[02] Navarro v.

Ermita ISSUE AND RULING:

G.R. No. 180050 | February 10, 2010 | Peralta  WON R.A. No. 9355 is constitutional – NO. (2010 Ruling); YES (2011 Ruling)

PETITIONERS/PROSECUTORS: RODOLFO G. NAVARRO, VICTOR F. BERNAL, February 10, 2010 Ruling

and RENE O. MEDINA  No. The SC ruled that the population of 120,813 is below the Local Government
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA, Code (LGC) minimum population requirement of 250,000 inhabitants.
representing the President of the Philippines; Senate of the Philippines, represented by  Neither did Dinagat Islands, with an approximate land area of 802.12 square
the SENATE PRESIDENT; House of Representatives, represented by the HOUSE kilometers meet the LGC minimum land area requirement of 2,000 square
SPEAKER; GOVERNOR ROBERT ACE S. BARBERS, representing the mother province kilometers.
of Surigao del Norte; GOVERNOR GERALDINE ECLEO VILLAROMAN,  The Court reiterated its ruling that paragraph 2 of Article 9 of the Rules and
representing the new Province of Dinagat Islands Regulations
 Implementing the Local Government Code, which exempts proposed provinces
TOPIC: Creation and Alteration of Local Government Units composed of one or more islands from the land area requirement, was null and
void as the said exemption is not found in Sec. 461 of the LGC. “There is no dispute
FACTS: that in case of discrepancy between the basic law and the rules and regulations
 The National Statistics Office certified that Dinagat Islands’ population is 120,813. implementing the said law, the basic law prevails, because the rules and
Its land area is 802.12 square kilometers and its average annual income is regulations cannot go beyond the terms and provisions of the basic law,” held the
P82,696,433.23, as certified by the Bureau of Local Government Finance. Court. (GR No. 180050, Navarro v. Ermita, May 12, 2010)
 October 2, 2006: the President approved into law R.A. 9355 creating the Province
of Dinagat Islands.  The Republic, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, and Dinagat filed
 December 3, 2006: the COMELEC conducted the mandatory plebiscite for the their respective motions for reconsideration of the Decision. In its Resolution dated
ratification of the creation of the province under the LGC which yielded 69,943 May 12, 2010, the Supreme Court denied the said motions.
affirmative votes and 63,502 negative votes.
o With the approval of the people from both the mother province of Surigao April 12, 2011 Ruling
del Norte and the Province of Dinagat Islands (Dinagat), the President  Yes. In Navarro vs. Executive Secretary (G.R. no. 180050, April 12, 2011), the
appointed the interim set of provincial officials who took their oath of office Honorable Supreme Court ruled that Republic Act No. 9355 is as VALID and
on January 26, 2007. CONSTITUTIONAL, and the proclamation of the Province of Dinagat Islands and
o Later, during the May 14, 2007 synchronized elections, the Dinagatnons the election of the officials thereof are declared VALID.
elected their new set of provincial officials who assumed office on July 1,  The SC also ruled that the provision in Article 9(2) of the Rules and Regulations
2007. Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991 stating, “The land area
 November 10, 2006: petitioners Rodolfo G. Navarro and other former political requirement shall not apply where the proposed province is composed of one (1)
leaders of Surigao del Norte, filed before the SC a petition for certiorari and or more islands,” is declared VALID.
prohibition (G.R. No. 175158) challenging the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9355  According to the SC, “with respect to the creation of barangays, land area is not a
alleging that that the creation of Dinagat as a new province, if uncorrected, would requisite indicator of viability. However, with respect to the creation of
perpetuate an illegal act of Congress, and would unjustly deprive the people of municipalities, component cities, and provinces, the three (3) indicators of viability
Surigao del Norte of a large chunk of the provincial territory, Internal Revenue and projected capacity to provide services, i.e., income, population, and land area,
Allocation (IRA), and rich resources from the area. are provided for.”
 “But it must be pointed out that when the local government unit to be created  This preferential option would prove more difficult and burdensome if the 2,000-
consists of one (1) or more islands, it is exempt from the land area requirement as square-kilometer territory of a province is scattered because the islands are
expressly provided in Section 442 and Section 450 of the LGC if the local separated by bodies of water, as compared to one with a contiguous land mass.”
government unit to be created is a municipality or a component city, respectively.  xxx “What is more, the land area, while considered as an indicator of viability of a
This exemption is absent in the enumeration of the requisites for the creation of a local government unit, is not conclusive in showing that Dinagat cannot become a
province under Section 461 of the LGC, although it is expressly stated under province, taking into account its average annual income of P82,696,433.23 at the
Article 9(2) of the LGC-IRR.” time of its creation, as certified by the Bureau of Local Government Finance, which
 xxx “There appears neither rhyme nor reason why this exemption should apply to is four times more than the minimum requirement of P20,000,000.00 for the
cities and municipalities, but not to provinces. In fact, considering the physical creation of a province.
configuration of the Philippine archipelago, there is a greater likelihood that  The delivery of basic services to its constituents has been proven possible and
islands or group of islands would form part of the land area of a newly-created sustainable. Rather than looking at the results of the plebiscite and the May 10,
province than in most cities or municipalities. 2010 elections as mere fait accompli circumstances which cannot operate in favor
 It is, therefore, logical to infer that the genuine legislative policy decision was of Dinagat’s existence as a province, they must be seen from the perspective that
expressed in Section 442 (for municipalities) and Section 450 (for component cities) Dinagat is ready and capable of becoming a province.”
of the LGC, but was inadvertently omitted in Section 461 (for provinces).
 Thus, when the exemption was expressly provided in Article 9(2) of the LGC-IRR, DISPOSITIVE:
the inclusion was intended to correct the congressional oversight in Section 461 of
the LGC – and to reflect the true legislative intent. It would, then, be in order for
the Court to uphold the validity of Article 9(2) of the LGC-IRR.”
 xxx“Consistent with the declared policy to provide local government units
genuine and meaningful local autonomy, contiguity and minimum land area
requirements for prospective local government units should be liberally construed
in order to achieve the desired results.
 The strict interpretation adopted by the February 10, 2010 Decision could prove to
be counter-productive, if not outright absurd, awkward, and impractical. Picture
an intended province that consists of several municipalities and component cities
which, in themselves, also consist of islands.
 The component cities and municipalities which consist of islands are exempt from
the minimum land area requirement, pursuant to Sections 450 and 442,
respectively, of the LGC.
 Yet, the province would be made to comply with the minimum land area criterion
of 2,000 square kilometers, even if it consists of several islands. This would mean
that Congress has opted to assign a distinctive preference to create a province with
contiguous land area over one composed of islands — and negate the greater
imperative of development of self-reliant communities, rural progress, and the
delivery of basic services to the constituency.