Tolentino v. Commission on Elections
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The case concerns the 1971 Constitutional Convention, which was convened by Congress through Resolutions 2 and 4, and implemented by Republic Act 6132. The Convention's primary purpose was to propose amendments to the Philippine Constitution. As its first formal proposal, the Convention approved Organic Resolution No. 1, which sought to amend Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution to lower the voting age from twenty-one to eighteen years. This resolution stipulated that the amendment would be valid upon approval by a majority of votes cast in a plebiscite coinciding with the local elections in November 1971. The resolution also authorized the use of Convention funds for the plebiscite expenses. Procedural History: Following the approval of Organic Resolution No. 1, the President of the Convention, Diosdado Macapagal, formally requested the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to assist in implementing the resolution. COMELEC agreed to hold the plebiscite on the condition that the Convention would bear the costs of printing separate ballots and election forms, and provide security measures for their distribution. The Convention subsequently formed an Ad Hoc Committee to implement the resolution, issued guidelines, and confirmed the President's authority to implement it. The Convention also passed a resolution to recess to allow delegates to campaign for the amendment's ratification. The petitioner, Arturo M. Tolentino, filed a petition for prohibition, seeking to restrain COMELEC from holding the plebiscite. The Petition: Petitioner Arturo M. Tolentino sought a writ of prohibition to prevent the Commission on Elections from holding a plebiscite on November 8, 1971, to ratify the proposed amendment to Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution, which would lower the voting age to eighteen. Tolentino argued that the Constitutional Convention lacked the authority to call for such a plebiscite, asserting that this power exclusively belongs to Congress. Furthermore, he contended that under Article XV, Section 1 of the Constitution, all proposed amendments must be submitted to the people for ratification in a single election. The petition argued that holding a separate plebiscite for this single amendment, while the Convention was still in the preliminary stages of considering other amendments, violated this constitutional provision. The core of the petition was that the Convention's actions were unconstitutional, and therefore, COMELEC's participation in holding the plebiscite was also void.
Issue(s)
Whether the issue of the Constitutional Convention's authority to call for a plebiscite is a political question beyond the Court's jurisdiction. Whether the Constitutional Convention of 1971 has the power to order, on its own authority, the holding of a plebiscite for the ratification of a single proposed amendment before completing its work on other amendments. Whether submitting a single amendment for ratification in a separate plebiscite violates Section 1 of Article XV of the Constitution.
Ruling
The petition is granted. Organic Resolution No. 1 of the Constitutional Convention of 1971 and its implementing acts and resolutions, insofar as they provide for the holding of a plebiscite on November 8, 1971, are declared null and void. COMELEC and the Convention's fiscal officers are enjoined from taking any action in compliance therewith. The decision is immediately executory.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of jurisdiction: The Court held that the question of whether an act of the Constitutional Convention violates the Constitution is a justiciable, not a political, question. Citing Angara v. Electoral Commission and Gonzales v. Comelec, the Court asserted its power and duty to determine the proper allocation of powers between governmental departments and agencies, including the Constitutional Convention, which derives its authority from the existing Constitution. The Court clarified that while the Convention is supreme within its legitimate authority, it is not immune from constitutional limitations, and the Supreme Court acts as the final arbiter to resolve conflicts of authority under the fundamental law. On the power of the Constitutional Convention to call a plebiscite: The Court found that while the Convention has broad powers to propose amendments, these powers are derived from and limited by the existing Constitution. The Court did not definitively rule on whether the power to call a plebiscite is exclusively legislative or can be exercised concurrently, as it found the case could be resolved on other grounds. However, it emphasized that the Convention's actions are subject to constitutional limitations, particularly those concerning the process of amendment. On the violation of Article XV, Section 1: The Court ruled that the Convention violated Section 1 of Article XV of the Constitution by calling for a separate plebiscite to ratify only one amendment (reducing the voting age to 18) before completing its work on other proposed amendments. The provision clearly states that "such amendments shall be valid... when approved by a majority of the votes cast at an election at which the amendments are submitted to the people for their ratification." The use of the singular "an election" and plural "amendments" indicates that all amendments proposed by the Convention must be submitted in a single plebiscite. Submitting amendments piecemeal, especially when the Convention has not yet finished its work and the full scope of other proposed changes is unknown, prevents voters from intelligently appraising the amendment in relation to the entire proposed constitutional framework, thus constituting "no proper submission."
Main Doctrine
The Constitutional Convention of 1971, in calling for a separate plebiscite to ratify only one proposed amendment (reducing the voting age to 18) before completing its work on other amendments, violated Section 1 of Article XV of the Constitution, which mandates that all proposed amendments by the Convention shall be submitted to the people in a single election or plebiscite for ratification.