Imbong vs.

Commission on Elections
G.R. No. L-32432, September 11, 1970
Makasiar, J.

FACTS: Manuel Imbong and Raul Gonzales question the constitutionality of R.A. No.
6142 claiming that it prejudices their right as candidates for the constitutional convention. On
March 16, 1967, the Congress, acting as a constituent assembly, passed Res. No. 2 that called
for a constitutionalcConvention which shall have two delegates from each representative
district. On June 17, 1969, the Congress passed Resolution No. 4 amending Res. No. 2 by
providing that the convention shall be composed of 320 delegates with at least 2 delegates
from each district. On August 1970, the Congress, acting as a legislative body, enacted R.A
6132, implementing Res. Nos. 2 and 4 and expressly repealing R.A. 4914.

ISSUE: W/N the Congress, acting as a legislative body, can enact R.A. 6132 to implement
the resolution passed by it in its capacity as Constituent Assembly.

HELD: Yes. The Court declared that while the authority to call a constitutional
convention is vested by the Constitution solely and exclusively in Congress acting as a
constitutional assembly, the power to enact the implementing details or specifics of the general
law does note exclusively pertain to Congress. The Congress, in exercising its comprehensive
legislative power, may pass the necessary implementing law providing for the details of the
Constitutional Conventions, such as the number, qualification and compensation of its
members. In upholding the constitutionality of R.A 6132, the Court held that the Congress, as a
constituent assembly, has authority to propose constitutional amendments or call a convention
for the purpose by ¾ votes of each house in joint session but voting separately. Implementing
details are within the authority of the Congress not only as a constituent assembly but also in
the power which encompasses all matters not expressly withdrawn by the Constitution from
the ambit of legislative power as long as it does not contravene the Constitution.