SBMA vs.

COMELEC
G.R. No. 125416 September 26, 1996
FACTS: Republic Act No. 7227 entitled, The Bases Conversion and Development Act
of 1992 was enacted on March 13, 1992, which also created the Subic Special
Economic Zone (SSEZ). Section 12 of this law required the contiguous towns, and cities
of Subic to concur with the said RA. Hence, in April 1993 the Municipal Council of
Morong, Bataan passed Resolution No. 10 to join the SSEZ. And then on May 24,
1993, the private respondents, Garcia & Calimbas filed a petition wanting to annul
Resolution No. 10. The Municipal Council responded by promulgating Resolution No.
18, requesting Congress to amend certain provisions of RA 7227 and that the Bases
Conversion Development Authority and the Office of the President was already acting
favorably to their petition. Not satisfied with these responses, the private respondents
resorted to their power initiative under the Local Government Code. On July 6, 1993,
COMELEC denied the petition for local initiative on the ground that the subject thereof is
just a resolution and not an ordinance. Furthermore, COMELEC also directed the
Provincial Election Supervisor to hold the action on the authentication of signatures
being solicited by the private respondents.
On August 15, 1993, the private
respondents filed a petition of certiorari and mandamus to the Supreme Court against
COMELEC to set aside its 2 resolutions wherein these resolutions disallowed the
conduct of a local initiative to annul Resolution No. 10 and preventing the Provincial
Election Supervisor from proceeding with the authentication of the required number of
signatures in support of the initiative and in the gathering of signatures. On Sept. 5,
1993, the Resolution No. 10 was submitted to the Presidents Office. And then on
February 1, 1995, the President issued Proclamation No. 532, defining already the
metes and bounds of the SSEZ. On June 18, 1995, COMELEC issued Resolution 2845,
adopting therein a calendar of activities for local referendum on a certain municipal
ordinance. It also promulgated guidelines in conducting a local referendum proposing
to annul Resolution No. 10. This is why the SBMA filed a petition for certiorari and
prohibition against COMELEC contesting Resolution No. 2848 and alleging that
COMELEC is intent on amending a national law.
ISSUE: Whether or not COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in promulgating
and implementing its Resolution No. 2848 which "govern(s) the conduct of the
referendum proposing to annul or Municipal Resolution No. 10, Series of 1993 of the
Municipality of Morong, Bataan" considering that the subject of the petition was an
initiative and not a referendum?
HELD: Yes, COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in promulgating and
implementing its Resolution No. 2848.
Under the Initiative and Referendum Act of 1989 (Republic Act 6735), there are
statutory and conceptual demarcations between an initiative and a referendum.
In this case, COMELEC mistakenly calendared a referendum instead of an initiative,
which was being invoked by the private respondents because they have the power to do
so according to Article VI, Section 32 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution which states
that, The Congress shall as early as possible, provide for a system of initiative and
referendum, and the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can directly propose
and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or par thereof passed by the
Congress or local legislative body after the registration of a petition therefor signed by at
least ten per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative
district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters
thereof.