Parties: Imbong, Gonzales(member of congress) - petitioners

Comelec - respondent

FACTS:

Two separate but related petitions for declaratory relief were filed pursuant to Sec. 19 of R.A. No. 6132 by petitioners
Manuel B. Imbong and Raul M. Gonzales, both members of the Bar, taxpayers and interested in running as candidates for
delegates to the Constitutional Convention. Both impugn the constitutionality of R.A. No. 6132, claiming during the oral
argument that it prejudices their rights as such candidates.

On March 16, 1967, Congress, acting as a Constituent Assembly pursuant to Art. XV of the Constitution, passed Resolution
No. 2 which called for a Constitutional Convention to propose constitutional amendments to be composed of two delegates
from each representative district who shall have the same qualifications as those of Congressmen, to be elected on the second
Tuesday of November, 1970 in accordance with the Revised Election Code. On June 17, 1969, Congress, also acting as a
Constituent Assembly, passed Resolution No. 4 amending the aforesaid Resolution No. 2 of March 16, 1967 by providing that the
convention “shall be composed of 320 delegates apportioned among the existing representative districts according to the
number of their respective inhabitants: Provided, that a representative district shall be entitled to at least two delegates, who
shall have the same qualifications as those required of members of the House of Representatives,” 1 “and that any other details
relating to the specific apportionment of delegates, election of delegates to, and the holding of, the Constitutional Convention
shall be embodied in an implementing legislation: Provided, that it shall not be inconsistent with the provisions of this
Resolution.” 2

On August 24, 1970, Congress, acting as a legislative body, enacted Republic Act No. 6132, implementing Resolutions Nos. 2
and 4, and expressly repealing R.A. No. 4914.

Petitioner Raul M. Gonzales assails the validity of the entire law as well as the particular provisions embodied in Sections 2,
4, 5, and par. 1 of 8(a). Petitioner Manuel B. Imbong impugns the constitutionality of only par. I of Sec. 8(a) of said R.A. No. 6132
practically on the same grounds advanced by petitioner Gonzales.

ISSUE:

WON Congress has a right to call for Constitutional Convention;

WON the parameters set by such a call is constitutional.

HELD:

The Congress has the authority to call for a Constitutional Convention as a Constituent Assembly. Furthermore, specific
provisions assailed by the petitioners are deemed as constitutional.

Ratio:

Sec 4 RA 6132: it is simply an application of Sec 2 Art 12 of Constitution

Section 4. Persons Holding Office. Any person holding a public office or position, whether elective or appointive, including members of the
armed forces and officers and employees of corporations or enterprises owned and/or controlled by the government, shall be considered
resigned upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy: Provided, That any government official who resigns in order to run for delegate and who
does not yet qualify for retirement under existing laws, may, if elected, add to his length of service in the government the period from the filing
of his certificate of candidacy until the final adjournment of the Constitutional Convention.

- Constitutionality of enactment of RA 6132:

Congress acting as Constituent Assembly, has full authority to propose amendments, or call for convention for the purpose
by votes and these votes were attained by Resolution 2 and 4
– Sec 2 RA 6132:

mere implementation of Resolution 4 and is enough that the basis employed for such apportions is reasonable. In Macias
case, relied by Gonzales, is not reasonable for that case granted more representatives to provinces with less population than
provinces with more inhabitants. Under sec 2 RA 6132, Batanes has an equal number of delegates with other provinces with
more population. The impossibility of absolute proportional representation is recognized by the Constitution itself when it
directs that the apportionment of congressional districts among the various provinces shall be "as nearly as may be according to
their respective inhabitants, but each province shall have at least one member"

– Sec 5: State has right to create office and parameters to qualify/disqualify members thereof. Furthermore, this disqualification
is only temporary. This is a safety mechanism to prevent political figures from controlling elections and to allow them to devote
more time to the Constituional Convention.

– Par 1 Sec 8: this is to avoid debasement of electoral process and also to assure candidates equal opportunity since candidates
must now depend on their individual merits, and not the support of political parties. This provision does not create
discrimination towards any particular party/group, it applies to all organizations.