Recall: - A mode of removal of public officer by the people before the end of his term of office. - Characteristics: 1.

An incident of their sovereign power 2. Implied in all governmental operations 3. Indispensable for the proper administration of public affairs. - It is a fundamental right of the people in a democracy. It is embodied in our constitution Article XIII expressly recognized the Role and Rights of People's Organizations: Sec. 15. The State shall respect the role of independent people's organizations to enable the people to pursue and protect, within the democratic framework, their legitimate and collective interests and aspirations through peaceful and lawful means. People's organizations are bona fide associations of citizens with demonstrated capacity to promote the public interest and with identifiable leadership, membership, and structure. Sec. 16. The right of the people and their organizations to effective and reasonable participation at all levels of social, political, and economic decision-making shall not be abridged. The State shall, by laws, facilitate the establishment of adequate consultation mechanisms. As a response RA 7160 or otherwise known as the LGC, is the enabling law insofar as the right of the people to oust local government officials are concerned. More specifically, Sections 69 to 75. Enrique Garcia v COMELEC GR No. 111511 October 5, 1993 Facts: 1. Enrique Garcia was elected governor of the province of Bataan. 2. Some mayors, vice-mayors and members of the Sangguniang Bayan of the twelve (12) municipalities of the province constituted themselves into a Preparatory Recall Assembly to initiate the recall election of Garcia. 3. Petitioners filed with the COMELEC a petition to deny due course to the Resolution for failure to comply with the requirements under the LGC. 4. The COMELEC dismissed the petition and scheduled the recall election. 5. Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the SC on the ground that section 70 of R.A. 7160 allowing recall through the initiative of the PRAC is unconstitutional. Issue: Whether or not Recall by constituting a Preparatory Recall Assembly is unconstitutional? (Petitioner alleged Sec. 70 of RA 7160 or the LGC is unconstitutional)

Held: No. Ratio: 1. Two (2) principal reasons why this alternative mode of initiating the recall process thru an assembly was adopted: a. To diminish the difficulty of initiating recall thru the direct action of the people. b. To cut down on its expenses. 2. There is nothing in the Constitution that will remotely suggest that the people have the "sole and exclusive right to decide on whether to initiate a recall proceeding." In fact, its the contrary. 3. Article X, Sec. 3. The Congress shall enact a local government code which shall provide for a more responsible and accountable local government structure instituted through a system of decentralization with effective mechanisms of recall, initiative, and referendum, allocate among the different local government units their powers, responsibilities, and resources, and provide for the qualifications, election, appointment and removal, term, salaries, powers and functions and duties of local officials, and all other matters relating to the organization and operation of the local units. 4. Congress was clearly given the power to choose the effective mechanisms of recall as its discernment dictates. The power given was to select which among the means and methods of initiating recall elections are effective to carry out the judgment of the electorate. 5. Initiation by the PRAC is also initiation by the people, albeit done indirectly through their representatives. It is not constitutionally impermissible for the people to act through their elected representatives. Angobung v COMELEC 1. Angobung was elected as mayor of the Municipality of Tumauini, Isabela in 1995. 2. His rival, the loser, respondent Ma Aurora de Alban, filed a petition for recall against Angubong. 3. The petition was forwarded to the regional office of COMELEC in area (Tuguegarao, Cagayan) and then subsequently to Manila for approval. 4. The Deputy Director for Operations, Pio Jose, submitted his recommendation for approval of the petition for recall to the COMELEC en banc, and also, for the signing by other qualified voters in order to garner at least 25% as required. 5. The COMELEC en banc approved it and issued Resolution No. 96-2951. 6. Hence, this petition for certiorari by Angobung. Issue: Whether or not the COMELEC violated the provisions requiring 25% as to the number of signatures supporting a petition on Recall under the LGC?

Held: Yes. The COMELEC in effect approved the petition with only 1 signature (de Albans). (What should have happened was that the 25% must be met first before the COMELEC can approve it) Ratio:

Section 70(d) of the Local Government Code of 1991 expressly provides that recall of any elective x x x municipal x x x official may also be validly initiated upon petition of at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the total number of registered voters in the local government unit concerned during the election in which the local official sought to be recalled was elected. The law is plain and unequivocal as to what initiates recall proceedings: only a petition of at least 25% of the total number of registered voters, may validly initiate recall proceedings. We take careful note of the phrase, petition of at least twenty-five percent (25%) and point out that the law does not state that the petition must be signed by at least 25% of the registered voters; rather, the petition must be of or by, at least 25% of the registered voters, i.e., the petition must be filed, not by one person only, but by at least 25% of the total number of registered voters. This is understandable, since the signing of the petition is statutorily required to be undertaken before the election registrar or his representative, and in the presence of a represetantive of the official sought to be recalled, and in public place in the x x x municipality x x x. Hence, while the initiatory recall petition may not yet contain the signatures of at least 25% of the total number of registered voters, the petition must contain the names of at least 25% of the total number of registered voters in whose behalf only one person may sign the petition in the meantime.
[17]

We cannot sanction the procedure of the filing of the recall petition by a number of people less than the foregoing 25% statutory requirement, much less, the filing thereof by just one person, as in the instant case, since this is indubitably violative of clear and categorical provisions of subsisting law. (despite it being a big hassle for those who seeks it, theres wisdom behind this) eto,

it is a power granted to the people who, in concert, desire to change their leaders for reasons only they, as a collective, can justify. In other words, recall must be pursued by the people, not just by one disgruntled loser in the elections or a small percentage of disenchanted electors. Otherwise, its purposes as a direct remedy of the people shall be defeated by the ill motives of a few among them whose selfish resort to recall would destabilize the community and seriously disrupt the running of government.

Reason why its 25% this is the requirement under a majority of the
constitution and recall statutes in various American states to the same extent that they were aware of the rationale. EDDIE AMONG ED PANLILIOS CASE:

1. Brief intro about him 2. What happened in his case

Recall under COMELEC Resolution 7505 1. On August 21, 2008, an NGO "Kapanalig at Kambilan Ning Memalen Pampanga Inc." (Kambilan), led by its president Rosve Henson, a former election campaigner of losing gubernatorial candidate Lilia Pineda, launched a recall campaign against Panlilio, on the ground of loss of confidence in the governors leadership. 2. In the case of Pampanga, the required petitioners must be at least 98,703 which represent 10% of the total number of registered voters in Pampanga as of 20 April 2007, the Philippine general election, 2007. 3. On October 15, 2008, a formal recall petition against Panlilio for loss of confidence was filed with the Commission on Elections (Philippines). 15,000 "Kambilan" petitioners delivered 168 boxes containing the 224,875 voters' signatures from 20 Pampanga towns and San Fernando City. 4. In a 32-page petition, Panlilio moved to dismiss the recall petition. 5. This is not a supreme court case pero this is the best application of the law as amended in 2004.