Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 13K views

    Lambino vs. Comelec Case Digest G.R. No. 174153

    Uploaded by

    Jun Rinon
    The Lambino group filed a petition with COMELEC to hold a plebiscite ratifying their initiative petition to amend the 1987 constitution. COMELEC denied the petition citing lack of enabling law and prior jurisprudence. The Supreme Court upheld COMELEC's decision for three reasons: 1) The initiative petition did not properly inform signers of the nature and effect of the changes. 2) The proposed amendments amounted to a revision rather than amendments allowed by the constitution. 3) Even if the relevant law was valid, the initiative still violated the constitutional requirements.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Lambino vs. Comelec Case Digest G.R. No. 174153

    Uploaded by

    Jun Rinon
    13K views1 page
    The Lambino group filed a petition with COMELEC to hold a plebiscite ratifying their initiative petition to amend the 1987 constitution. COMELEC denied the petition citing lack of enabling law and prior jurisprudence. The Supreme Court upheld COMELEC's decision for three reasons: 1) The initiative petition did not properly inform signers of the nature and effect of the changes. 2) The proposed amendments amounted to a revision rather than amendments allowed by the constitution. 3) Even if the relevant law was valid, the initiative still violated the constitutional requirements.

    Original Description:

    Lambino vs. Comelec Case Digest G.R. No. 174153

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Lambino group filed a petition with COMELEC to hold a plebiscite ratifying their initiative petition to amend the 1987 constitution. COMELEC denied the petition citing lack of enabling law and prior jurisprudence. The Supreme Court upheld COMELEC's decision for three reasons: 1) The initiative petition did not properly inform signers of the nature and effect of the changes. 2) The proposed amendments amounted to a revision rather than amendments allowed by the constitution. 3) Even if the relevant law was valid, the initiative still violated the constitutional requirements.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    13K views1 page

    Lambino vs. Comelec Case Digest G.R. No. 174153

    Uploaded by

    Jun Rinon
    The Lambino group filed a petition with COMELEC to hold a plebiscite ratifying their initiative petition to amend the 1987 constitution. COMELEC denied the petition citing lack of enabling law and prior jurisprudence. The Supreme Court upheld COMELEC's decision for three reasons: 1) The initiative petition did not properly inform signers of the nature and effect of the changes. 2) The proposed amendments amounted to a revision rather than amendments allowed by the constitution. 3) Even if the relevant law was valid, the initiative still violated the constitutional requirements.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Lambino Vs. Comelec Case Digest G.R. No. 174153 Lambino Vs. Comelec G.R. No. 174153 Oct.

    25 2006 Facts: Petitioners (Lambino group) commenced gathering signatures for an initiative petition to change the 1987 constitution, they filed a petition with the COMELEC to hold a plebiscite that will ratify their initiative petition under RA 6735. Lambino group alleged that the petition had the support of 6M individuals fulfilling what was provided by art 17 of the constitution. Their petition changes the 1987 constitution by modifying sections 1-7 of Art 6 and sections 1-4 of Art 7 and by adding Art 18. the proposed changes will shift the present bicameral- presidential form of government to unicameralparliamentary. COMELEC denied the petition due to lack of enabling law governing initiative petitions and invoked the Santiago Vs. Comelec ruling that RA 6735 is inadequate to implement the initiative petitions. Issue: Whether or Not the Lambino Groups initiative petition complie s with Section 2, Article XVII of the Constitution on amendments to the Constitution through a peoples initiative. Whether or Not this Court should revisit its ruling in Santiago declaring RA 6735 incomplete, inadequate or wanting in essential terms an d conditions to implement the initiative clause on proposals to amend the Constitution. Whether or Not the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in denying due course to the Lambino Groups petition. Held: According to the SC the Lambino group failed to comply with the basic requirements for conducting a peoples initiative. The Court held that the COMELEC did not grave abuse of discretion on dismissing the Lambino petition. 1. The Initiative Petition Does Not Comply with Section 2, Article XVII of the Constitution on Direct Proposal by the People The petitioners failed to show the court that the initiative signer must be informed at the time of the signing of the nature and effect, failure to do so is deceptive and misleading which renders the initiative void. 2. The Initiative Violates Section 2, Article XVII of the Constitution Disallowing Revision through Initiatives The framers of the constitution intended a clear distinction between amendment and revision, it is intended that the third mode of stated in sec 2 art 17 of the constitution may propose only amendments to the constitution. Merging of the legislative and the executive is a radical change, therefore a constitutes a revision. 3. A Revisit of Santiago v. COMELEC is Not Necessary Even assuming that RA 6735 is valid, it will not change the result because the present petition violated Sec 2 Art 17 to be a valid initiative, must first comply with the constitution before complying with RA 6735 Petition is dismissed.

    You might also like