Remedial law - Motion for execution & Stay of execution
digestFull description
case digest and raw
DigestFull description
Full description
Case digestFull description
eLECTIONFull description
ConstiFull description
Sanchez vs COMELECFull description
Digest of Lopez vs COMELEC
lkhhllkj
caseFull description
digest for ethicsFull description
Quasi-judicial function
COMELEC vs CONRADO CRUZ G.R. No. 186616 November 20, 2009 FACTS:
When RA 9164 entitled “An Act Providing for Synchronized Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan Elections” was passed, questions of the constitutionality were raised against Section 2 which states that “No barangay elective official shall shall serve for more than 3 consecutive terms in the same position: Provided however, that the term of office shall be reckoned from the 1994 barangay elections. Voluntary renunciation of office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of service for the full term for which the elective official was elected. Before the 2007 Synchronized Barangay and SK Elections, some of the then incumbent officials of several barangays of Caloocan City filed with the RTC a petition for declaratory relief to challenge the constitutionality of the said provision as it is violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution in as much as the barangay officials were singled out that there consecutive limit shall be counted retroactively. ISSUE:
Whether or not the provision in Section 2 of RA 9164 is violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. RULING:
The equal protection clause is under Sec 2 Art III of the Constitution which provides: “Nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. laws.” This is however considering equality under the same conditions and among persons similarly situated. The law can treat barangay officials differently from other local elective officials because the Constitution itself provides a significant distinction between these elective officials with respect to length of term and term limitation. The clear distinction, expressed in the Constitution itself, is that while the Constitution provides for a 3-year term and 3-term limit for local elective officials, it left the length of term and the application of the 3-term limit or any form of term limitation for determination by Congress through legislation. Not only does this disparate treatment recognize substantial distinctions, it recognizes as well that the Constitution itself allows a non-uniform treatment. No equal protection violation can exist under these conditions.