Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Daza Vs Singson
Daza Vs Singson
Daza vs Singson
FACTS:
Subsequently, the chamber elected a new set of representatives consisting the original
member except the petitioner and including Singson as the additional member of the
LDP.
The petitioner challenged his removal from the Commission on Appointments on the
grounds that his election is permanent. He also claims that the reorganization of the
House of representative is not based on permanent political realignment because LDP
is not a duly registered party and has not yet attained political stability.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the political realignment of the Houser of Representative validly changes
the composition of the Commission on Appointments
Ruling:
YES. The Court, in the case at bar, resolved the issue in favor of the House of
Representative to change its representation in the Commission on Appointments. The
change of representation reflects at any time the changes that may transpire in the
political alignments of its membership. The court further explains that such changes
must be permanent and do not include the temporary alliances or fictional divisions not
involving severance of political loyalties or formal disaffiliation and permanent shift of
allegiance from one political party to another.
The court elucidates the constitutional intent of Sec 18 Art. VI of the constitution which
is to give the right of representation in the Commission on Appointment only to political
Parties who are duly registered in the COMELEC. In the case at bar, the LDP was
granted registration as a political part by COMELEC. Hence, changes the composition
of the Commission on Appointments is valid pursuant to Art VI Sec18 of the constitution.