Santiago v Comelec

FACTS:
Private resp Delfin filed with public resp comelec a petition for an amendment
to the constitution, to lift term limits of elective officials.
Delfin asked comelec to order 1) the fixing of time and date to gather
signatures, 2) publicize this order, and 3) instruct election registrars to assist
petitioners and volunteers to establish signing stations for the referendum
Delfin petition contains amendments to articles VI, VII, X concerning term
limits
Sen. Roco intervened and filed a motion to dismiss the delfin petition on the
ground that it was not the proper intiatory petition cognizable by comelec.
Thereafter, Sen. Santiago filed a special civil action for prohibition against the
delfin petition on the following grounds:
peoples initiative needs an enabling law
RA 6735 (natl and local init and referendum) is inadequate to provide for a
system to enable PI.
While it makes passive mentions of amendments to the constitution, it
does not have its own subtitle unlike national and local IR.
Furthermore, Subtitle II in which the constitutional amendments are
mentioned, the system obviously refers to national IR only.
Comelec reso no. 2300, which the delfin petition relied on, is ultra vires;
only congress can implement measures on how to conduct PI
PI only allows for amendments and not revisions. Delfin petition is a
revision.
Point by point, Comelec and the OSG replied that:
RA 6735 IS the enabling law
Constitutional amendments is provided for in the declaration of policy and
is necessarily included under the national IR subtitle because it is natl in
scope; the lack of its own subtitle is not a fatal defect.
Comelec reso no. 2300 is not ultra vires, it is constitutional that comelec
implement the rules to effectuate RA 6735
Delfin petition is not a revision

ISSUES:
Whether or not RA 6735 is adequate to provide for PI
Whether or not Comelec reso no. 2300 valid insofar as PI is concerned
Whether or not Comelec can take cognizance of the Delfin petition
Whether the Delfin petition is an amendment or a revision

RULING:
 RA 6735 is INADEQUATE. RESIBO:
While the Constitution, among other things, is indeed listed in the
statement of policy, it is preceeded by to directly propose, enact,
approve, or reject in part or in whole. These actions cannot be done to
the Constitution.
While requirements for natl and local IR are provided, the same are
missing for PI.
There is no subtitle dedicated for PI. Meaning, the main thrust of the law is
natl and local IR ONLY.
Consequently, Comelec reso no. 2300 is invalid insofar as PI is concerned by
virtue of RA 6735s inadequacy.
Comelec acted with grave abuse amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
because the Delfin petition was not proper; it didnt yet have the requirements
for filing of a petition
The issue regarding the Delfin petition, whether it is an amendment or a
revision, is rendered moot and academic.
Petition is granted. RA 6735 declared inadequate to provide for PI. Comelec
reso no. 2300 is declared void vis-a-vis PI provisions. Comelec is ordered to
dismiss the Delfin petition.