A law converted the component city of Malumanay, Laguna into a highly

urbanized city. The Local Government Code (LGC) provides that the
conversion “shall take effect only after it is approved by the majority of votes
cast in a plebiscite to be held in the political units directly affected.”
Before the COMELEC, Mayor Xenon of Malumanay City insists that only the
registered voters of the city should vote in the plebiscite because the city is
the only political unit directly affected by the conversion. Governor Yuri
asserts that all the registered voters of the entire province of Laguna should
participate in the plebiscite, because when the LGC speaks of the “qualified
voters therein,” it means ail the voters of all the political units affected by
such conversion, and that includes all the voters of the entire province. He
argues that the income, population and area of Laguna will reduce. Who,
between Mayor Xenon and Governor Yuri, is correct? Explain your answer.
(5%) ʼ16 – Q3
Governor Yuri is correct. All the registered voters of the Province of Laguna should
be included in the plebiscite. The conversion of the City of Malumanay into a
highly urbanized city will adversely affect the Province of Laguna and its residents.
The territory of the Province of Laguna will be reduced. Its share in the internal
revenue allotment will be reduced, because the population and land area are
included as basis for determining its share. Once the City of Malumanay becomes
a highly urbanized city, the Province of Laguna will no longer share in the taxes
collected by the City of Malumanay. The City of Malumanay will be under the
supervision of the President instead of the Province of Laguna. Decisions of the
City of Malumanay in administrative cases involving barangay officials will no
longer be appealable to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan. The registered voters of
the City of Malumanay will no longer be entitled to vote for provincial officials. To
limit the plebiscite to the voters of the City of Malumanay would nullify the
principle of majority rule (Untali v. Commission on Elections, 723 SCRA 170
[2014]).
Typhoon Bangis devastated the Province of Sinagtala. Roads and bridges
were destroyed which impeded the entry of vehicles into the area. This
caused food shortage resulting in massive looting of grocery stores and
malls.
There is power outage also in the area. For these reasons, the governor of the
province declares a state of emergency in their through Proclamation No. 1.
He also invoked Section 465 of the
Local Government Code of 1991 (R.A. No. 7160) which vests on the provincial
governor the power to carryout emergency measures during man-made and
natural disasters and calamities, and to call upon the appropriate national law
enforcement agencies to suppress disorder and lawless violence. In the same
proclamation, the governor called upon the members of the Philippine
National Police, with the assistance of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, to
set up checkpoints and chokepoints, conduct general searches and seizures
including arrests, and other actions necessary to ensure public safety. Was
the action of the provincial governor proper? Explain? (4%) ‘15 - Q20
The action of the Provincial Governor is not valid. It is only the President who is
authorized to exercise emergency powers under Section 23, Article VI of the
Constitution and to call out the Armed Forces of the Philippines under Section 1,
Article VII of the Constitution. Section 465 of the Local Government Code does
not sanction his actions. It refers to calamities and disasters. Looting is not a
calamity or disaster. The power under Article 465 of the Local Government Code
to call upon national law enforcement agencies to suppress lawless violence is not
applicable. The Armed Forces of the Philippines is not a law enforcement agency.
(Kulayan v. Tan, 675 SCRA 482 [2012]).
From an existing province, Wideland, Congress created a new province,
Hundred Isles, consisting of several islands, with an aggregate area of 500
square kilometres. The law creating Hundred Isles was duly approved in a
plebiscite called for that purpose. Juan, a taxpayer and a resident of
Wideland, assailed the creation of Hundred Isles claiming that it did not
comply with the area requirement as set out in the Local Government Code,
i.e., an area of at least 2,000 square kilometres. The proponents justified the
creation, however, pointing out that the Rules and Regulations Implementing
the Local Government Code states that “the land area requirement shall not
apply where the proposed province is composed of one (1) or more islands.”
accordingly, since the new province consists of several islands, the area
requirement need not be satisfied.
How tenable is the position of the proponents? (4%) ‘14 - Q28
The position of the proponents is tenable. The Supreme Court has clarified that,
when a province is not composed of one or more islands, its creation need not
comply with the 2,000 square kilometre contiguous territory requirement under
the provision of the Local Government Code. Article 9 (2) of the Implementing
Rules and Regulations of the Local Government Code provided the exemption.
Sections 442 and 450 of the Local Government Code exempted municipalities and
component cities from the area requirement if they consist of one or more islands.
While there is no similar provision for provinces, there is no reason why the
exemption should not apply to them. There is a greater likelihood that an island or
group of islands will form part of the area of a province (Navarro v. Ermita, G.R. No.
180050, April 12, 2011, 648 SCRA 400).
A valid and definite offer to buy a property is a pre-requisite to expropriation
initiated by a local government unit (Sec. 19, LGC). ʼ10 – Q13a
Re-classification of land by a local government unit is done through a
resolution but through an ordinance. ʼ10 – Q13b
The statement that a local government unit may reclassify land through a
resolution is false. Under Section 2 of the Local Government Code, the enactment
of an ordinance is required (Department of Agrarian Reform v. Polo Coconut
Plantation Company, Inc., 564 SCRA
78 [2008].)
Boundary Disputes between and among municipalities in the same province;
Where to file. ʼ10 – Q13c
The statement that boundary disputes between and among municipalities in the
same province may be filed immediately with the Regional Trial Court is false.
Under Section 118 of the Local Government Code, they should be referred to the
sangguniang panlalawigan (Municipality of Sta. Fe v. Municipality of Artao, 533
SCRA 586 [2007].)
Metropolitan Manila Development Authority is not authorized to confiscate a
driverʼs license in the enforcement of traffic regulations. ‘10 – Q13d
The statement that the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) is
authorized to confiscate a driverʼs license in the enforcement of traffic regulations
is false. Since Republic Act No. 7924 does not grant the MMDA the authority to
enact ordinances, the grant to it by Section 5(f) of R.A. No. 7924 of the power to
confiscate driversʼ licenses without need of any other law is an unauthorized
exercise of police power (Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Garin, 456
SCRA 176 [2005].)
Authority of city government to issue a cease and desist order to stop the
operations of an industrial waste processing plant on the ground that it emits
an obnoxious odor. ʼ10 – Q14
The city government has no power to stop the operations of the plant. Since its
operations is not a nuisance per se, the city government cannot abate it
extrajudicially. A suit must be filed in court (AC Enterprises, Inc. v. Frabelle
Properties Corp., 506 SCRA 625 [2006].)
De facto municipal corporation; Definition. ʼ10 – Q20b
A de facto municipal corporation is one so defectively created as not to be a de
jure corporation but is nevertheless the result of a bona fide attempt to
incorporate under existing statutory authority, couple with the exercise of
corporate powers, and recognized by the courts as such on the grounds of public
policy in all proceedings except by a direct attack by the state questioning its
corporate existence (Angeles, Restatement of the Law on Local Governments, p.
23.)
Municipal corporation by estoppel; Definition. ʼ10 – Q20c
A municipal corporation by estoppel is a corporation which is defectively formed
as not to be a de facto corporation but is considered a corporation in relation to
someone who dealt with it and acquiesced in its exercise of its corporate functions
or entered into a contract with it (Martin, Public Corporations, 1985 ed., p. 20.)
Constitutionality of a Sangguniang Panglungsod Ordinance requiring all disco
pub owners to have all their hospitality girls tested for HIV. ʼ10 – Q21
The ordinance is a valid exercise of police power. The right to privacy yields to
certain paramount rights of the public and defers to the exercise of police power.
The ordinance is not prohibiting the disco pub owners and the hospitality girls
from pursuing their calling or business but is merely regulating it (Social Justice
Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board, 570 SCRA 410 [2008].) The ordinance is a
valid exercise of police power, because its purpose is to safeguard public health
(Beltran v. Secretary of Health, 476 SCRA 168 [2005].)
Recall election; Succession; Eligibility of losing candidate to run for the same
office; Propriety of resignation of incumbent official instead of running in the
recall election. ʼ10 - Q22
The candidate who received the highest number of votes will succeed Governor
Diy. (Section 72, Local Government Code.)
Governor Diy can run again as governor. He did not fully serve his third term,
because he lost in the recall election. His third term should not be included in
computing the three-term limit (Lonzanida v. Commission on Elections, 311 SCRA
602 [1999].)
Governor Diy cannot refuse to run in the recall election. He is automatically
considered as a duly registered candidate. (Sec. 71, LGC). He is not allowed to
resign. (Sec. 73, LGC.)
Expropriation of parcel of land by Sangguniang bayan for a freedom park
notwithstanding an existence of smaller freedom park in the municipality;
When can Sangguniang Panlalawigan declared invalid an ordinance made by
Sangguniang Bayan. ʼ09 – Q3; ʼ05 – Q10(2)(b)
The disapproval of the ordinance is not correct.
Under Section 56(c) of the Local Government Code, the Sangguniang Bayan of
Leyte can declare the ordinance invalid only if it is beyond the power of the
Sangguniang Bayan of Bulalakaw. In the instant case, the ordinance is well within
the power of the Sangguniang Bayan. The disapproval of the ordinance by the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Leyte was outside of its authority having been done
on a matter pertaining to the wisdom of the ordinance which pertains to the
Sangguniang Bayan (Moday v. Court of Appeals, 268 SCRA 586 [1997].)
Liability of municipality arising from injuries sustained by a pedestrian who
was hit by a glass pane that fell from a dilapidated window frame of the
municipal hall. ʼ09 – Q4
The motion to dismiss should be denied. Under Sec. 24 of the Local Government
Code and Article 2189 of the Civil Code, the municipality of Pinatukdao is liable for
damages arising from injuries to person by reason of negligence of local
government units or local offices of the defective condition of the municipal hall
under their control and supervision.
Effect of an adverse decision in an election protest which declared a
candidate to have lost in the election during his second term, but
promulgated only after full serving such term, in running for the same
elective position after the expiration of his third term. ʼ08 – Q9a
Abdul may no longer run because he has served three full terms. The decision
regarding his second term is of no moment because he has already fully served
the term. Moreover, such decision did not oust him from his third term. (Ong v.
Alegre, G.R. No. 163295, 23 January 2006; Rivera III v. Morales, G.R. No. 167591, 9
May 2007.)
Whether or not the candidateʼs political party can validly nominate his wife as
substitute candidate in case the COMELEC disqualifies him and denies due
course to or cancels his certificate of candidacy in view of a false material
representation. ʼ08 – Q9b
In case the COMELEC disqualifies him, his wife could be nominated on her own
right. She would not be a substitute because Abdul is not entitled to a substitute
as the grounds for substitution is exclusive – death, withdrawal of disqualification
(Ong v. Alegre, G.R. No. 163295, 23 January 2006; Rivera III v. Morales, G.R. No.
167591, 9 May 2007.)
Mayor appointed his wife as City Treasurer among 3 employees considered
for the position. His wife has been an Assistant City Treasurer for 10 years
even before she married the Mayor; Propriety thereof. ʼ08 – Q12
Section 48 of the Civil Service Law and Section 79 of the Local Government Code
prohibits appointments of relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity or
affinity. The Civil Service Commission should declare Amelia not qualified for the
position, even if she is otherwise qualified (Debulgado v. CSC, G.R. No. 111471, 26
September 1994; People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 164185, 23 July 2008.)
Besides this, appointment of a Treasurer is by the Secretary of Finance (Sec. 470,
Local Government Code.)
Constitutionality of a provision in the General Appropriations Act which
provides that the Internal Revenue Allocation be released only if the province
meets certain conditions as determined by an Oversight Council created by
the President; Standing of district representative in case the provincial
governor does not file the case. ʼ07 – Q8
The requirement is void. The Constitution provided that the internal revenue
allotment of the local government units must be automatically released to them
(Section 6, Article X of the Constitution.) Hence, the Province of Bataan cannot be
required to perform any act before it can receive its internal revenue allotment
(Province of Batangas v. Romulo, 429 SCRA 736 [2004].)
It is the Governor of the Province of Bataan who should file the case to compel
DBM to release the funds. However, if the Governor does not file the case because
he is a party-mate of the President, the Representative of Bataan may be allowed
to file the case. The issue involved is of transcendental importance, and the
Representative, being a taxpayer and voter in Bataan, has the requisite standing to
institute the action (Francisco v. House of Representatives, 415 SCRA 44 [2003].)
To give much needed help to the Province of Aurora which was devastated by
typhoons and torrential rains, the President declared it in a “state of
calamity.” Give at least four (4) legal effects of such declaration. ʼ05 – Q1b
The proclamation of a state of calamity by the President will have the following
legal effects:
 j. The local government units in the Province of Aurora may enact a
supplemental budget for the purchase of supplies and materials or the
payment of services to prevent danger to or loss of life or property (Section
321, Local Government Code.);

k. The five (5) per cent of the estimated revenue from regular sources required
to be appropriated in the budgets of local government units for unforeseen
expenditures may be used in the Province of Aurora (Section 324(d), Local
Government Code.);

l. Science and technological personnel of the government in the Province of

Aurora shall be paid hazard allowance (Section 7(c), Republic Act No. 8439.);

m. Public Health workers in the Province of Aurora shall be paid hazard allowance
(Section 21, Republic Act No. 7305.);

n. The prices of basic necessities in the Province of Aurora shall

automatically be frozen at their prevailing levels or place under automatic
price control (Section 6(1), Republic Act No. 7581 entitled as The Price Act.);

o. A crime committed in the Province of Aurora will be considered aggravated

(Article 14(7), Revised Penal Code.)

(The last two (2) answers to this case are more appropriate for coverage in other
subjects.)
To be qualified for the office to which a local official has been elected, when
at the latest should he be:
● (a)  A Filipino citizen?

● (b)  A resident of the locality? ʼ05 – Q9(1)

To be qualified for the office to which a local official has been elected, it is
sufficient that he is a Filipino citizen at the time of his proclamation and at the
start of his term. Philippine citizenship is required for holding an elective public
office to ensure that no person owing allegiance to another country shall govern
our people and a unit of the Philippine territory. An official begins to discharge his
functions only upon his proclamation and on the day his term of office begins
(Frivaldo v. Commission on Elections, 257 SCRA 727 [1996].)
To be qualified for the office to which a local official has been elected, he must be
a resident of the locality for at least one year immediately before the election
(Section 39(a), Local Government Code.)
Manuel was elected Mayor of the Municipality of Tuba in the elections of
1992, 1995 and 1998. He fully served his first two terms, and during his third
term, the Municipality of Tuba was converted into the component City of
Tuba. The said charter provided for a hold-over and so without interregnum,
Manuel went to serve as the Mayor of the City of Tuba. In the 2001 elections,
Manuel filed his certificate of candidacy for City Mayor. He disclosed,
though, that he had already served for three (3) consecutive terms as elected
Mayor when Tuba was still a municipality. He also stated in this certificate of
candidacy that he is running for the position of Mayor for the first time now
that Tuba is a city. Reyes, an adversary, ran against Manuel and petitioned
that he be disqualified because he had already served for three consecutive
terms as Mayor. The petition was not timely acted upon, and Manuel was
proclaimed the winner with 20,000 votes over the 10,000 votes received by
Reyes as the only other candidate. It was only after Manuel took his oath and
assumed office that the COMELEC ruled that he was disqualified for having
ran and served for three consecutive terms.
1. As lawyer of Manuel, present the possible arguments to prevent his
disqualification and removal.
As lawyer of Manuel, I shall argue that when the municipality was converted to a
city, it became a different juridical personality. Hence, when he ran for city mayor,
he was not running for the same office as that of municipal mayor.
2. How would you rule on whether or not Manuel is eligible to run as Mayor of
the newly-created City of Tuba immediately after having already served for
three (3) consecutive terms as Mayor of the Municipality of Tuba?
Manuel is not eligible to run as mayor of the City of Tuba. While it acquired a new
corporate existence separate and distinct from the of the municipality, this does
not mean that for the purpose of applying the constitutional provision on term
limitations, the office of the municipal mayor should be considered as different
from the office of the city mayor. The framers of the Constitution intended to avoid
the evil of a single person accumulating excessive power over a particular
territorial jurisdiction as a result of a prolonged stay in power. To allow Manuel to
vie for the position of city mayor after having served for three consecutive terms
as a municipal mayor will defeat the intent of the framers of the Constitution
(Latasa v. Commission on Elections, 417 SCRA 601 [2003].)
3. Assuming that Manuel is not eligible candidate, rebut Reyesʼ claim that he
should be proclaimed as winner having received the next highest number of
votes. ʼ05 – Q9(2)
The fact the Manuel is ineligible does not entitled Reyes, who garnered the second
highest number of votes, to be proclaimed elected. He was not the choice of the
people (Latasa v. Commission on Elections, 417 SCRA 601 [2003].)