Navarro v. Executive Secretary

ROMASANTA, GALILEE J.
Civil Procedure Case Digest

2nd Year John Wesley School of Law and Governance
Navarro vs. Ermita

648 SCRA 401, G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011
Petitioners: RODOLFO G. NAVARRO, VICTOR F. BERNAL, and RENE O. MEDINA
Respondents: EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA, representing the President of the Philippines Senate of the
Philippines, represented by the SENATE PRESIDENT House of Representatives, represented by the HOUSE
SPEAKER GOVERNOR ROBERT ACE S. BARBERS, representing the mother province of Surigao del Norte
GOVERNOR GERALDINE ECLEO VILLAROMAN, representing the new Province of Dinagat Islands
Intervenors: CONGRESSMAN FRANCISCO T. MATUGAS, HON. SOL T. MATUGAS, HON. ARTURO CARLOS A. EGAY,
JR., HON. SIMEON VICENTE G. CASTRENCE, HON. MAMERTO D. GALANIDA, HON. MARGARITO M.
LONGOS, and HON. CESAR M. BAGUNDOL
URGENT MOTION TO RECALL Entry of Judgment dated October 20, 2010
FACTS:
October 2, 2006 - President of the Republic approved into law Republic Act (R.A.) No.
9355 (An Act Creating the Province of Dinagat Islands).
December 3, 2006 - COMELEC conducted the mandatory plebiscite for the ratification of
the creation of the province under the Local Government Code (LGC) yielding 69,943
affirmative votes and 63,502 negative votes.
January 26, 2007 - Interim set of provincial officials took their oath of office upon the
appointment by the President with approval of the people from both the mother province
of Surigao del Norte and the Province of Dinagat Islands (Dinagat).
May 14, 2007 During synchronized elections, the Dinagatnons elected their new set of
provincial officials who assumed office on July 1, 2007.
November 10, 2006 - petitioners Rodolfo G. Navarro, Victor F. Bernal and Rene O.
Medina, former political leaders of Surigao del Norte, filed before the SC a petition for
certiorari and prohibition challenging the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9355, which was
DISMISSED on technical grounds. Their MR was also DENIED.
Petitioners, as taxpayers and residents of the Province of Surigao del Norte, filed
another petition for certiorari seeking to nullify R.A. No. 9355 for being unconstitutional,
alleging that the creation of Dinagat as a new province, if uncorrected, would perpetuate
an illegal act of Congress, and would unjustly deprive the people of Surigao del Norte of
a large chunk of the provincial territory, Internal Revenue Allocation (IRA), and rich
resources from the area. They pointed out that when the law was passed, Dinagat had a
land area of 802.12 square kilometers only and a population of only 106,951, failing to
comply with Section 10, Article X of the Constitution and of Section 461 of the LGC, on
both counts:
o Constitution, Article XLocal Government
Section 10. No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created, divided, merged, abolished,
or its boundary substantially altered, except in accordance with the criteria established in the local
government code and subject to the approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the
political units directly affected.
o LGC, Title IV, Chapter I
Section 461. Requisites for Creation.(a) A province may be created if it has an average annual income,
as certified by the Department of Finance, of not less than Twenty million pesos (P20,000,000.00) based
on 1991 constant prices and either of the following requisites:
i. a continuous territory of at least two thousand (2,000) square kilometers, as certified by
the Lands Management Bureau or
ii. a population of not less than two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) inhabitants as certified by the
National Statistics Office:
Provided, That, the creation thereof shall not reduce the land area, population, and income of the original unit or
units at the time of said creation to less than the minimum requirements prescribed herein.
(b) The territory need not be contiguous if it comprises two (2) or more islands or is separated by a
chartered city or cities which do not contribute to the income of the province.
(c) The average annual income shall include the income accruing to the general fund, exclusive of special
funds, trust funds, transfers, and nonrecurring income.
February 10, 2010 GRANTED the petition and declared R.A. No. 9355 unconstitutional
for failure to comply with the requirements on population and land area in the creation of
a province under the LGC. Consequently, it declared the proclamation of Dinagat and
the election of its officials as null and void. It likewise declared as null and void the
provision on Article 9(2) of the Rules and Regulations Implementing the LGC (LGCIRR),
stating that, [t]he land area requirement shall not apply where the proposed province is
Page 1 of 3
composed of one (1) or more islands for being beyond the ambit of Article 461 of the
LGC, inasmuch as such exemption is not expressly provided in the law.
May 12, 2010 - The Republic, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, and
Dinagat filed their respective MRs but were DENIED.
June 29, 2010 - The Republic and Dinagat both filed their respective motions for leave of
court to admit their second motions for reconsideration, accompanied by their second
motions for reconsideration. These motions were eventually noted without action by the
SC.
June 18, 2010 - Meanwhile, the movants-intervenors filed a Motion for Leave to
Intervene and to File and to Admit Intervenors MR of the Resolution dated May 12,
2010, alleging that the COMELEC issued Resolution No. 8790, relevant to this case and
that election to their respective offices would necessarily be annulled since Dinagat
Islands will revert to its previous status as part of the First Legislative District of Surigao
del Norte and a special election will have to be conducted for governor, vice governor,
and House of Representatives member and Sangguniang Panlalawigan member for the
First Legislative District of Surigao del Norte.
Moreover, as residents of Surigao del Norte and as public servants representing the
interests of their constituents, they have a clear and strong interest in the outcome of this
case inasmuch as the reversion of Dinagat as part of the First Legislative District of
Surigao del Norte will affect the latter province such that: (1) the whole administrative
setup of the province will have to be restructured (2) the services of many employees
will have to be terminated (3) contracts will have to be invalidated and (4) projects and
other developments will have to be discontinued. They claim that their rights cannot be
adequately pursued and protected in any other proceeding since their rights would be
foreclosed if the May 12, 2010 Resolution would attain finality.
July 20, 2010 - the SC DENIED the Motion for Leave to Intervene and to File and to
Admit Intervenors MR on the ground that the allowance or disallowance of a motion to
intervene is addressed to the sound discretion of the Court, and that the appropriate time
to file the said motion was before and not after the resolution of this case.
September 7, 2010 Movants-intervenors filed a MR citing several rulings of the Court,
allowing intervention as an exception to Section 2, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court that it
should be filed at any time before legal interest in this case was not yet existent. They
averred that prior to the May 10, 2010 elections, they were unaware of the proceedings
in this case. Even for the sake of argument that they had notice of the pendency of the
case, they pointed out that prior to the said elections, Sol T. Matugas was a simple
resident of Surigao del Norte, Arturo Carlos A. Egay, Jr. was a member of the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the Second District of Surigao del Norte, and Mamerto D.
Galanida was the Municipal Mayor of Socorro, Surigao del Norte, and that, pursuant to
COMELEC Resolution No. 8790, it was only after they were elected as Governor of
Surigao del Norte, Vice Governor of Surigao del Norte and Sangguniang Panlalawigan
Member of the First District of Surigao del Norte, respectively, that they became
possessed with legal interest in this controversy.
October 5, 2010 - the SC issued an order for Entry of Judgment, stating that the decision
in this case had become final and executory on May 18, 2010. Hence, the above motion.
ISSUE: Whether the creation of the Province of Dinagat complied with the requirements of the
law.
RULING:
YES. The land area, while considered as an indicator of viability of a local government unit, is
not conclusive in showing that Dinagat cannot become a province, taking into account its
average annual income of P82,696,433.23 at the time of its creation, as certified by the Bureau
Page 2 of 3
of Local Government Finance, which is four times more than the minimum requirement of
P20,000,000.00 for the creation of a province. The delivery of basic services to its constituents
has been proven possible and sustainable. Rather than looking at the results of the plebiscite
and the May 10, 2010 elections as mere fait accompli circumstances which cannot operate in
favor of Dinagats existence as a province, they must be seen from the perspective that Dinagat
is ready and capable of becoming a province. The SC should not be instrumental in stunting
such capacity.
The Court resolved to:

o GRANT the Urgent Motion to Recall Entry of Judgment by movants-intervenors
o RECONSIDER and SET ASIDE the July 20, 2010 Resolution, and GRANT the
Motion for Leave to Intervene and to File and to Admit Intervenors Motion for
Reconsideration of the Resolution dated July 20, 2010
o GRANT the Intervenors Motion for Reconsideration of the Resolution dated May 12,
2010. The May 12, 2010 Resolution is RECONSIDERED and SET ASIDE. The
provision in Article 9(2) of the Rules and Regulations Implementing the Local
Government Code of 1991 stating, The land area requirement shall not apply where
the proposed province is composed of one (1) or more islands, is declared VALID.
Accordingly, Republic Act No. 9355 (An Act Creating the Province of Dinagat
Islands) is declared as VALID and CONSTITUTIONAL, and the proclamation of the
Province of Dinagat Islands and the election of the officials thereof are declared
VALID and
o The petition is DISMISSED.
Page 3 of 3

Navarro v. Executive Secretary

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Navarro v. Executive Secretary

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Navarro v. Executive Secretary

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ROMASANTA, GALILEE J.

Civil Procedure Case Digest

Navarro vs. Ermita

The Court resolved to:

You might also like