TRINIDAD, Eva Angeline M.

Local Governments

2011-41125 February 14, 2018

League of Cities of the Philippines v. COMELEC

G.R. No. 176951 | Bersamin, J. | June 28, 2011

Trinidad, Dissenting:

The position of the majority is that Sec. 10 Art. X of the 1987 Constitution requiring the creation
of local government units be done in accordance with the Local Government Code has not been
contravened by the Cityhood Laws. This rests upon the theory that the provisions embodied in the
Cityhood Laws exempting the 16 municipalities from the newly enacted Php 100 million income
requirement in effect amended the Code by providing exceptions to the criteria provided therein before a
municipality may become a city.

Sec. 10 Art. X of the 1987 Constitution reads thus:

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 approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite
in the political units directly affected.

Meanwhile, the Php 100 million income requirement was imposed upon by Republic Act No.
9009 (RA 9009) or “An Act Amending Section 450 of Republic Act No. 7160, Otherwise Known as the
Local Government Code of 1991, by Increasing the Average Annual Income Requirement for a
Municipality of Cluster of Barangays to be Converted into a Component City.”

The Cityhood laws on the other hand each contained a provision exempting the 16 municipalities
from that requirement. The provision reads as: “Exemption from Republic Act No. 9009. The City of x x
x shall be exempted from the income requirement prescribed under Republic Act No. 9009.”

While the majority points out that the latter provision in the Cityhood laws amended the criteria
prescribed in the Local Government Code as the former is a later enactment compared to RA 9009, this is
contradicted by the Cityhood laws themselves. The statutes specifically provide, as pointed out in Justice
Carpio’s dissenting opinion, that provisions therein inconsistent with the Local Government Code shall
have no effect whatsoever on those that are consistent while the latter shall remain binding and in force.
This necessarily implies that such inconsistent provisions are inferior to the Code and shall be struck
down, defeating the position of the majority that such laws amended the Code.

Given then that the exemption to the average annual income requirement provided for in the
Cityhood laws go against the criteria enumerated in the Code, the exemptions must be given no weight
and the Code shall continue to govern.

Further, if it were really the intention of Congress to amend the criteria for municipalities and
barangays desirous of being cities, they would have done so not via mere cityhood laws but by enacting a
separate law for that specific purpose. The provisions of RA 9009, a specific law amending the Code, are
clear and unambiguous and does not provide for any exemption to its coverage. Even assuming arguendo
that the law is susceptible to construction, Congress was aware during the deliberations and subsequent
enactment of RA 9009 that there were 16 municipalities whose cityhood bills were still pending. The
omission of Congress to expressly state that these municipalities were exempted in the law itself clearly
shows that there was no intention for such exceptions to be made.

Even delving into Congressional deliberations, the interpellations of Senators Drilon and
Pimentel stated that the rationale behind the law was to prevent the “mad rush of municipalities wanting
to be converted into cities” with the purpose of securing for themselves a larger portion of the Internal
Revenue Allotments. To hold then that Congress intended to make exceptions for the 16 municipalities in
this situation is blatantly contrary to the purpose of the law.

The Cityhood Laws clearly do not amend the Local Government Code but rather run contrary to
the qualifications prescribed therein. Since adherence to the Local Government Code is required by the
Constitution in matters relating to the creation, division, merging, and abolition of local government units,
and the Cityhood Laws fail to do so, I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion and grant the
petitions. The Cityhood Laws namely: Republic Act Nos. 9389, 9390, 9391, 9392, 9393, 9394, 9398,
9404, 9405, 9407, 9408, 9409, 9434, 9435, 9436, and 9491 are hereby declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL.