MONTEJO v COMELEC

FACTS:

Petitioner Cerilo Roy Montejo, representative of the first district of Leyte, pleads for the annulment of
Section 1 of Resolution no. 2736, redistricting certain municipalities in Leyte, on the ground that it violates
the principle of equality of representation.

The province of Leyte with the cities of Tacloban and Ormoc is composed of 5 districts. Biliran, located in
the 3rd district of Leyte, was made its subprovince by virtue of Republic Act No. 2141 Section 1 enacted on
1959. On 1992, the Local Government Code took effect and the subprovince of Biliran became a regular
province. As a consequence of the conversion, eight municipalities of the 3rd district composed the new
province of Biliran. A further consequence was to reduce the 3rd district to five municipalities (underlined
above) with a total population of 146,067 as per the 1990 census.

To remedy the resulting inequality in the distribution of inhabitants, voters and municipalities in the
province of Leyte, respondent COMELEC held consultation meetings with the incumbent representatives of
the province and other interested parties and on December 29, 1994, it promulgated the assailed resolution
where, among others, it transferred the municipality of Caloocan of the 2nd district and the municipality of
Palompon of the 4th district to the 3rd district of Leyte.

ISSUE:

WON the unprecedented exercise by the COMELEC of legislative power of redistricting and
reapportionment is valid or not?

HELD:

Section 1 of Resolution no. 2736 is annulled and set aside.

The deliberations of the members of the Constitutional Commission shows that COMELEC was denied the
major power of legislative apportionment as it itself exercised the power. Regarding the first elections after
the enactment of the 1987 constitution, it is the Commission who did the reapportionment of the legislative
districts and for the subsequent elections, the power was given to the Congress.

Also, respondent COMELEC relied on the ordinance appended to the 1987 constitution as the source of its
power of redistricting which is traditionally regarded as part of the power to make laws. Said ordinance
states that:

Section 2: The Commission on Elections is hereby empowered to make minor adjustments to the
reapportionment herein made.”

Minor adjustments does not involve change in the allocations per district. Examples include error in the
correct name of a particular municipality or when a municipality in between which is still in the territory of
one assigned district is forgotten. And consistent with the limits of its power to make minor adjustments,
section 3 of the Ordinance did not also give the respondent COMELEC any authority to transfer municipalities
from one legislative district to another district. The power granted by section 3 to the respondent is to
adjust the number of members (not municipalities.)
DOCTRINE:

Make minor adjustments of the apportionment of legislative districts (Sec. 2, Ordinance appended to the
Constitution).

This refers merely to the power to correct an error because of the omission of a municipality or an error
in the name of a municipality and does not include the power to make a reappointment of legislative
districts.