Every law has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality. Based
on the grounds raised by petitioners to challenge the constitutionality of R.A.
No. 6734, the Court finds that petitioners have failed to overcome the
presumption. The dismissal of these two petitions is, therefore, inevitable.
No comments:
Post a Comment