SANCHEZ vs COMELEC (Public Corporation)

G.R. Nos. 94459-60             January 24, 1991

GUILLERMO R. SANCHEZ, and CARLITO T. TAN, petitioners,

vs.

THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and its COMMISSIONERS, ZACARIAS V. PIZARRO, Jr., in his capacity as CITY ELECTION REGISTRAR OF BUTUAN CITY, EMMANUEL R. BALANON and MANUEL D. CAÑETE, respondents.

FACTS:

Private respondents Emmanuel R. Balanon, a defeated candidate for City Mayor and Manuel D. Cañete filed separate notices of recall against petitioners, Guillermo R. Sanchez and Carlito T. Tan, incumbent city mayor and vice-mayor, respectively, of Butuan City, before the City Election Registrar.

Repondent City Election Registrar Pizarro approved the schedule of signing to be conducted from Mondays to Fridays beginning February 14, 1990 to March 15, 1990, as well as the designated five (5) signing centers for the purpose, in line with the guidelines provided in Sec. 6 and other provisions of Comelec Resolution No. 1612" 

Petitioners filed their opposition thereto, contending among others, that there is no valid ground to justify the amendment of the recall proceedings already underway.

Petitioners filed their "petition to deny the proposed amendments of schedule of signing" of the recall proceedings 

On the same date, respondent COMELEC issued Minute Resolution No. 90-0254 suspending the recall proceedings against petitioners until the funding requirements therefor shall have been adequately clarified.

Thereafter, respondent COMELEC promulgated Resolution No. 2272, providing for the rules and regulations on the recall of elective provincial, city and municipal officials.

Respondent COMELEC issued Minute Resolution No. 90-0590 (Annex "0-2" of the petition) declaring as null and void the signing process conducted under Resolution No. 1612, said resolution having been superseded by Resolution No. 2272 and setting the date for the signing process on August 11, 18 and 25 1990.

Alleging lack or excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion on the part of respondent COMELEC in issuing Resolution No. 2272 and Minute Resolution No. 90-0590, petitioners filed this instant petition for prohibition and injunction with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order.

ISSUE:

Whether thr petitioners contention that Resolution No. 2272 is unconstitutional there being no legislative enactment yet on mechanism of recall as mandated under Sec. 3, Art. X of the Constitution.

RULING:

We find the contention devoid of merit.

While it is true that Sec. 3, Art. X of the Constitution mandates the Congress to enact a local government code providing among others for an effective mechanism of recall, nothing in said provision could be inferred the repeal of BP 337, the local government code existing prior to the adoption of the 1987 Constitution. Sec. 3, Art. X of the Constitution merely provides that the local government code to be enacted by Congress shall be "more responsive" than the one existing at present. Until such time that a more responsive and effective local government code is enacted, the present code shall remain in full force and effect. Thus, under Sec. 3, Art. XVIII, "(a)ll existing laws, decrees, executive orders, proclamations, letters of instructions and other executive issuances not inconsistent with this Constitution shall remain operative until amended, repealed, or revoked."

Considering that the present local government code (BP 337) is still in effect, respondent COMELEC's promulgation of Resolution No. 2272 is therefore valid and constitutional, the same having been issued pursuant to Sec. 59 of BP 337. It reads:

Sec. 59. Supervision by the Commission on Elections. — The Commission on Elections shall conduct and supervise the process of and election on recall in the manner and time herein provided and, in pursuance thereof, promulgate the necessary rules and regulations.