[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  Neither did Dinagat Islands, with an approximate land area of 802.12 square
by 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 kilometers.
province 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 composed of one or more islands from the land area
TOPIC: Creation and Alteration of Local Government Units requirement, was null and void as the said exemption is not found in Sec. 461 of
the LGC. “There is no dispute that in case of discrepancy between the basic law
FACTS: and the rules and regulations implementing the said law, the basic law prevails,
 The National Statistics Office certified that Dinagat Islands’ population is 120,813. because the rules and regulations cannot go beyond the terms and provisions of
Its land area is 802.12 square kilometers and its average annual income is the basic law,” held the Court. (GR No. 180050, Navarro v. Ermita, May 12, 2010)
P82,696,433.23, as certified by the Bureau of Local Government Finance.
 October 2, 2006: the President approved into law R.A. 9355 creating the Province  The Republic, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, and Dinagat
of Dinagat Islands. filed their respective motions for reconsideration of the Decision. In its
 December 3, 2006: the COMELEC conducted the mandatory plebiscite for the Resolution dated May 12, 2010, the Supreme Court denied the said motions.
ratification of the creation of the province under the LGC which yielded 69,943
affirmative votes and 63,502 negative votes. April 12, 2011 Ruling
o With the approval of the people from both the mother province of Surigao  Yes. In Navarro vs. Executive Secretary (G.R. no. 180050, April 12, 2011), the
del Norte and the Province of Dinagat Islands (Dinagat), the President Honorable Supreme Court ruled that Republic Act No. 9355 is as VALID and
appointed the interim set of provincial officials who took their oath of CONSTITUTIONAL, and the proclamation of the Province of Dinagat Islands
office on January 26, 2007. and the election of the officials thereof are declared VALID.
o Later, during the May 14, 2007 synchronized elections, the Dinagatnons  The SC also ruled that the provision in Article 9(2) of the Rules and Regulations
elected their new set of provincial officials who assumed office on July 1, Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991 stating, “The land area
2007. requirement shall not apply where the proposed province is composed of one (1)
 November 10, 2006: petitioners Rodolfo G. Navarro and other former political or more islands,” is declared VALID.
leaders of Surigao del Norte, filed before the SC a petition for certiorari and  According to the SC, “with respect to the creation of barangays, land area is not a
prohibition (G.R. No. 175158) challenging the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9355 requisite indicator of viability. However, with respect to the creation of
alleging that that the creation of Dinagat as a new province, if uncorrected, municipalities, component cities, and provinces, the three (3) indicators of
would perpetuate an illegal act of Congress, and would unjustly deprive the viability and projected capacity to provide services, i.e., income, population, and
people of Surigao del Norte of a large chunk of the provincial territory, Internal land area, are provided for.”
Revenue Allocation (IRA), and rich resources from the area.  “But it must be pointed out that when the local government unit to be created
consists of one (1) or more islands, it is exempt from the land area requirement as
 expressly provided in Section 442 and Section 450 of the LGC if the local  This preferential option would prove more difficult and burdensome if the 2,000-
government unit to be created is a municipality or a component city, square-kilometer territory of a province is scattered because the islands are
respectively. This exemption is absent in the enumeration of the requisites for the separated by bodies of water, as compared to one with a contiguous land mass.”
creation of a province under Section 461 of the LGC, although it is expressly  xxx “What is more, the land area, while considered as an indicator of viability of
stated under Article 9(2) of the LGC-IRR.” a local government unit, is not conclusive in showing that Dinagat cannot
 xxx “There appears neither rhyme nor reason why this exemption should apply become a province, taking into account its average annual income of
to cities and municipalities, but not to provinces. In fact, considering the physical P82,696,433.23 at the time of its creation, as certified by the Bureau of Local
configuration of the Philippine archipelago, there is a greater likelihood that Government Finance, which is four times more than the minimum requirement
islands or group of islands would form part of the land area of a newly-created of P20,000,000.00 for the creation of a province.
province than in most cities or municipalities.  The delivery of basic services to its constituents has been proven possible and
 It is, therefore, logical to infer that the genuine legislative policy decision was sustainable. Rather than looking at the results of the plebiscite and the May 10,
expressed in Section 442 (for municipalities) and Section 450 (for component 2010 elections as mere fait accompli circumstances which cannot operate in favor
cities) of the LGC, but was inadvertently omitted in Section 461 (for provinces). of Dinagat’s existence as a province, they must be seen from the perspective that
 Thus, when the exemption was expressly provided in Article 9(2) of the LGC- Dinagat is ready and capable of becoming a province.”
IRR, 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 DISPOSITIVE:
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.
 Moreover, 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.

Illogical
 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.