Mariano Jr. v. Commission on Elections: Challenge to Unconstitutionality of R.A. No. 7854,, Summaries of Constitutional Law

Download Mariano Jr. v. Commission on Elections: Challenge to Unconstitutionality of R.A. No. 7854, and more Summaries Constitutional Law in PDF only on Docsity! Case: Mariano, Jr. v. Commission on Elections Date: March 7, 1995 Ponente: J. Puno DOCTRINE “Petitions premised on contingent events, the happening of which are uncertain, pose a hypothetical issue which has not yet ripened into an actual case or controversy.” FACTS: Two petitions are assailing certain provisions of Republic Act No. 7854 (An Act Converting the Municipality of Makati Into a Highly Urbanized City to be known as the City of Makati) as unconstitutional. Suing as taxpayers, petitioners assail Section 51 of R.A. No. 7854 as it attempts to alter or restart the ‘three-consecutive term’ limit for local elective officials, in violation of Section 8, Article X and Section 7, Article VI of the Constitution. Petitioners argue that by providing that the new city shall acquire a new corporate existence, Section 51 of R.A. No. 7854 restarts the term of the present municipal elective officials of Makati and disregards the terms previously served by them. In particular, petitioners point that Section 51 favors the incumbent Makati mayor, respondent Jejomar Binay, who has already served for two consecutive terms. ISSUE: WON petitioners may validly assail Section 5 of R.A. No. 7854? HELD: No. The requirements before a litigant can challenge the constitutionality of a law are well- delineated. They are: (1) there must be an actual case or controversy; (2) the question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party; (3) the constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity; and (4) the decision on the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself. Petitioners have far from complied with these requirements. The petition is premised on the occurrence of many contingent events, i.e., that Mayor Binay will run again in this coming mayoralty elections; that he would be re-elected in said elections; and that he would seek re-election for the same post in the 1998 elections. Considering that these contingencies may or may not happen, petitioners merely pose a hypothetical issue which has yet to ripen to an actual case or controversy. The petitions are dismissed.