David v COMELEC
Panganiban, 1997 FACTS:
David, in his capacity as barangay chairman chairman and as president president of the Liga ng mga Barangay sa Pilipinas, led a petition to prohibit the holding of the barangay election scheduled on the second Monday of May 1997 Mean!hile, Liga ng mga Barangay "ue#on $ity $hapter also led a petition to see% a &udicial revie! revie! by certiorari to declare as unconstitutional' (1) *ection +(c) of -. 71/0 (2) $3M4L4$ -esolution 5os 2660 and 2667 ing the date of the holding of the barang barangay ay electi election ons s on May 12, 12, 1997 1997 and other other activ activiti ities es relat related ed there thereto to and, and, () 8he 8he budge budgetar tary y appro appropr priat iation ion of P+00 P+00 millio million n contai contained ned in -epubl epublic ic .ct .ct 5o 620 620 (:ene (:eneral ral .ppropriations .ct of 1997) intended to defray the costs and epenses in holding the 1997 barangay elections Petition Petitioners ers contend contend that under -. //79, the term of o;ce o;ce of barangay barangay o;cials o;cials is years years .lthough the L:$ reduced the term of o;ce of all local elective o;cials to three years, such reduction does not apply to barangay o;cials .s amicus curiae, former *enator .
• •
>hich la! governs the term of o;ce of barangay o;cials' -. 71/0 or -. //79? (-. 71/0 @ years) As -. 71/0 insofar as it shortened such term to only three years constitutional? (4*) .re petitioners estopped from claiming a term other than that provided under -. 71/0? (4*)
RATIO:
Clear Legislative Intent and Design to Limit Term to Th ree Years Years -. 71/0 !as enacted later than -. //79 At is basic that in case of an irreconciliable conCict bet!ee bet!een n t!o la!s, la!s, the later later enact enactmen mentt preva prevails ils (Legis Legis posterio posteriores res priores priores contrari contrarias as abrogant ) ) During the barangay elections held on May 9, 199+ (second Monday), the voters actually and directly elected one punong barangay and seven %aga!ads (as in the $ode) An enacting the general appropriations appropriations act of 1997, $ongress $ongress appropriated the amount of P+00 million to cover epenses for the holding of barangay elections this year Li%e!ise, under *ec 7 of -. 6169 6169,, $ong $ongre ress ss orda ordain ined ed that that a gene genera rall regi regist stra rati tion on of vote voters rs shal shalll be held held imm immed edia iate tely ly afte afterr the the bara barang ngay ay elec electi tion ons s in 1997 1997E E 8hes 8hese e are are clea clearr and and epr epres ess s contemporaneous statements of $ongress that barangay o;cials shall be elected this May, in accordance !ith *ec +Fc of -. 71/0 An Paras vs. Comelec, this $ourt said that the net regular election involving the barangay o;ce concerned is barely 7 months a!ay, the same having been scheduled in May, 1997E 8his &udicial &udicial decision decision is part of the the legal system system of the Philippines Philippines (5$$ 6)E 6)E -. 71/0 is a codie codied d set of la!s la!s that that speci specical cally ly applie applies s to local local gover governm nment ent units units At specically and denitively provides in its *ec +Fc that the term of o;ce of barangay o;cials shall be for three yearsE At is a special provision that applies only to the term of bara barang ngay ay o;ci o;cial als s !ho !ho !er !ere elec electe ted d on the the seco second nd Mond Monday ay of May May 199+ 199+ >ith >ith such such particularity, the provision cannot be deemed a general la! Three-Year Term Not Repugnant to Constitution 8he $onstitution $onstitution did not epressly epressly prohibit prohibit $ongress $ongress from ing ing any term of o;ce o;ce for barangay barangay o;cials At merely left the determination of such term to the la!ma%ing body, !ithout any specic limitation or prohibition, thereby leaving to the la!ma%ers full discretion to such term in accordance !ith the eigencies of public service At must be remembered that every la! has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality 8he petitioners have miserably failed to discharge this burden and to sho! clearly the unconstitutionality they aver $onsti $onstitut tution ional al $ommis $ommissio sion n on ho! ho! long long the term term of baran baranga gay y o;cial o;cials s is' .s may may be determined by la!E more precisely, as provided for in the Local .utonomy $ode (*ec +Fc limits their term to years)E •
Petitioners Estopped From Challenging Their Three-Year Terms Barangay o;cials are estopped from as%ing for any term other than that !hich they ran for and !ere elected to, under the la! governing their very claim to such o;ces' namely, the L:$ PetitionersG PetitionersG belated claim of ignorance ignorance as to !hat la! governed governed their election to o;ce in 199+ is unacceptable because under 5$$ , ignorance of the la! ecuses no one from compliance there!ithE •
David v $3M4L4$ :- 5o 12711/ .pril 6, 1997
*ec 6 .rt H of the $onstitution' 8he term of o;ce of elective local o;cials, ecept barangay o;cials, !hich shall be determined by la!(term of o;ce of barangay o;cials) I.$8*' 8his case involves the consolidation of 2 petitions that tac%le the common rit of Preliminary An&unction dated =anuary 1, 1997 .ccordingly, the parties led their respective memoranda An a separate case led before this court Petitioner Liga ng mga Barangay "ue#on $ity $hapter represented by its president Bonifacio M -illon led a petition, doc%eted as :- 5o 12609, to see% a &udicial revie! by certiorari to declare as unconstitutional' *ection +(c) of -. 71/0 !hich prescribed the term of barangay o;cials to be for years !hich shall begin on the regular election to be held on the second Monday of May 199+ $3M4L4$ -esolution 5os 2660 and 2667 ing the date of the holding of the barangay elections on May 12, 1997 and other activities related thereto A**N4' 1 >hether or not the term of o;ce of barangay o;cials shall be for years as prescribed by -. 71/0(8he Local :overnment $ode of ) or years as prescribed by -. // 2
>hether or not -. 71/0 sec +(c) is unconstitutional
4LD' 1 es , 8he $ourt held that term of o;ce of barangay o;cials shall be for years as prescribed by -. 71/0 *ince -. 71/0 is a ne!er la! than -. //, not!ithstanding the fact that -. 71/0 is a general la! since the particular provision on the term of o;ce of barangay o;cials is a specic provision !hich supersedes the provision in -. // 2 5o, 8he $ourt held that -. 71/0 sec +(c) is not unconstitutional *ince under *ec 6 .rt H of the $onstitution the term of o;ce of barangay o;cials shall be as determined by la! 8here is nothing in the $onstitution or in the record of the constitutional commission !hich !ould support the vie! that the term of o;ce of barangay o;cials could not be for years
