Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No.

L-28196 November 9, 1967

". R. B. 0. ,Resolution of Both 0ouses+ No. ", proposin% that 6ection 7, Article 89, of the Constitution of the Philippines, be a'ended so as to increase the 'e'bership of the 0ouse of Representatives fro' a 'a:i'u' of " ;, as provided in the present Constitution, to a 'a:i'u' of "!;, to be apportioned a'on% the several provinces as nearl( as 'a( be accordin% to the nu'ber of their respective inhabitants, althou%h each province shall have, at least, one ,"+ 'e'ber2 . R. B. 0. No. , callin% a convention to propose a'end'ents to said Constitution, the convention to be co'posed of t&o , + elective dele%ates fro' each representative district, to be <elected in the %eneral elections to be held on the second 4uesda( of Nove'ber, "#1"2< and .. R. B. 0. No. ., proposin% that 6ection "$, Article 89, of the sa'e Constitution, be a'ended so as to authori=e 6enators and 'e'bers of the 0ouse of Representatives to beco'e dele%ates to the afore'entioned constitutional convention, &ithout forfeitin% their respective seats in Con%ress. 6ubse>uentl(, Con%ress passed a bill, &hich, upon approval b( the President, on /une "1, "#$1, beca'e Republic Act No. -#"., providin% that the a'end'ents to the Constitution proposed in the afore'entioned Resolutions No. " and . be sub'itted, for approval b( the people, at the %eneral elections &hich shall be held on Nove'ber "-, "#$1. 4he petition in L- !"#$ &as filed on 5ctober ", "#$1. At the hearin% thereof, on 5ctober !, "#$1, the 6olicitor General appeared on behalf of respondents. Moreover, Att(. /uan 4. 3avid and counsel for the Philippine Constitution Association ? hereinafter referred to as the P09LC5N6A ? &ere allo&ed to ar%ue as ami#i #uriae. 6aid counsel for the P09LC5N6A, 3r. 6alvador Araneta, li@e&ise pra(ed that the decision in this case be deferred until after a substantiall( identical case brou%ht b( said or%ani=ation before the Co''ission on Elections," &hich &as e:pected to decide it an( ti'e, and &hose decision &ould, in all probabilit(, be appealed to this Court ? had been sub'itted thereto for final deter'ination, for a )oint decision on the identical issues raised in both cases. 9n fact, on 5ctober .", "#$1, the P09LC5N6A filed &ith this Court the petition in G. R. No. L- ! -, for revie& b(#ertiorari of the resolution of the Co''ission on Elections dis'issin% the petition therein. 4he t&o , + cases &ere dee'ed sub'itted for decision on Nove'ber !, "#$1, upon the filin% of the ans&er of respondent, the 'e'orandu' of the petitioner and the repl( 'e'orandu' of respondent in L- ! -. Ra'on A. Gon=ales, the petitioner in L- !"#$, is ad'ittedl( a Ailipino citi=en, a ta:pa(er, and a voter. 0e clai's to have instituted case L- !"#$ as a class unit, for and in behalf of all citi=ens, ta:pa(ers, and voters si'ilarl( situated. Althou%h respondents and the 6olicitor General have filed an ans&er den(in% the truth of this alle%ation, upon the %round that the( have no @no&led%e or infor'ation to for' a belief as to the truth thereof, such denial &ould appear to be a perfunctor( one. 9n fact, at the hearin% of case L- !"#$, the 6olicitor General e:pressed hi'self in favor of a )udicial deter'ination of the 'erits of the issued raised in said case. 4he P09LC5N6A, petitioner in L- ! -, is ad'ittedl( a corporation dul( or%ani=ed and e:istin% under the la&s of the Philippines, and a civic, non-profit and non-partisan or%ani=ation the ob)ective of &hich is to uphold the rule of la& in the Philippines and to defend its Constitution a%ainst erosions or onslau%hts fro' &hatever source. 3espite his afore'entioned state'ent in L- !"#$, in his ans&er in L- ! - the 6olicitor General 'aintains that this Court has no )urisdiction over the sub)ect-'atter of L! -, upon the %round that the sa'e is <'erel( political< as held in 'abana( "s. )opez *ito.. 6enator

RAMON A. GONZALES, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, IRECTOR O! PRINTING "#$ AU ITOR GENERAL, respondents. G.R. No. L-2822% November 9, 1967

P&ILIPPINE CONSTITUTION ASSOCIATION 'P&ILCONSA(, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, respondent. No. 28196: Ramon A. Gonzales for and in his own behalf as petitioner. Juan . !a"id as ami#us #uriae $ffi#e of the %oli#itor General for respondents. No. 2822&: %al"ador Araneta for petitioner. $ffi#e of the %oli#itor General for respondent. CONCEPCION, C.J.: G. R. No. L- !"#$ is an ori%inal action for prohibition, &ith preli'inar( in)unction. Petitioner therein pra(s for )ud%'ent* "+ Restrainin%* ,a+ the Co''ission on Elections fro' enforcin% Republic Act No. -#"., or fro' perfor'in% an( act that &ill result in the holdin% of the plebiscite for the ratification of the constitutional a'end'ents proposed in /oint Resolutions Nos. " and . of the t&o 0ouses of Con%ress of the Philippines, approved on March "$, "#$12 ,b+ the 3irector of Printin% fro' printin% ballots, pursuant to said Act and Resolutions2 and ,c+ the Auditor General fro' passin% in audit an( disburse'ent fro' the appropriation of funds 'ade in said Republic Act No. -#".2 and + declarin% said Act unconstitutional and void. 4he 'ain facts are not disputed. 5n March "$, "#$1, the 6enate and the 0ouse of Representatives passed the follo&in% resolutions*

Arturo M. 4olentino, &ho appeared before the Co''ission on Elections and filed an opposition to the P09LC5N6A petition therein, &as allo&ed to appear before this Court and ob)ected to said petition upon the %round* a+ that the Court has no )urisdiction either to %rant the relief sou%ht in the petition, or to pass upon the le%alit( of the co'position of the 0ouse of Representatives2 b+ that the petition, if %ranted, &ould, in effect, render in operational the le%islative depart'ent2 and c+ that <the failure of Con%ress to enact a valid reapportion'ent la& . . . does not have the le%al effect of renderin% ille%al the 0ouse of Representatives elected thereafter, nor of renderin% its acts null and void.< )URIS ICTION

la&s, not of 'en, and to the ri%id nature of our Constitution. 6uch ri%idit( is stressed b( the fact that, the Constitution e:pressl( confers upon the 6upre'e Court,"- the po&er to declare a treat( unconstitutional,"7 despite the e'inentl( political character of treat(-'a@in% po&er. 9n short, the issue &hether or not a Resolution of Con%ress ? actin% as a constituent asse'bl( ? violates the Constitution essentiall( )usticiable, not political, and, hence, sub)ect to )udicial revie&, and, to the e:tent that this vie& 'a( be inconsistent &ith the stand ta@en in 'abana( "s. )opez *ito,"$ the latter should be dee'ed 'odified accordin%l(. 4he Me'bers of the Court are unani'ous on this point. T&E MERITS

As earl( as An(ara "s. +le#toral ,ommission,- this Court ? spea@in% throu%h one of the leadin% 'e'bers of the Constitutional Convention and a respected professor of Constitutional La&, 3r. /ose P. Laurel ? declared that <the )udicial depart'ent is the onl( constitutional or%an &hich can be called upon to deter'ine the proper allocation of po&ers bet&een the several depart'ents and a'on% the inte%ral or constituent units thereof.< 9t is true that in 'abana( "s. )opez *ito,7 this Court characteri=in% the issue sub'itted thereto as a political one, declined to pass upon the >uestion &hether or not a %iven nu'ber of votes cast in Con%ress in favor of a proposed a'end'ent to the Constitution ? &hich &as bein% sub'itted to the people for ratification ? satisfied the three-fourths vote re>uire'ent of the funda'ental la&. 4he force of this precedent has been &ea@ened, ho&ever, b( %uanes "s. ,hief A##ountant of the %enate-$ Avelino vs. Cuenco,1 4aBada vs. Cuenco,! and 'a#ias "s. ,ommission on +le#tions.# 9n the first, &e held that the officers and e'plo(ees of the 6enate Electoral 4ribunal are under its supervision and control, not of that of the 6enate President, as clai'ed b( the latter2 in the second, this Court proceeded to deter'ine the nu'ber of 6enators necessar( for a .uorum in the 6enate2 in the third, &e nullified the election, b( 6enators belon%in% to the part( havin% the lar%est nu'ber of votes in said cha'ber, purportin% to act on behalf of the part( havin% the second lar%est nu'ber of votes therein, of t&o , + 6enators belon%in% to the first part(, as 'e'bers, for the second part(, of the, 6enate Electoral 4ribunal2 and in the fourth, &e declared unconstitutional an act of Con%ress purportin% to apportion the representative districts for the 0ouse of Representatives, upon the %round that the apportion'ent had not been 'ade as 'a( be possible accordin% to the nu'ber of inhabitants of each province. 4hus &e re)ected the theor(, advanced in these four ,-+ cases, that the issues therein raised &ere political >uestions the deter'ination of &hich is be(ond )udicial revie&. 9ndeed, the po&er to a'end the Constitution or to propose a'end'ents thereto is not included in the %eneral %rant of le%islative po&ers to Con%ress."; 9t is part of the inherent po&ers of the people ? as the repositor( of soverei%nt( in a republican state, such as ours "" ? to 'a@e, and, hence, to a'end their o&n Aunda'ental La&. Con%ress 'a( propose a'end'ents to the Constitution 'erel( because the sa'e e:plicitl( %rants such po&er. " 0ence, &hen e:ercisin% the sa'e, it is said that 6enators and Me'bers of the 0ouse of Representatives act, notas 'e'bers of ,on(ress, but as co'ponent ele'ents of a #onstituent assembl/. Chen actin% as such, the 'e'bers of Con%ress derive their authorit( fro' the Constitution, unli0e the people, &hen perfor'in% the sa'e function, ". for their authorit( does not e'anate fro' the Constitution ? the( are the "er/ sour#e of all po&ers of %overn'ent, in#ludin( the ,onstitution itself . 6ince, &hen proposin%, as a constituent asse'bl(, a'end'ents to the Constitution, the 'e'bers of Con%ress derive their authorit( fro' the Aunda'ental La&, it follo&s, necessaril(, that the( do not have the final sa( on &hether or not their acts are &ithin or be(ond constitutional li'its. 5ther&ise, the( could brush aside and set the sa'e at nau%ht, contrar( to the basic tenet that ours is a %overn'ent of

6ection " of Article D8 of the Constitution, as a'ended, reads* 4he Con%ress in )oint session asse'bled b( a vote of three-fourths of all the Me'bers of the 6enate and of the 0ouse of Representatives votin% separatel(, 'a( propose a'end'ents to this Constitution or call a convention for that purpose. 6uch a'end'ents shall be valid as part of this Constitution &hen approved b( a 'a)orit( of the votes cast at an election at &hich the a'end'ents are sub'itted to the people for their ratification. Pursuant to this provision, a'end'ents to the Constitution 'a( be proposed, either b( Con%ress, or b( a convention called b( Con%ress for that purpose. 9n either case, the vote of <three-fourths of all the 'e'bers of the 6enate and of the 0ouse of Representatives votin% separatel(< is necessar(. And, <such a'end'ents shall be valid as part of< the <Constitution &hen approved b( a 'a)orit( of the votes cast at an election at &hich the a'end'ents are sub'itted to the people for their ratification.< 9n the cases at bar, it is conceded that the R. B. 0. Nos. " and . have been approved b( a vote of three-fourths of all the 'e'bers of the 6enate and of the 0ouse of Representatives votin% separatel(. 4his, not&ithstandin%, it is ur%ed that said resolutions are null and void because* ". 4he Me'bers of Con%ress, &hich approved the proposed a'end'ents, as &ell as the resolution callin% a convention to propose a'end'ents, are, at best, de fa#to Con%ress'en2 . Con%ress 'a( adopt either one of t&o alternatives propose ? a'end'ents or call a convention therefore but 'a( not avail of both ? that is to sa(, propose a'end'ent and call a convention ? at the sa'e ti'e2 .. 4he election, in &hich proposals for a'end'ent to the Constitution shall be sub'itted for ratification, 'ust be aspe#ial election, not a (eneral election, in &hich officers of the national and local %overn'ents ? such as the elections scheduled to be held on Nove'ber "-, "#$1 ? &ill be chosen2 and -. 4he spirit of the Constitution de'ands that the election, in &hich proposals for a'end'ent shall be sub'itted to the people for ratification, 'ust be held under such conditions ? &hich, alle%edl(, do not e:ist ? as to %ive the people a reasonable opportunit( to have a fair %rasp of the nature and i'plications of said a'end'ents.

)e(alit/ of ,on(ress and )e(al %tatus of the ,on(ressmen 4he first ob)ection is based upon 6ection 7, Article 89, of the Constitution, &hich provides* 4he 0ouse of Representatives shall be co'posed of not 'ore than one hundred and t&ent( Me'bers &ho shall be apportioned a'on% the several provinces as nearl( as 'a( be accordin% to the nu'ber of their respective inhabitants, but each province shall have at least one Me'ber. 4he Con%ress shall b( la& 'a@e an apportion'ent &ithin three (ears after the return of ever( enu'eration, and not other&ise. Entil such apportion'ent shall have been 'ade, the 0ouse of Representatives shall have the sa'e nu'ber of Me'bers as that fi:ed b( la& for the National Asse'bl(, &ho shall be elected b( the >ualified electors fro' the present Asse'bl( districts. Each representative district shall co'prise, as far as practicable, conti%uous and co'pact territor(. 9t is ur%ed that the last enu'eration or census too@ place in "#$;2 that, no apportion'ent havin% been 'ade &ithin three ,.+ (ears thereafter, the Con%ress of the Philippines andFor the election of its Me'bers beca'e ille%al2 that Con%ress and its Me'bers, li@e&ise, beca'e a de fa#to Con%ress andFor de fa#to con%ress'en, respectivel(2 and that, conse>uentl(, the disputed Resolutions, proposin% a'end'ents to the Constitution, as &ell as Republic Act No. -#"., are null and void. 9t is not true, ho&ever, that Con%ress has not 'ade an apportion'ent &ithin three (ears after the enu'eration or census 'ade in "#$;. 9t did actuall( pass a bill, &hich beca'e Republic Act No. .;-;,"1 purportin% to 'a@e said apportion'ent. 4his Act &as, ho&ever, declared unconstitutional, upon the %round that the apportion'ent therein underta@en had not been 'ade accordin% to the nu'ber of inhabitants of the different provinces of the Philippines."! Moreover, &e are unable to a%ree &ith the theor( that, in vie& of the failure of Con%ress to 'a@e a valid apportion'ent &ithin the period stated in the Constitution, Con%ress beca'e an <unconstitutional Con%ress< and that, in conse>uence thereof, the Me'bers of its 0ouse of Representatives are de fa#to officers. 4he 'a)or pre'ise of this process of reasonin% is that the constitutional provision on <apportion'ent &ithin three (ears after the return of ever( enu'eration, and not other&ise,< is 'andator(. 4he fact that Con%ress is under le%al obli%ation to 'a@e said apportion'ent does not )ustif(, ho&ever, the conclusion that failure to co'pl( &ith such obli%ation rendered Con%ress ille%al or unconstitutional, or that its Me'bers have beco'e de fa#to officers. 9t is conceded that, since the adoption of the Constitution in "#.7, Con%ress has not 'ade a valid apportion'ent as re>uired in said funda'ental la&. 4he effect of this o'ission has been envisioned in the Constitution, pursuant to &hich* . . . Entil such apportion'ent shall have been 'ade, the 0ouse of Representatives shall have the sa'e nu'ber of Me'bers as that fi:ed b( la& for the National Asse'bl(, &ho shall be elected b( the >ualified electors fro' the present Asse'bl( districts. . . . . 4he provision does not support the vie& that, upon the e:piration of the period to 'a@e the apportion'ent, a Con%ress &hich fails to 'a@e it is dissolved or beco'es ille%al. 5n the contrar(, it

i'plies necessaril( that Con%ress shall #ontinue to function &ith the representative districts e:istin% at the ti'e of the e:piration of said period. 9t is ar%ued that the above->uoted provision refers onl( to the elections held in "#.7. 4his theor( assu'es that an apportion'ent had to be 'ade necessaril( before the first elections to be held after the inau%uration of the Co''on&ealth of the Philippines, or in "#.!. "# 4he assu'ption, is, ho&ever, un&arranted, for there had been no enu'eration in "#.7, and nobod( could foretell &hen it &ould be 'ade. 4hose &ho drafted and adopted the Constitution in "#.7 could be certain, therefore, that the three-(ear period, after the earliest possible enu'eration, &ould e:pire after the elections in "#.!. Chat is 'ore, considerin% that several provisions of the Constitution, particularl( those on the le%islative depart'ent, &ere a'ended in "#-;, b( establishin% a bica'eral Con%ress, those &ho drafted and adopted said a'end'ent, in#orporatin( therein the pro"ision of the ori(inal ,onstitution re(ardin( the apportionment of the distri#ts for representati"es , 'ust have @no&n that the three-(ear period therefor &ould e:pire after the ele#tions s#heduled to be held and a#tuall/ held in 19&1. 4hus, the events conte'poraneous &ith the fra'in% and ratification of the ori%inal Constitution in "#.7 and of the a'end'ent thereof in "#-; stron%l( indicate that the provision concernin% said apportion'ent and the effect of the failure to 'a@e it &ere e:pected to be applied to conditions obtainin% after the elections in "#.7 and "#.!, and even after subse.uent elections. 4hen a%ain, since the report of the 3irector of the Census on the last enu'eration &as sub'itted to the President on Nove'ber .;, "#$;, it follo&s that the three-(ear period to 'a@e the apportion'ent did not e:pire until 1961, or after the Presidential elections in "#$". 4here can be no >uestion, therefore, that the 6enate and the 0ouse of Representatives or%ani=ed or constituted on 3ece'ber .;, "#$", &ere de 2ure bodies, and that the Me'bers thereof &ere de 2ure officers. Pursuant to the theor( of petitioners herein, upon e:piration of said period of three (ears, or late in "#$., Con%ress beca'e ille%al and its Me'bers, or at least, those of the 0ouse of Representatives, beca'e ille%al holder of their respective offices, and &ere de fa#to officers. Petitioners do not alle%e that the e:piration of said three-(ear period &ithout a reapportion'ent, had the effect of abro%atin% or repealin% the le%al provision creatin% Con%ress, or, at least, the 0ouse of Representatives, and are not a&are of an( rule or principle of la& that &ould &arrant such conclusion. Neither do the( alle%e that the ter' of office of the 'e'bers of said 0ouse auto'aticall( e:pired or that the( ipso fa#to forfeited their seats in Con%ress, upon the lapse of said period for reapportion'ent. 9n fact, neither our political la&, nor our la& on public officers, in particular, supports the vie& that failure to dischar%e a 'andator( dut(, &hatever it 'a( be, &ould auto'aticall( result in the forfeiture of an office, in the absence of a statute to this effect. 6i'ilarl(, it &ould see' obvious that the provision of our Election La& relative to the election of Me'bers of Con%ress in "#$7 &ere not repealed in conse>uence of the failure of said bod( to 'a@e an apportion'ent &ithin three ,.+ (ears after the census of "#$;. 9nas'uch as the %eneral elections in "#$7 &ere presu'abl( held in confor'it( &ith said Election La&, and the le%al provisions creatin% Con%ress ? &ith a 0ouse of Representatives co'posed of 'e'bers elected b( >ualified voters of representative districts as the( e:isted at the ti'e of said elections ? re'ained in force, &e can not

see ho& said Me'bers of the 0ouse of Representatives can be re%arded as de fa#to officers o&in% to the failure of their predecessors in office to 'a@e a reapportion'ent &ithin the period afore'entioned. Epon the other hand, the Constitution authori=es the i'peach'ent of the President, the 8icePresident, the /ustices of the 6upre'e Court and the Auditor General for, inter alia, culpable violation of the Constitution, ; the enforce'ent of &hich is, not onl( their 'andator( dut(, but also, their 'ain function. 4his provision indicates that, despite the violation of such 'andator( dut(, the title to their respective offices re'ains uni'paired, until dis'issal or ouster pursuant to a )ud%'ent of conviction rendered in accordance &ith Article 9D of the Constitution. 9n short, the loss of office or the e:tinction of title thereto is not auto'atic. Even if &e assu'ed, ho&ever, that the present Me'bers of Con%ress are 'erel( de fa#to officers, it &ould not follo& that the contested resolutions and Republic Act No. -#". are null and void. 9n fact, the 'ain reasons for the e:istence of the de fa#to doctrine is that public interest de'ands that acts of persons holdin%, under color of title, an office created b( a valid statute be, li@e&ise, dee'ed valid insofar as the public ? as distin%uished fro' the officer in >uestion ? is concerned. " 9ndeed, other&ise, those dealin% &ith officers and e'plo(ees of the Govern'ent &ould be entitled to de'and fro' the' satisfactor( proof of their title to the positions the( hold, before dealin% &ith the', or before reco%ni=in% their authorit( or obe(in% their co''ands, even if the( should act &ithin the li'its of the authorit( vested in their respective offices, positions or e'plo('ents. 5ne can i'a%ine this %reat inconvenience, hardships and evils that &ould result in the absence of the de fa#to doctrine. As a conse>uence, the title of a de fa#to officer cannot be assailed collaterall(. . 9t 'a( not be contested e:cept directl(, b( .uo warranto proceedin%s. Neither 'a( the validit( of his acts be >uestioned upon the %round that he is 'erel( a de fa#to officer. - And the reasons are obvious* ,"+ it &ould be an indirect in>uir( into the title to the office2 and , + the acts of a de fa#to officer, if &ithin the co'petence of his office, are valid, insofar as the public is concerned. 9t is ar%ued that the fore%oin% rules do not appl( to the cases at bar because the acts therein involved have not been co'pleted and petitioners herein are not third parties. 4his pretense is untenable. 9t is inconsistent &ith a/0o "s. ,apistrano. 7 9n that case, one of the parties to a suit bein% heard before /ud%e Capistrano ob)ected to his continuin% to hear the case, for the reason that, 'ean&hile, he had reached the a%e of retire'ent. 4his Court held that the ob)ection could not be entertained, because the /ud%e &as at least, a de fa#to /ud%e, &hose title can not be assailed collaterall(. 9t should be noted that 4a(@o &as not a third part( insofar as the /ud%e &as concerned. 4a(@o &as one of the parties in the afore'entioned suit. Moreover, /ud%e Capistrano had not, as (et, finished hearin% the case, 'uch less rendered decision therein. No ri%hts had vested in favor of the parties, in conse>uence of the acts of said /ud%e. Get, 4a(@oHs ob)ection &as overruled. Needless to sa(, insofar as Con%ress is concerned, its acts, as re%ards the Resolutions herein contested and Republic Act No. -#"., are co'plete. Con%ress has nothin% else to do in connection there&ith. 4he Court is, also, unani'ous in holdin% that the ob)ection under consideration is untenable. A"ailable Alternati"es to ,on(ress

Att(. /uan 4. 3avid, as ami#us #uriae, 'aintains that Con%ress 'a( either propose a'end'ents to the Constitution or call a convention for that purpose, but it can not do both, at the sa'e ti'e. 4his theor( is based upon the fact that the t&o , + alternatives are connected in the Constitution b( the dis)unctive <or.< 6uch basis is, ho&ever, a &ea@ one, in the absence of other circu'stances ? and none has brou%ht to our attention ? supportin% the conclusion dra&n b( the ami#us #uriae. 9n fact, the ter' <or< has, oftenti'es, been held to 'ean <and,< or vice-versa, &hen the spirit or conte:t of the la& &arrants it. $ 9t is, also, note&orth( that R. B. 0. Nos. " and . propose a'end'ents to the constitutional provision on ,on(ress, to be sub'itted to the people for ratification on No"ember 1&- 1963, &hereas R. B. 0. No. calls for a convention in 1931, to consider proposals for a'end'ent to the Constitution, in (eneral. 9n other &ords, the sub)ect-'atter of R. B. 0. No. is different fro' that of R B. 0. Nos. " and .. Moreover, the a'end'ents proposed under R. B. 0. Nos. " and ., &ill be sub'itted for ratification several (ears before those that 'a( be proposed b( the constitutional convention called in R. B. 0. No. . A%ain, althou%h the three ,.+ resolutions &ere passed on the sa'e date, the( &ere ta@en up and put to a vote separatel(, or one after the other. 9n other &ords, the( &ere notpassed at the sa'e ti'e. 9n an( event, &e do not find, either in the Constitution, or in the histor( thereof an(thin% that &ould ne%ate the authorit( of different Con%resses to approve the contested Resolutions, or of the sa'e Con%ress to pass the sa'e in, different sessions or different da(s of the sa'e con%ressional session. And, neither has an( plausible reason been advanced to )ustif( the denial of authorit( to adopt said resolutions on the sa'e da(. Counsel as@* 6ince Con%ress has decided to call a constitutional convention to propose a'end'ents, &h( not let the &hole thin% be sub'itted to said convention, instead of, li@e&ise, proposin% so'e specific a'end'ents, to be sub'itted for ratification before said convention is heldI 4he force of this ar%u'ent 'ust be conceded. but the sa'e i'pu%ns the wisdom of the action ta@en b( Con%ress, not its authorit/ to ta@e it. 5ne see'in% purpose thereof to per'it Me'bers of Con%ress to run for election as dele%ates to the constitutional convention and participate in the proceedin%s therein, &ithout forfeitin% their seats in Con%ress. Chether or not this should be done is a political >uestion, not sub)ect to revie& b( the courts of )ustice. 5n this >uestion there is no disa%ree'ent a'on% the 'e'bers of the Court. 'a/ ,onstitutional Amendments 4e %ubmitted for Ratifi#ation in a General +le#tion5 Article D8 of the Constitution provides* . . . 4he Con%ress in )oint session asse'bled, b( a vote of three-fourths of all the Me'bers of the 6enate and of the 0ouse of Representatives votin% separatel(, 'a( propose a'end'ents to this Constitution or call a contention for that purpose. 6uch a'end'ents shall be valid as part of this Constitution &hen approved b( a 'a)orit( of the votes cast at an election at &hich the a'end'ents are sub'itted to the people for their ratification.

4here is in this provision nothin% to indicate that the <election< therein referred to is a <special,< not a %eneral, election. 4he circu'stance that three previous a'end'ents to the Constitution had been sub'itted to the people for ratification in special elections 'erel( sho&s that Con%ress dee'ed it best to do so under the circu'stances then obtainin%. 9t does not ne%ate its authorit( to sub'it proposed a'end'ents for ratification in %eneral elections. 9t &ould be better, fro' the vie&point of a thorou%h discussion of the proposed a'end'ents, that the sa'e be sub'itted to the peopleHs approval independentl( of the election of public officials. And there is no den(in% the fact that an ade>uate appraisal of the 'erits and de'erits proposed a'end'ents is li@el( to be overshado&ed b( the %reat attention usuall( co''anded b( the choice of personalities involved in %eneral elections, particularl( &hen provincial and 'unicipal officials are to be chosen. But, then, these considerations are addressed to the &isdo' of holdin% a plebiscite si'ultaneousl( &ith the election of public officer. 4he( do not den( the authorit( of Con%ress to choose either alternative, as i'plied in the ter' <election< used, &ithout >ualification, in the above>uoted provision of the Constitution. 6uch authorit( beco'es even 'ore patent &hen &e consider* ,"+ that the ter' <election,< nor'all( refers to the choice or selection of candidates to public office b( popular vote2 and , + that the &ord used in Article 8 of the Constitution, concernin% the %rant of suffra%e to &o'en is, not <election,< but <plebiscite.< Petitioners 'aintain that the ter' <election,< as used in 6ection " of Art. D8 of the Constitution, should be construed as 'eanin% a spe#ial election. 6o'e 'e'bers of the Court even feel that said ter' ,<election<+ refers to a <plebiscite,< without an( <election,< %eneral or special, of public officers. 4he( opine that constitutional a'end'ents are, in %eneral, if not al&a(s, of such i'portant, if not transcendental and vital nature as to de'and that the attention of the people be focused e:clusivel( on the sub)ect-'atter thereof, so that their votes thereon 'a( reflect no 'ore than their intelli%ent, i'partial and considered vie& on the 'erits of the proposed a'end'ents, uni'paired, or, at least, undiluted b( e:traneous, if not insidious factors, let alone the partisan political considerations that are li@el( to affect the selection of elective officials. 4his, certainl(, is a situation to be hoped for. 9t is a %oal the attain'ent of &hich should be pro'oted. 4he ideal conditions are, ho&ever, one thin%. 4he >uestion &hether the Constitution forbids the sub'ission of proposals for a'end'ent to the people e6#ept under su#h #onditions, is another thin%. Much as the &riter and those &ho concur in this opinion ad'ire the contrar( vie&, the( find the'selves unable to subscribe thereto &ithout, in effect, readin% into the Constitution &hat the( believe is not &ritten thereon and can not fairl( be deduced fro' the letter thereof, since the spirit of the la& should not be a 'atter of sheer speculation. 4he 'a)orit( vie& ? althou%h the votes in favor thereof are insufficient to declare Republic Act No. -#". unconstitutional ? as abl( set forth in the opinion penned b( Mr. /ustice 6anche=, is, ho&ever, other&ise. 7ould the %ubmission now of the ,ontested Amendments to the 8eople *iolate the %pirit of the ,onstitution5

9t should be noted that the contested Resolutions &ere approved on March "$, "#$1, so that, b( Nove'ber "-, "#$1, our citi=enr( shall have had practicall( ei%ht ,!+ 'onths to be infor'ed on the a'end'ents in >uestion. 4hen a%ain, 6ection of Republic Act No. -#". provides* ,"+ that <the a'end'ents shall be published in three consecutive issues of the 5fficial Ga=ette, at least t&ent( da(s prior to the election2< , + that <a printed cop( of the proposed a'end'ents shall be posted in a conspicuous place in ever( 'unicipalit(, cit( and provincial office buildin% and in ever( pollin% place not later than 5ctober "-, "#$1,< and that said cop( <shall re'ain posted therein until after the election2< ,.+ that <at least five copies of said a'end'ent shall be @ept in each pollin% place, to be 'ade available for e:a'ination b( the >ualified electors durin% election da(2< ,-+ that <&hen practicable, copies in the principal native lan%ua%es, as 'a( be deter'ined b( the Co''ission on Elections, shall be @ept in each pollin% place2< ,7+ that <the Co''ission on Elections shall 'a@e available copies of said a'end'ents in En%lish, 6panish and, &henever practicable, in the principal native lan%ua%es, for free distributin%*< and ,$+ that the contested Resolutions <shall be printed in full< on the bac@ of the ballots &hich shall be used on Nove'ber "-, "#$1. Ce are not prepared to sa( that the fore%oin% 'easures are palpabl( inade>uate to co'pl( &ith the constitutional re>uire'ent that proposals for a'end'ent be <sub'itted to the people for their ratification,< and that said 'easures are 'anifestl( insufficient, fro' a constitutional vie&point, to infor' the people of the a'end'ent sou%ht to be 'ade. 4hese &ere substantiall( the sa'e 'eans availed of to infor' the people of the sub)ect sub'itted to the' for ratification, fro' the ori%inal Constitution do&n to the Parit( A'end'ent. 4hus, referrin% to the ori%inal Constitution, 6ection " of Act No. - ;;, provides* 6aid Constitution, &ith the 5rdinance appended thereto, shall be published in the 5fficial Ga=ette, in En%lish and in 6panish, for three consecutive issues at least fifteen da(s prior to said election, and a printed cop( of said Constitution, &ith the 5rdinance appended thereto, shall be posted in a conspicuous place in each 'unicipal and provincial %overn'ent office buildin% and in each pollin% place not later than the t&ent(-second da( of April, nineteen hundred and thirt(-five, and shall re'ain posted therein continuall( until after the ter'ination of the election. At least ten copies of the Constitution &ith the 5rdinance appended thereto, in En%lish and in 6panish, shall be @ept at each pollin% place available for e:a'ination b( the >ualified electors durin% election da(. Chenever practicable, copies in the principal local dialects as 'a( be deter'ined b( the 6ecretar( of the 9nterior shall also be @ept in each pollin% place. 4he provision concernin% &o'anHs suffra%e is 6ection " of Co''on&ealth Act No. .-, readin%*

6aid Article 8 of the Constitution shall be published in the 5fficial Ga=ette, in En%lish and in 6panish, for three consecutive issues at least fifteen da(s prior to said election, and the said Article 8 shall be posted in a conspicuous place in each 'unicipal and provincial office buildin% and in each pollin% place not later than the t&ent(-second da( of April, nineteen and thirt(-seven, and shall re'ain posted therein continuall( until after the ter'ination of the plebiscite. At least ten copies of said Article 8 of the Constitution, in En%lish and in 6panish, shall be @ept at each pollin% place available for e:a'ination b( the >ualified electors durin% the plebiscite. Chenever practicable, copies in the principal native lan%ua%es, as 'a( be deter'ined b( the 6ecretar( of the 9nterior, shall also be @ept in each pollin% place. 6i'ilarl(, 6ection , Co''on&ealth Act No. 7"1, referrin% to the "#-; a'end'ents, is of the follo&in% tenor* 4he said a'end'ents shall be published in En%lish and 6panish in three consecutive issues of the 5fficial Ga=ette at least t&ent( da(s prior to the election. A printed cop( thereof shall be posted in a conspicuous place in ever( 'unicipal, cit(, and provincial %overn'ent office buildin% and in ever( pollin% place not later than Ma( ei%hteen, nineteen hundred and fort(, and shall re'ain posted therein until after the election. At least ten copies of said a'end'ents shall be @ept in each pollin% place to be 'ade available for e:a'ination b( the >ualified electors durin% election da(. Chen practicable, copies in the principal native lan%ua%es, as 'a( be deter'ined b( the 6ecretar( of the 9nterior, shall also be @ept therein. As re%ards the Parit( A'end'ent, 6ection of Republic Act No. 1. is to the effect that*

la& enforcin% a%encies, particularl( those that ta@e place subse>uentl( to the passa%e or approval of the la&. Referrin% particularl( to the contested proposals for a'end'ent, the sufficienc( or insufficienc(, fro' a constitutional an%le, of the sub'ission thereof for ratification to the people on Nove'ber "-, "#$1, depends ? in the vie& of those &ho concur in this opinion, and &ho, insofar as this phase of the case, constitute the 'inorit( ? upon &hether the provisions of Republic Act No. -#". are such as to fairl( apprise the people of the %ist, the 'ain idea or the substance of said proposals, &hich is ? under R. B. 0. No. " ? the increase of the 'a:i'u' nu'ber of seats in the 0ouse of Representatives, fro' " ; to "!;, and ? under R. B. 0. No. . ? the authorit( %iven to the 'e'bers of Con%ress to run for dele%ates to the Constitutional Convention and, if elected thereto, to dischar%e the duties of such dele%ates, &ithout forfeitin% their seats in Con%ress. Ce ? &ho constitute the 'inorit( ? believe that Republic Act No. -#". satisfies such re>uire'ent and that said Act is, accordin%l(, constitutional. A considerable portion of the people 'a( not @no& ho& over "$; of the proposed 'a:i'u' of representative districts are actuall( apportioned b( R. B. 0. No. " a'on% the provinces in the Philippines. 9t is not i'probable, ho&ever, that the( are not interested in the details of the apportion'ent, or that a careful readin% thereof 'a( tend in their si'ple 'inds, to i'pair a clear vision thereof. Epon the other hand, those &ho are 'ore sophisticated, 'a( enli%hten the'selves sufficientl( b( readin% the copies of the proposed a'end'ents posted in public places, the copies @ept in the pollin% places and the te:t of contested resolutions, as printed in full on the bac@ of the ballots the( &ill use. 9t is, li@e&ise, conceivable that as 'an( people, if not 'ore, 'a( fail to reali=e or envisa%e the effect of R. B. 0. No. . upon the &or@ of the Constitutional Convention or upon the future of our Republic. But, then, nobod( can foretell such effect &ith certaint(. Aro' our vie&point, the provisions of Article D8 of the Constitution are satisfied so lon% as the electorate @no&s that R. B. 0. No. . per'its Con%ress'en to retain their seats as le%islators, even if the( should run for and assu'e the functions of dele%ates to the Convention. Ce are i'pressed b( the factors considered b( our distin%uished and estee'ed brethren, &ho opine other&ise, but, &e feel that such factors affect the wisdom of Republic Act No. -#". and that of R. B. 0. Nos. " and ., not theauthorit/ of Con%ress to approve the sa'e. 4he s(ste' of chec@s and balances underl(in% the )udicial po&er to stri@e do&n acts of the E:ecutive or of Con%ress transcendin% the confines set forth in the funda'ental la&s is not in dero%ation of the principle of separation of po&ers, pursuant to &hich each depart'ent is supre'e &ithin its o&n sphere. 4he deter'ination of the conditions under &hich the proposed a'end'ents shall be sub'itted to the people is concededl( a 'atter &hich falls &ithin the le%islative sphere. Ce do not believe it has been satisfactoril( sho&n that Con%ress has e:ceeded the li'its thereof in enactin% Republic Act No. -#".. Presu'abl(, it could have done so'ethin% better to enli%hten the people on the sub)ect-'atter thereof. But, then, no la& is perfect. No product of hu'an endeavor is be(ond i'prove'ent. 5ther&ise, no le%islation &ould be constitutional and valid. 6i: ,$+ Me'bers of this Court believe, ho&ever, said Act and R. B. 0. Nos. " and . violate the spirit of the Constitution.

4he said a'end'ent shall be published in En%lish and 6panish in three consecutive issues of the 5fficial Ga=ette at least t&ent( da(s prior to the election. A printed cop( thereof shall be posted in a conspicuous place in ever( 'unicipal, cit(, and provincial %overn'ent office buildin% and in ever( pollin% place not later than Aebruar( eleven, nineteen hundred and fort(seven, and shall re'ain posted therein until after the election. At least, ten copies of the said a'end'ent shall be @ept in each pollin% place to be 'ade available for e:a'ination b( the >ualified electors durin% election da(. Chen practicable, copies in the principal native lan%ua%es, as 'a( be deter'ined b( the Co''ission on Elections, shall also be @ept in each pollin% place. 4he 'ain difference bet&een the present situation and that obtainin% in connection &ith the for'er proposals does not arise fro' the la& enacted therefor. 4he difference sprin%s fro' the circu'stance that the 'a)or political parties had ta@en sides on previous a'end'ents to the Constitution ? e:cept, perhaps, the &o'anHs suffra%e ? and, conse>uentl(, debated thereon at so'e len%th before the plebiscite too@ place. Epon the other hand, said political parties have not see'in%l( 'ade an issue on the a'end'ents no& bein% contested and have, accordin%l(, refrained fro' discussin% the sa'e in the current political ca'pai%n. 6uch debates or pole'ics as 'a( have ta@en place ? on a rather li'ited scale ? on the latest proposals for a'end'ent, have been due principall( to the initiative of a fe& civic or%ani=ations and so'e 'ilitant 'e'bers of our citi=enr( &ho have voiced their opinion thereon. A le%islation cannot, ho&ever, be nullified b( reason of the failure of certain sectors of the co''unit( to discuss it sufficientl(. 9ts constitutionalit( or unconstitutionalit( depends upon no other factors than those e:istin% at the ti'e of the enact'ent thereof, unaffected b( the acts or o'issions of

9nas'uch as there are less than ei%ht ,!+ votes in favor of declarin% Republic Act -#". and R. B. 0. Nos. " and . unconstitutional and invalid, the petitions in these t&o , + cases 'ust be, as the( are hereb(, dis'iss and the &rits therein pra(ed for denied, &ithout special pronounce'ent as to costs. 9t is so ordered. 'a0alintal and 4en(zonJ.8.JJ.- concur. 9ernando- J.- concurs full( &ith the above opinion, addin% a fe& &ords on the >uestion of )urisdiction.

4o vote for the approval of the proposed a'end'ents, the voter shall &rite the &ord <(es< or its e>uivalent in Pilipino or in the local dialect in the blan@ space after each >uestion2 to vote for the re)ection thereof, he shall &rite the &ord <No< or its e>uivalent in Pilipino or in the local dialect. 9 believe that intrinsicall(, that is, considered in itself and &ithout reference to e:traneous factors and circu'stances, the 'anner prescribed in the aforesaid provisions is sufficient for the purpose of havin% the proposed a'end'ents sub'itted to the people for their ratification, as en)oined in 6ection ", Article D8 of the Constitution. 9 a' at a loss to sa( &hat else should have been re>uired b( the Act to 'a@e it adhere 'ore closel( to the constitutional re>uire'ent. Certainl( it &ould have been out of place to provide, for instance, that %overn'ent officials and e'plo(ees should %o out and e:plain the a'end'ents to the people, or that the( should be the sub)ect of an( particular 'eans or for' of public discussion. 4he ob)ection of so'e 'e'bers of the Court to Republic Act No. -#". see's to 'e predicated on the fact that there are so 'an( other issues at sta@e in the co'in% %eneral election that the attention of the electorate, cannot be entirel( focused on the proposed a'end'ents, such that there is a failure to properl( sub'it the' for ratification &ithin the intend'ent of the Constitution. 9f that is so, then the defect is not intrinsic in the la& but in its i'ple'entation. 4he sa'e 'anner of sub'ittin% the proposed a'end'ents to the people for ratification 'a(, in a different settin%, be sufficient for the purpose. Get 9 cannot conceive that the constitutionalit( or unconstitutionalit( of a la& 'a( be 'ade to depend &ill(nill( on factors not inherent in its provisions. Aor a la& to be struc@ do&n as unconstitutional it 'ust be so b( reason of so'e irreconcilable conflict bet&een it and the Constitution. 5ther&ise a la& 'a( be either valid or invalid, accordin% to circu'stances not found in its provisions, such as the =eal &ith &hich the( are carried out. 4o such a thesis 9 cannot a%ree. 4he criterion &ould be too broad and relative, and dependent upon individual opinions that at best are sub)ective. Chat one 'a( re%ard as sufficient co'pliance &ith the re>uire'ent of sub'ission to the people, &ithin the conte:t of the sa'e la&, 'a( not be so to another. 4he >uestion is susceptible of as 'an( vie&s as there are vie&ers2 and 9 do not thin@ this Court &ould be )ustified in sa(in% that its o&n vie& on the 'atter is the correct one, to the e:clusion of the opinions of others. 5n the other hand, 9 re)ect the ar%u'ent that the ratification 'ust necessaril( be in a special election or plebiscite called for that purpose alone. Chile such procedure is hi%hl( to be preferred, the Constitution spea@s si'pl( of <an ele#tion at &hich the a'end'ents are sub'itted to the people for their ratification,< and 9 do not subscribe to the restrictive interpretation that the petitioners &ould place on this provision, na'el(, that it 'eans onl( a special election.

Se*"r"+e O*,#,o#MA.ALINTAL, J., concurrin%* 9 concur in the fore%oin% opinion of the Chief /ustice. 9 &ould 'a@e so'e additional observations in connection &ith '( concurrence. 6ections and - of Republic Act No. -#". provide* 6ec. . 4he a'end'ents shall be published in three consecutive issues of the 5fficial Ga=ette at least t&ent( da(s prior to the election. A printed cop( thereof shall be posted in a conspicuous place in ever( 'unicipalit(, cit( and provincial office buildin% and in ever( pollin% place not later than 5ctober fourteen, nineteen hundred and si:t(-seven, and shall re'ain posted therein until after the election. At least five copies of the said a'end'ents shall be @ept in each pollin% place to be 'ade available for e:a'ination b( the >ualified electors durin% election da(. Chen practicable, copies in the principal native lan%ua%es, as 'a( be deter'ined b( the Co''ission on Elections, shall be @ept in each pollin% place. 4he Co''ission on Elections shall 'a@e available copies of each a'end'ents in En%lish, 6panish and, &henever practicable, in the principal native lan%ua%es, for free distribution. ::: ::: :::

6ec. -. 4he ballots &hich shall be used in the election for the approval of said a'end'ents shall be printed in En%lish and Pilipino and shall be in the si=e and for' prescribed b( the Co''ission on Elections*8ro"ided- howe"er, 4hat at the bac@ of said ballot there shall be printed in full Resolutions of both 0ouses of Con%ress Nu'bered 5ne and 4hree, both adopted on March si:teen, nineteen hundred and si:t(-seven, proposin% the a'end'ents* 8ro"ided- further, 4hat the >uestionnaire appearin% on the face of the ballot shall be as follo&s* Are (ou in favor of the proposed a'end'ent to 6ection five of Article 89 of our Constitution printed at the bac@ of this ballotI Are (ou in favor of the proposed a'end'ent to section si:teen of Article 89 of our Constitution printed at the bac@ of this ballotI

/ENGZON, ).P., J., concurrin%* 9t is the %lor( of our institutions that the( are founded upon la&, that no one can e:ercise an( authorit( over the ri%hts and interests of others e:cept pursuant to and in the 'anner authori=ed b( la&. " Based upon this principle, petitioners Ra'on A. Gon=ales and Philippine Constitution Association ,P09LC5N6A+ co'e to this Court in separate petitions.

Petitioner Gon=ales, as ta:pa(er, voter and citi=en, and alle%edl( in representation thru class suit of all citi=ens of this countr(, filed this suit for prohibition &ith preli'inar( in)unction to restrain the Co''ission on Elections, 3irector of Printin% and Auditor General fro' i'ple'entin% andFor co'pl(in% &ith Republic Act -#"., assailin% said la& as unconstitutional. Petitioner P09LC5N6A, as a civic, non-profit and non-partisan corporation, assails the constitutionalit( not onl( of Republic Act -#". but also of Resolutions of Both 0ouses Nos. " and . of March "$, "#$1. Republic Act -#"., effective /une "1, "#$1, is an Act sub'ittin% to the Ailipino people for approval the a'end'ents to the Constitution of the Philippines proposed b( the Con%ress of the Philippines in Resolutions of Both 0ouses Nu'bered " and ., adopted on March "$, "#$1. 6aid Republic Act fi:es the date and 'anner of the election at &hich the aforesaid proposed a'end'ents shall be voted upon b( the people, and appropriates funds for said election. Resolutions of Both 0ouses Nos. " and . propose t&o a'end'ents to the Constitution* the first, to a'end 6ec. 7, Art. 89, b( increasin% the 'a:i'u' 'e'bership of the 0ouse of Representatives fro' " ; to "!;, apportionin% "$; of said "!; seats and eli'inatin% the provision that Con%ress shall b( la& 'a@e an apportion'ent &ithin three (ears after the return of ever( enu'eration2 the second, to a'end 6ec. "$, Art. 89, b( allo&in% 6enators and Representatives to be dele%ates to a constitutional convention &ithout forfeitin% their seats. 6ince both petitions relate to the proposed a'end'ents, the( are considered to%ether herein.

4urnin% then to petitioner Gon=alesH first ob)ection, 6ec. ", Art. D8 clearl( does not bear hi' on the point. 9t no&here re>uires that the ratification be thru an election solel/ for that purpose. 9t onl( re>uires that it be at <an election at &hich the a'end'ents are sub'itted to the people for their ratification.< 4o )oin it &ith an election for candidates to public office, that is, to 'a@e it concurrent &ith such election, does not render it an( less an election at &hich the proposed a'end'ents are sub'itted to the people for their ratification. 4o prohibition bein% found in the plain ter's of the Constitution, none should be inferred. 0ad the fra'ers of re>uirin% Constitution thou%ht of re>uirin% a special election for the purpose onl( of the proposed a'end'ents, the( could have said so, b( >ualif(in% the phrase &ith so'e &ord such as <special< or <solel(< or <e:clusivel(<. 4he( did not. 9t is not herein decided that such concurrence of election is &ise, or that it &ould not have been better to provide for a separate election e:clusivel( for the ratification of the proposed a'end'ents. 4he point ho&ever is that such separate and e:clusive election, even if it 'a( be better or &iser, &hich a%ain, is not for this Court to decide, is not included in the procedure re>uired b( the Constitution to a'end the sa'e. 4he function of the /udiciar( is <not to pass upon >uestions of &isdo', )ustice or e:pedienc( of le%islation<. 9t is li'ited to deter'inin% &hether the action ta@en b( the Le%islative 3epart'ent has violated the Constitution or not. 5n this score, 9 a' of the opinion that it has not. Petitioner Gon=alesH second point is that Republic Act -#". is deficient for not havin% been passed b( Con%ress in )oint session b( .F- vote. 6ec. ", Art. D8 of the Constitution provides*

6pecificall( and briefl(, petitioner Gon=alesH ob)ections are as follo&s* ,"+ Republic Act -#". violates 6ec. ", Art. D8 of the Constitution, in sub'ittin% the proposed a'end'ents to the Constitution, to the people for approval, at the %eneral election of "#$1 instead of at a special election solel( for that purpose2 , + Republic Act -#". violates 6ec. ", Art. D8 of the Constitution, since it &as not passed &ith the .F- vote in )oint session re>uired &hen Con%ress proposes a'end'ents to the Constitution, said Republic Act bein% a step in or part of the process of proposin% a'end'ents to the Constitution2 and ,.+ Republic Act -#". violates the due process clause of the Constitution ,6ec. ", 6ubsec. ", Art. 999+, in not re>uirin% that the substance of the proposed a'end'ents be stated on the face of the ballot or other&ise renderin% clear the i'port of the proposed a'end'ents, such as b( statin% the provisions before and after said a'end'ents, instead of printin% at the bac@ of the ballot onl( the proposed a'end'ents. 6ince observance of Constitutional provisions on the pro#edure for a'endin% the Constitution is concerned, the issue is co%ni=able b( this Court under its po&ers to revie& an Act of Con%ress to deter'ine its confor'it( to the funda'ental la&. Aor thou%h the Constitution leaves Con%ress free to propose &hatever Constitutional a'end'ent it dee's fit, so that the substan#e or #ontent of said proposed a'end'ent is a 'atter of polic( and &isdo' and thus a political >uestion, the Constitution nevertheless i'poses re>uisites as to the manner orpro#edure of proposin% such a'end'ents, e.(., the three-fourths vote re>uire'ent. 6aid procedure or 'anner, therefore, fro' bein% left to the discretion of Con%ress, as a 'atter of polic( and &isdo', is fi:ed b( the Constitution. And to that e:tent, all >uestions bearin% on &hether Con%ress in proposin% a'end'ents follo&ed the procedure re>uired b( the Constitution, is perforce )usticiable, it not bein% a 'atter of polic( or &isdo'.

6ec. ". 4he Con%ress in )oint session asse'bled, b( a vote of three-fourths of all the 'e'bers of the 6enate and of the 0ouse of Representatives votin% separatel(, 'a( propose a'end'ents to this Constitution or call a convention for that purpose. 6uch a'end'ents shall be valid as part of this Constitution &hen approved b( a 'a)orit( of the votes cast at an election to &hich the a'end'ents are sub'itted to the people for their ratification. 3oes Republic Act -#". propose a'end'ents to the ConstitutionI 9f b( the ter' <propose a'end'ent< is 'eant to deter'ine C0A4 said a'end'ent shall be, then Republic Act -#". does not2 Resolutions of Both 0ouses " and . alread( did that. 9f, on the other hand, it 'eans, or also 'eans, to provide for ho&, &hen, and b( &hat 'eans the a'end'ents shall be submitted to the people for approval, then it does. A careful readin% of 6ec. ", Art. D8 sho&s that the first sense. is the one intended. 6aid 6ection has t&o sentences* in the first, it re>uires the .F- votin% in )oint session, for Con%ress to <propose a'end'ents<. And then in the second sentence, it provides that <such a'end'ents . . . shall be sub'itted to the people for their ratification<. 4his clearl( indicates that b( the ter' <propose a'end'ents< in the first sentence is 'eant to fra'e the substance or the content or the C0A4ele'ent of the a'end'ents2 for it is this and this alone that is sub'itted to the people for their ratification. 4he details of &hen the election shall be held for approval or re)ection of the proposed a'end'ents, or the 'anner of holdin% it, are not sub'itted for ratification to for' part of the Constitution. 6tated differentl(, the plain lan%ua%e of 6ection ", Art. D8, sho&s that the act of proposin% a'end'ents is distinct fro' ? albeit related to ? that of sub'ittin% the a'end'ents to the

people for their ratification2 and that the .F- votin% re>uire'ent applies onl( to the first step, not to the second one. 9t follo&s that the sub'ission of proposed a'end'ents can be done thru an ordinar( statute passed b( Con%ress. 4he Constitution does not e:pressl( state b( &ho' the sub'ission shall be underta@en2 the rule is that a po&er not lod%ed else&here under the Constitution is dee'ed to reside &ith the le%islative bod(, under the doctrine of residuar( po&ers. Con%ress therefore validl( enacted Republic Act -#". to fi: the details of the date and 'anner of sub'ittin% the proposed a'end'ents to the people for their ratification. 6ince it does not <propose a'end'ents< in the sense referred to b( 6ec. ", Art. D8 of the Constitution, but 'erel( provides for ho& and &hen the a'end'ents, alread( proposed, are %oin% to be voted upon, the sa'e does not need the .F- vote in )oint session re>uired in 6ec. ", Art. D8 of the Constitution. Aurther'ore, Republic Act -#". is an appropriation 'easure. 6ec. $ thereof appropriates P",;;;,;;; for carr(in% out its provisions. 6ec. "!, Art. 89 of the Constitution states that <All appropriation . . . bills shall ori%inate e:clusivel( in the 0ouse of Representatives<. Republic Act -#"., therefore, could not have been validl( adopted in a )oint session, reinforcin% the vie& that 6ec. ", Art. D8 does not appl( to such a 'easure providin% for the holdin% of the election to ratif( the proposed a'end'ents, &hich 'ust perforce appropriate funds for its purpose. Petitioner Gon=ales contends, thirdl(, that Republic Act -#". offends a%ainst substantive due process. An e:a'ination of the provisions of the la& sho&s no violation of the due process clause of the Constitution. 4he publication in the 5fficial Ga=ette at least ; da(s before the election, the postin% of notices in public buildin%s not later than 5ctober "-, "#$1, to re'ain posted until after the elections, the placin% of copies of the proposed a'end'ents in the pollin% places, aside fro' printin% the sa'e at the bac@ of the ballot, provide sufficient opportunit( to the voters to cast an intelli%ent vote on the proposal. 3ue process refers onl( to providin% fair opportunit(2 it does not %uarantee that the opportunit( %iven &ill in fact be availed of2 that is the loo@-out of the voter and the responsibilit( of the citi=en. As lon% as fair and reasonable opportunit( to be infor'ed is %iven, and it is, the due process clause is not infrin%ed. Non-printin% of the provisions to be a'ended as the( no& stand, and the printin% of the full proposed a'end'ents at the bac@ of the ballot instead of the substance thereof at the face of the ballot, do not deprive the voter of fair opportunit( to be infor'ed. 4he present &ordin% of the Constitution is not bein% veiled or suppressed fro' hi'2 he is conclusivel( presu'ed to @no& the' and the( are available should he &ant to chec@ on &hat he is conclusivel( presu'ed to @no&. 6hould the voters choose to re'ain i%norant of the present Constitution, the fault does not lie &ith Con%ress. Aor opportunit( to fa'iliari=e oneself &ith the Constitution as it stands has been available thru all these (ears. Perhaps it &ould have been 'ore convenient for the voters if the present &ordin% of the provisions &ere also to be printed on the ballot. 4he sa'e ho&ever is a 'atter of polic(. As lon% as the 'ethod adopted provides sufficientl( reasonable chance to intelli%entl( vote on the a'end'ents, and 9 thin@ it does in this case, it is not constitutionall( defective. Petitioner Gon=alesH other ar%u'ents touch on the 'erits or &isdo' of the proposed a'end'ents. 4hese are for the people in their soverei%n capacit( to decide, not for this Court. 4&o ar%u'ents &ere further advanced* first, that Con%ress cannot both call a convention and propose a'end'ents2 second, that the present Con%ress is a de fa#to one, since no apportion'ent la& &as

adopted &ithin three (ears fro' the last census of "#$;, so that the Representatives elected in "#$" are de fa#to officers onl(. Not bein% de 2ure, the( cannot propose a'end'ents, it is ar%ued. As to the first point, 6ec. " of Art. D8 states that Con%ress <'a( propose a'end'ents or call a convention for that purpose<. 4he ter' <or<, ho&ever, is fre>uentl( used as havin% the sa'e 'eanin% as <and< particularl( in per'issive, affir'ative sentences so that the interpretation of the &ord <or< as <and< in the Constitution in such use &ill not chan%e its 'eanin% ,8ic@sbur% 6. J P. R. Co. v. Goodenou%h, . 6o. -;-, -"", ";! La, -- +. And it should be pointed out that the resolutions proposin% a'end'ents ,R.B.0. Nos. " and .+ are different fro' that callin% for a convention ,R.B.0. No. +. 6urel(, if Con%ress dee's it better or &ise to a'end the Constitution before a convention called for is elected, it should not be fettered fro' doin% so. Aor our purposes in this case, suffice it to note that the Constitution does not prohibit it fro' doin% so. As to the second ar%u'ent, it is also true that 6ec. 7 of Art. 89 of the Constitution provides in part that <4he Con%ress shall b( la& 'a@e an apportion'ent &ithin three (ears after the return of ever( enu'eration, and not other&ise<. 9t ho&ever further states in the ne:t sentence* <Entil such apportion'ent shall have been 'ade, the 0ouse of Representatives shall have the sa'e nu'ber of Me'bers as that fi:ed b( la& for the National Asse'bl(, &ho shall be elected b( the >ualified electors fro' the present asse'bl( districts.< 4he failure of Con%ress, therefore, to pass a valid redistrictin% la& since the ti'e the above provision &as adopted, does not render the present districtin% ille%al or unconstitutional. Aor the Constitution itself provides for its continuance in such case, renderin% le%al and de 2ure the status .uo. Aor the above reasons, 9 vote to uphold the constitutionalit( of Republic Act -#"., and full( concur &ith the opinion of the Chief /ustice.

!ERNAN O, J., concurrin%* At the outset, &e are faced &ith a >uestion of )urisdiction. 4he opinion prepared b( the Chief /ustice discusses the 'atter &ith a fullness that erases doubts and 'is%ivin%s and clarifies the applicable principles. A fe& &ords 'a( ho&ever be added. Ce start fro' the pre'ise that onl( &here it can be sho&n that the >uestion is to be solved b( public opinion or &here the 'atter has been left b( the Constitution to the sole discretion of an( of the political branches, as &as so clearl( stated b( the then /ustice Concepcion in a:ada ". ,uen#o," 'a( this Court avoid passin% on the issue before it. Chatever 'a( be said about the present >uestion, it is hard to spea@ &ith certitude considerin% Article D8, that Con%ress 'a( be entrusted &ith the full and uncontrolled discretion on the procedure leadin% to proposals for an a'end'ent of the Constitution. 9t 'a( be said ho&ever that in 'abana( ". )opez *ito, this Court throu%h /ustice 4uason follo&ed Cole'an v. Miller,. in its holdin% that certain aspects of the a'endin% process 'a( be considered political. 0is opinion >uoted &ith approval the vie& of /ustice Blac@, to &hich three other 'e'bers of

the Enited 6tates 6upre'e Court a%reed, that the process itself is political in its entiret(, <fro' sub'ission until an a'end'ent beco'es part of the Constitution, and is not sub)ect to )udicial %uidance, control or interference at an( point.< 9n a sense that &ould solve the 'atter neatl(. 4he )udiciar( &ould be spared the at ti'es arduous and in ever( case soul-searchin% process of deter'inin% &hether the procedure for a'end'ents re>uired b( the Constitution has been follo&ed. At the sa'e ti'e, &ithout i'pu%nin% the 'otives of Con%ress, &hich cannot be )udiciall( in>uired into at an( rate, it is not be(ond the real' of possibilit( that a failure to observe the re>uire'ents of Article D8 &ould occur. 9n the event that )udicial intervention is sou%ht, to rel( auto'aticall( on the theor( of political >uestion to avoid passin% on such a 'atter of delicac( 'i%ht under certain circu'stances be considered, and ri%htl( so, as nothin% less than )udicial abdication or surrender. Chat appears re%rettable is that a 'a)or opinion of an estee'ed )urist, the late /ustice 4uason, &ould no lon%er be controllin%. 4here is co'fort in the thou%ht that the vie& that then prevailed &as itself a product of the ti'es. 9t could ver( &ell be that considerin% the circu'stances e:istin% in "#-1 as &ell as the particular a'end'ent sou%ht to be incorporated in the Constitution, the parit( ri%hts ordinance, the better part of &isdo' in vie& of the %rave econo'ic situation then confrontin% the countr( &ould be to avoid the e:istence of an( obstacle to its bein% sub'itted for ratification. Moreover, the Republic bein% less than a (ear old, A'erican 6upre'e Court opinions on constitutional >uestions &ere-invariabl( accorded uncritical acceptance. 4hus the approach follo&ed b( /ustice 4uason is not difficult to understand. 9t 'a( be said that there is less propensit( no&, &hich is all to the %ood, for this Court to accord that 'uch deference to constitutional vie&s co'in% fro' the >uarter. Nor is this 'ode of vie&in% the opinion of /ustice 4uason to do in)ustice to his 'e'or(. Aor as he stated in another 'a)or opinion in Araneta ". !in(lasan,- in ascertainin% the 'eanin% to be %iven the E'er%enc( Po&ers Act,7 one should not i%nore &hat &ould ensue if a particular 'ode of construction &ere follo&ed. As he so e'phaticall( stated, <Ce test a rule b( its results.< 4he conse>uences of a )udicial veto on the then proposed a'end'ent on the econo'ic survival of the countr(, an erroneous appraisal it turned out later, constituted an effective ar%u'ent for its sub'ission. Ch( not then consider the >uestion political and let the people decideI 4hat assu'ption could have been indul%ed in. 9t could ver( &ell be the inarticulate 'a)or pre'ise. Aor 'an( it did bear the sta'p of )udicial states'anship. 4he opinion of Chief /ustice Concepcion renders cr(stal-clear &h( as of this date and in the foreseeable future )udicial in>uir( to assure the ut'ost co'pliance &ith the constitutional re>uire'ent &ould be a 'ore appropriate response.

Ri%ht at the outset, the &riter e:presses his deep appreciation to Mr. /ustice Cali:to 5. Kaldivar and Mr. /ustice Ared Rui= Castro for their invaluable contribution to the substance and for' of the opinion &hich follo&s. 3irectl( under attac@ in this, a petition for prohibition, is the constitutionalit( of Republic Act -#"., approved on /une "1, "#$1. 4his Act see@s to i'ple'ent Resolutions " and . adopted b( the 6enate and the 0ouse of Representatives on March "$, "#$1 &ith the end in vie& of a'endin% vital portions of the Constitution. 6ince the proble' here presented has its roots in the resolutions aforesaid of both houses of Con%ress, it 'a( )ust as &ell be that &e recite in brief the salient features thereof. Resolution No. " increases the 'e'bership of the 0ouse of Representatives fro' " ; to "!; 'e'bers, and i''ediatel( apportions "$; seats. A co'panion resolution is Resolution No. . &hich per'its 6enators and Con%ress'en ? &ithout forfeitin% their seats in Con%ress ? to be 'e'bers of the Constitutional Convention" to be convened, as provided in another resolution ? Resolution No. . Parentheticall(, t&o of these proposed a'end'ents to the Constitution ,Resolutions 9 and .+ are to be sub'itted to the people for their ratification ne:t Nove'ber "-, "#$1. Resolution No. )ust adverted to calls for a constitutional convention also to propose amendments to the ,onstitution. 4he dele%ates thereto are to be elected on the second 4uesda( of Nove'ber "#1;2 the convention to sit on /une 1- 19312 and the a'end'ents proposed b( the convention to be sub'itted to the people thereafter for their ratification. 5f i'portance no& are the proposed a'end'ents increasin% the nu'ber of 'e'bers of the 0ouse of representatives under Resolution No. ", and that in Resolution No. . &hich %ives 6enators and Con%ress'en the ri%ht to sit as 'e'bers of the constitutional convention to be convened on /une ", "#1". Because, these are the t&o a'end'ents to be sub'itted to the people in the %eneral elections soon to be held on Nove'ber "-, "#$1, upon the provisions of 6ection ", Republic Act -#"., &hich reads* 4he a'end'ents to the Constitution of the Philippines proposed b( the Con%ress of the Philippines in Resolutions of both 0ouses Nu'bered 5ne and 4hree, both adopted on March si:teen, nineteen hundred and si:t(- seven, shall be sub'itted to the people for approval at the %eneral election &hich shall be held on Nove'ber fourteen, nineteen hundred and si:t(seven, in accordance &ith the provisions of this Act. Republic Act -#". pro)ects the basic an%le of the proble' thrust upon us ? the 'anner in &hich the a'end'ents proposed b( Con%ress )ust adverted to be brou%ht to the peopleHs attention. Airst, to the controllin% constitutional precept. 9n order that proposed a'end'ents to the Constitution 'a( beco'e effective, 6ection ", Article D8 thereof co''ands that such a'end'ents 'ust be <approved b( a 'a)orit( of the votes cast at an election at &hich a'end'ents are submitted to the people for their ratifi#ation.< 4he accent is on t&o &ords co'ple'entin% each other, na'el(, <sub'itted< and <ratification.< ". Ce are forced to ta@e a lon% hard loo@ at the core of the proble' facin% us. And this, because the a'end'ents sub'itted are transcendental and enco'passin%. 4he ceilin% of the nu'ber of Con%ress'en is sou%ht to be elevated fro' " ; to "!; 'e'bers2 and 6enators and Con%ress'en

SANC&EZ, J., in separate opinion*

'a( run in constitutional conventions &ithout forfeitin% their seats. 4hese certainl( affect the people as a &hole. 4he increase in the nu'ber of Con%ress'en has its proportional increase in the peopleHs ta: burdens. 4he( 'a( not loo@ at this &ith favor, &hat &ith the constitutional provision ,6ection 7, Article 89+ that Con%ress <shall b( la& 'a@e an apportion'ent<, &ithout the necessit( of disturbin% the present constitutionall( provided nu'ber of Con%ress'en. People in Lue=on Cit(, for instance, 'a( bal@ at the specific apportion'ent of the "$; seats set forth in Resolution No. ", and as@ for a Con%ress'an of their o&n, on the theor( of e>ual representation. And then, people 'a( >uestion the propriet( of per'ittin% the increased "!; Con%ress'en fro' ta@in% part in the forthco'in% constitutional convention and future conventions for fear that the( 'a( do'inate its proceedin%s. 4he( 'a( entertain the belief that, if at all, increase in the nu'ber of Con%ress'en should be a proper topic for deliberation in a constitutional convention &hich, an(&a(, &ill soon ta@e place. 4he( probabl( &ould as@* Ch( the hurr(I 4hese ponderables re>uire the peopleHs close scrutin(. . Cith these as bac@drop, &e perforce %o into the philosoph( behind the constitutional directive that constitutional a'end'ents be sub'itted to the people for their ratification. A constitutional a'end'ent is not a te'porar( e:pedient. Enli@e a statute &hich 'a( suffer a'end'ents three or 'ore ti'es in the sa'e (ear, it is intended to stand the test of ti'e. 9t is an e:pression of the peopleHs soverei%n &ill. And so, our approach to the proble' of the 'echanics of sub'ission for ratification of a'end'ents is thatreasonin( on the basis of the spirit of the ,onstitution is 2ust as important as reasonin( b/ a stri#t adheren#e to the phraseolo(/ thereof. Ce underscore this, because it is &ithin the real' of possibilit( that a Constitution 'a(be overhauled. 6upposin% three-fourths of the Constitution is to be a'ended. 5r, the proposal is to eli'inate the all i'portant2 Bill of Ri%hts in its entiret(. Ce believe it to be be(ond debate that in so'e such situations the a'end'ents ou%ht to call for a constitutional convention rather than a le%islative proposal. And (et, nothin% there is in the boo@s or in the Constitution itself. &hich &ould re>uire such a'end'ents to be adopted b( a constitutional convention. And then, too, the spirit of the supre'e enact'ent, &e are sure, forbids that proposals therefor be initiated b( Con%ress and thereafter presented to the people for their ratification. 9n the conte:t )ust adverted to, &e ta@e the vie& that the &ords <sub'itted to the people for their ratification<, if construed in the li%ht of the nature of the Constitution ? a funda'ental charter that is le%islation direct fro' the people, an ? e:pression of their soverei%n &ill ? is that it can onl( be a'ended b( the people e:pressin% the'selves accordin% to the procedure ordained b( the Constitution. 4herefore, a'end'ents 'ust be fairl( laid before the people for their blessin% or spurnin%. 4he people are not to be 'ere rubber sta'ps. 4he( are not to vote blindl(. 4he( 'ust be afforded a'ple opportunit( to 'ull over the ori%inal provisions co'pare the' &ith the proposed a'end'ents, and tr( to reach a conclusion as the dictates of their conscience su%%est, free fro' the incubus of e:traneous or possibl( in insidious influences. Ce believe, the &ord <sub'itted< can onl( 'ean that the %overn'ent, &ithin its 'a:i'u' capabilities, should strain ever( effort to infor' ver( citi=en of the provisions to be a'ended, and the proposed a'end'ents and the 'eanin%, nature and effects thereof. B( this, &e are not to be understood as sa(in% that, if one citi=en or ";; citi=ens or ",;;; citi=ens cannot be reached, then there is no sub'ission &ithin the 'eanin% of the &ord as intended b( the fra'ers of the Constitution. Chat the Constitution in effect directs is that the %overn'ent, in sub'ittin% an a'end'ent for ratification, should put ever( instru'entalit( or a%enc( &ithin its structural fra'e&or@ to enli%hten the people, educate the' &ith respect to their act of

ratification or re)ection. Aor, as &e have earlier stated, one thin% is submission and another is ratifi#ation. 4here 'ust be fair sub'ission, intelli%ent, consent or re)ection. 9f &ith all these safe%uards the people still approve the a'end'ent no 'atter ho& pre)udicial it is to the', then so be it. Aor, the people decree their o&n fate. Aptl( had it been said* . . . 4he %reat 'en &ho builded the structure of our state in this respect had the 'ental vision of a %ood Constitution voiced b( /ud%e Coole(, &ho has said <A %ood Constitution should be(ond the reach of te'porar( e:cite'ent and popular caprice or passion. 9t is needed for stabilit( and steadiness2 it 'ust (ield to the thou%ht of the people2 not to the &hi' of the people, or the thou%ht evolved the e:cite'ent or hot blood, but the sober second thou%ht, &hich alone, if the %overn'ent is to be safe, can be allo&ed efficienc(. . . . ,han(es in (o"ernment are to be feared unless the benefit is #ertain. As Montai%n sa(s* <All %reat 'utations sha@e and disorder a state. Good does not ne#essaril/ su##eed e"il; another e"il ma/ su##eed and a worse.< A'. La& Rev. "!!#, p. ."". .. 4ersel( put, the issue before us funnels do&n to this proposition* 9f the people are not sufficientl( infor'ed of the a'end'ents to be voted upon, to conscientiousl( deliberate thereon, to e:press their &ill in a %enuine 'anner can it be said that in accordance &ith the constitutional 'andate, <the a'end'ents are sub'itted to the people for their ratificationI< 5ur ans&er is <No<. Ce e:a'ine Republic Act -#"., approved on /une "1, "#$1 < the statute that sub'its to the people the constitutional a'end'ents proposed b( Con%ress in Resolutions " and .. 6ection of the Act provides the 'anner of propa%ation of the nature of the a'end'ents throu%hout the countr(. 4here are five parts in said 6ection , "iz* ,"+ 4he a'end'ent shall be published in three consecutive issues of the 5fficial Ga=ette at least t&ent( da(s prior to the election. , + A printed cop( thereof shall be posted in a conspicuous place in ever( 'unicipalit(, cit( and provincial office buildin% and in ever( pollin% place not later than 5ctober fourteen, nineteen hundred and si:t(-seven, and shall re'ain posted therein until after the election. ,.+ At least five copies of the said a'end'ents shall be @ept in each pollin% place to be 'ade available for e:a'ination b( the >ualified electors durin% election da(. ,-+ Chen practicable, copies in the principal native lan%ua%es, as 'a( be deter'ined b( the Co''ission on Elections, shall be @ept in each pollin% place. ,7+ 4he Co''ission on Elections shall 'a@e available copies of said a'end'ents in En%lish, 6panish and, &henever practicable, in the principal native lan%ua%es, for free distribution. A >uestion that co'es to 'ind is &hether the procedure for disse'ination of infor'ation re%ardin% the a'end'ents effectivel( brin%s the 'atter to the people. A dissection of the 'echanics (ields disturbin%

thou%hts. Airst, the 5fficial Ga=ette is not &idel( read. 9t does not reach the barrios. And even if it reaches the barrios, is it available to allI And if it is, &ould all under stand En%lishI 6econd, it should be conceded that 'an( citi=ens, especiall( those in the outl(in% barrios, do not %o to 'unicipal, cit( andFor provincial office buildin%s, e:cept on special occasions li@e pa(in% ta:es or respondin% to court su''onses. And if the( do, &ill the( notice the printed a'end'ents posted on the bulletin boardI And if the( do notice, such cop( a%ain is in En%lish ,sa'ple sub'itted to this Court b( the 6olicitor General+ for, an(&a(, the statute does not re>uire that it be in an( other lan%ua%e or dialect. 4hird, it &ould not help an( if at least five copies are @ept in the pollin% place for e:a'ination b( >ualified electors durin% election da(. As petitioner puts it, votin% ti'e is not stud( ti'e. And then, &ho can enter the pollin% place, e:cept those &ho are about to voteI Aourth, copies in the principal native lan%ua%es shall be @ept in each pollin% place. But this is not, as 6ection itself i'plies, in the nature of a co''and because such copies shall be @ept therein onl( <&hen practicable< and <as 'a( be deter'ined b( the Co''ission on Elections.< Even if it be said that these are available before election, a citi=en 'a( not intrude into the school buildin% &here the pollin% places are usuall( located &ithout disturbin% the school classes bein% held there. Aifth, it is true that the Co'elec is directed to 'a@e available copies of such a'end'ents in En%lish, 6panish or &henever practicable, in the principal native lan%ua%es, for free distribution. 0o&ever, Co'elec is not re>uired to activel( distribute the' to the people. 4his is si%nificant as to people in the provinces, especiall( those in the far-flun% barrios &ho are co'pletel( un'indful of the discussions that %o on no& and then in the cities and centers of population on the 'erits and de'erits of the a'end'ents. Rather, Co'elec, in this case, is but a passive a%enc( &hich 'a( hold copies available, but &hich copies 'a( not be distributed at all. Ainall(, it is of co''on @no&led%e that Co'elec has 'ore than its hands full in these pre-election da(s. 4he( cannot possibl( 'a@e e:tensive distribution. 8oters &ill soon %o to the polls to sa( <(es< or <no<. But even the official sa'ple ballot sub'itted to this Court &ould sho& that onl/ the a'end'ents are printed at the bac@. And this, in pursuance to Republic Act -#". itself. 6urel( enou%h, the voters do not have the benefit of proper notice of the proposed a'end'ents thru disse'ination b( publication in e6tenso. People do not have at hand the necessar( data on &hich to base their stand on the 'erits and de'erits of said a'end'ents. Ce, therefore, hold that there is no proper submission of the proposed constitutional a'end'ents &ithin the 'eanin% and intend'ent of 6ection ", Article D8 of the Constitution. -. Conte'porar( histor( is &itness to the fact that durin% the present election ca'pai%n the focus is on the election of candidates. 4he constitutional a'end'ents are cro&ded out. Candidates on the ho'estretch, and their leaders as &ell as the voters, %ear their undivided efforts to the election of officials2 the constitutional a'end'ents cut no ice &ith the'. 4he truth is that even in the ballot itself, the space accorded to the castin% of <(es< or <no< vote &ould %ive one the i'pression that the constitutional a'end'ents are but a bootstrap to the electoral ballot. Corse still, the fortunes of 'an( elective officials, on the national and local levels, are ine:tricabl( intert&ined &ith the results of the votes on the plebiscite. 9n a clash bet&een votes for a candidate and conscience on the 'erits and de'erits of the constitutional a'end'ents, &e are >uite certain that it is the latter that &ill be dented.

7. 4hat proper sub'ission of a'end'ents to the people to enable the' to e>uall( ratif( the' properl( is the 'eat of the constitutional re>uire'ent, is reflected in the se>uence of unifor' past practices. 4he Constitution had been a'ended thrice < in "#.#, "#-; and "#-1. 9n each case, the a'end'ents &ere e'bodied in resolutions adopted b( the Le%islature, &hich thereafter fi:ed the dates at &hich the proposed a'end'ents &ere to be ratified or re)ected. 4hese plebiscites have been referred to either as an <election< or <%eneral election<. At no ti'e, ho&ever, &as the vote for the a'end'ents of the Constitution held si'ultaneousl( &ith the election officials, national or local. Even &ith re%ard to the "#-1 parit( a'end'ent2 the record sho&s that the sole issue &as the "#-1 parit( a'end'ent2 and the special elections si'ultaneousl( held in onl( three provinces, 9loilo, Pan%asinan and Bu@idnon, &ere 'erel( in#idental thereto. 9n the end &e sa( that the people are the last ra'parts that %uard a%ainst indiscri'inate chan%es in the Constitution that is theirs. 9s it too 'uch to as@ that reasonable %uarantee be 'ade that in the 'atter of the alterations of the la& of the land, their true voice be heardI 4he ans&er perhaps is best e:pressed in the follo&in% thou%hts* <=t must be remembered that the ,onstitution is the people>s ena#tment. No proposed #han(e #an be#ome effe#ti"e unless the/ will it so throu(h the #ompellin( for#e of need of it and desire for it.<Aor the reasons %iven, our vote is that Republic Act -#". 'ust be stric@en do&n as in violation of the Constitution. ?aldi"ar and ,astroRe/es- J.4.).- !izon and An(eles- JJ.- concur in the result. JJ.- concur.

R+@+%- J.4.).- J.- #on#urrin(: = #on#ur in the result with the opinion penned b/ 'r. Justi#e %an#hez. o appro"e a mere proposal to amend the ,onstitution re.uires AArt. B*C a threeDfourths A1E&C "ote of all the members of ea#h le(islati"e #hamber- the hi(hest ma2orit/ e"er demanded b/ the fundamental #harter- one hi(her e"en than that re.uired in order to de#lare war A%e#. 2&- Arti#le *=C- with all its dire #onse.uen#es. =f su#h an o"erwhelmin( ma2orit/- that was e"identl/ e6a#ted in order to impress upon all and sundr/ the seriousness of e"er/ #onstitutional amendment- is as0ed for a proposal to amend the ,onstitution- = find it impossible to belie"e that it was e"er intended b/ its framers that su#h amendment should be submitted and ratified b/ 2ust Fa ma2orit/ of the "otes #ast at an ele#tion at whi#h the amendments are submitted to the people for their ratifi#ationF- if the #on#entration of the people>s attention thereon to be di"erted b/ other e6traneous issues- su#h as the #hoi#e of lo#al and national offi#ials. he framers of the ,onstitution- aware of the fundamental #hara#ter thereof- and of the need of (i"in( it as mu#h stabilit/ as is pra#ti#able- #ould ha"e onl/ meant that an/ amendments thereto should be debated#onsidered and "oted upon at an ele#tion wherein the people #ould de"ote undi"ided attention to the sub2e#t. hat this was the intention and the spirit of the pro"ision is #orroborated in the #ase of all other #onstitutional amendments in the past- that were submitted to and appro"ed in spe#ial ele#tions e6#lusi"el/ de"oted to the issue whether the le(islature>s amendator/ proposals should be ratified or not.

!izon- An(eles- ?aldi"ar and ,astro- JJ.- #on#ur.