MARIANO v.

COMELEC
- R.A. 7854 An Act Converting the Municipality of Makati into a Highly
Urbanized City to be known as City of Makati
- Petition for prohibition and declaratory relief, R.A. 7854 as unconstitutional
- R.A. 7854 Sec. 2, 51, and 52 are unconstitutional:
o Section 2: did not properly identify the land area or territorial
jurisdiction of Makati in metes and bounds (violation of Sec. 10, Art.
10 of the Constitution)
Local Government Code requires that the area of a municipality
be described by metes and bounds with technical descriptions.
It is not an end in itself but a tool
This means that as long as the territorial jurisdiction of a
municipality can be ascertained, the legislative intent has been
served
R.A. 7854 did not add, subtract, divide or multiplied or
established a new land area did not change even a land area
of Makati City
It shall comprise the present territory of the municipality
It was not defined in R.A. 7854 because at the time of the
creation of the law, there was a dispute between Makati and
Taguig over Fort Bonifacio unsettled boundary dispute
o Section 51: attempts to alter the 3-consecutive term limit for local
officials, violation of Sec. 8, Art. 10 and Sec. 7, Art. 6

- Sec 52: INCREASED THE LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT OF MAKATI BY A SPECIAL
LAW
Section 52 stated that Makati shall have at least 2 districts
Unconstitutional because: 1. Reapportionment cannot be done
by special law; 2. The reapportionment of legislative district is
not part of the title of the bill; 3. Makatis population as of 1990
is only at 450k.
Held
- As settled in Tobias v. Abalos, the reapportionment of legislative districts can
be made through a special law
o Congress was not precluded in increasing its members via special law,
different from the general reapportionment law. THIS can be related
to what was done for R.A 7854 in providing an increase in Makatis
legislative district. IF THE LAW WILL PRECLUDE THE SPECIAL LAWS,
a certain legislative district can be left unrepresented over an
indeterminate period of time, which is a subtraction of Sovereignty.
- Legislative district may still be increased even if its only 450k because it
meets the minimum 250k requirement
o Section 3 of the Ordinance appended to the Constitution provided that
a city whose population has increased more than 250k shall be
entitled to AT LEAST one Congressional Representative
- As discussed in Tobias v. Abalos, the Constitution does not command that the
title of the law should completely mirror all its details. A general subject and
statement of the provisions that are germane to such general subject is
sufficient compliance
- Dismissed for lack of merit, no costs