Marmeto vs. Commission on Elections

The COMELEC cannot defeat the exercise of the people's original legislative power through local initiative by citing lack of specific budgetary allocation, provided the general appropriations law contains a line item for the conduct and supervision of elections which may be augmented from savings; however, the COMELEC possesses quasi-judicial authority to review initiative petitions to determine whether the propositions are within the legal powers of the concerned Sanggunian to enact, and may dismiss petitions proposing the creation of separate legislative bodies or the appropriation of public funds for management by private entities.

Engr. Oscar A. Marmeto, representing the Muntinlupa People Power (MPP)—an informal association of residents and registered voters of Muntinlupa City—sought to enact through local initiative an ordinance creating a sectoral council composed of 12 representatives to manage livelihood programs and appropriate ₱200 million for such purposes. After the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Muntinlupa failed to act on the proposed ordinance within the prescribed period, Marmeto filed an initiative petition with the COMELEC. The petition was initially dismissed for being beyond the Sanggunian's powers. Upon re-filing following the COMELEC's suggestion to present the petition to a newly-elected Sanggunian, the COMELEC dismissed the second petition via Resolution No. 14-0509 solely on the ground that no specific budgetary appropriation existed for the conduct of local initiative proceedings.

• The Proposed Ordinance: On behalf of the Muntinlupa People Power (MPP)—an informal association of city residents and voters—Marmeto filed a proposed ordinance seeking: (1) the creation of a sectoral council composed of 12 members from various sectors to serve as people's representatives; (2) authorization for this council to directly propose, enact, approve, or reject ordinances through initiative or referendum; (3) the appropriation of ₱200 million for livelihood programs and projects, with net income to be used for basic services; and (4) the grant of authority to MPP to create implementing guidelines for fund utilization, conduct feasibility studies, and manage the funds subject only to general accounting and auditing rules.
• Initial Initiative Proceedings: After the Sangguniang Panlungsod failed to act on the first proposed ordinance within 30 days, Marmeto filed an initiative petition. The Sanggunian secretary informed the COMELEC that the proposal could not be acted upon because the FY 2013 budget had already been enacted, requiring a new appropriation ordinance to fund the initiative process.
• COMELEC's Initial Dismissal: The COMELEC dismissed the first initiative petition via Resolution No. 13-0904, ruling that the propositions were beyond the Sanggunian's powers to enact and not in accordance with existing laws. Specifically, the COMELEC noted that the proposal sought to create a separate legislative body with 12 sectoral representatives, whereas Section 457 of the LGC limits sectoral representatives in the Sanggunian to three elected members, and Section 458 does not authorize the creation of separate legislative bodies.
• Second Initiative Attempt: Following the denial of reconsideration and the COMELEC's suggestion to re-file with the newly-elected Sanggunian, Marmeto filed a second proposed ordinance on December 2, 2013. After the Sanggunian again failed to act, Marmeto filed a second initiative petition on February 10, 2014, and a Supplemental Petition on April 1, 2014, to comply with COMELEC Resolution No. 2300.
• Assailed Resolution: The COMELEC dismissed the second initiative petition via Resolution No. 14-0509 dated July 22, 2014, solely on the ground that the Commission's FY 2014 budget contained no specific provision for local initiative expenses, and that signature verification and other acts would entail expenses.

• Ministerial Duty to Conduct Initiative: Petitioner maintained that the COMELEC has a ministerial duty under the Constitution and pertinent laws to conduct initiative proceedings upon compliance with legal requirements. The denial of an initiative petition due to lack of appropriated funds constitutes gross neglect of duty and evasion of the COMELEC's constitutional mandate to enforce and administer election laws.
• Availability of Funds: Petitioner argued that the COMELEC's approved annual appropriations are automatically and regularly released pursuant to constitutional mandate, and that the lack of a specific line item cannot defeat the exercise of the people's original legislative power.

• Ultra Vires Propositions: Respondent countered that the dismissal was proper because the proposed ordinance sought to create a separate legislative body composed of 12 appointive sectoral representatives with power to enact ordinances, which is beyond the Sanggunian's powers under Sections 457 and 458 of the LGC. The LGC permits only three elected sectoral representatives, not 12 appointive ones.
• Lack of Budgetary Allocation: Respondent defended Resolution No. 14-0509 on the ground that the FY 2014 budget contained no specific appropriation for local initiative proceedings, and that the conduct of signature verification and establishment of signature stations would require funds.

• Budgetary Constraints: Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the initiative petition solely for lack of specific budgetary allocation.
• COMELEC's Authority to Review Substance: Whether the COMELEC possesses the authority to review initiative petitions to determine whether the propositions are within the legal powers of the concerned Sanggunian to enact.
• Validity of Propositions: Whether the propositions in Marmeto's initiative petition—specifically the creation of a 12-member sectoral council with legislative functions and the appropriation of ₱200 million subject to management by a private organization—are within the powers of the Sangguniang Panlungsod to enact.

• Budgetary Constraints: Grave abuse of discretion was committed in dismissing the petition for lack of budget. The FY 2014 General Appropriations Act contained a line item appropriation of ₱1,401,501,000 for the COMELEC's Major Final Output 1 on "Regulation of Elections," specifically for the "Conduct and supervision of elections, referenda, recall votes and plebiscites." Following Goh v. Hon. Bayron, this appropriation is comprehensive enough to include initiative elections, and the COMELEC Chairman is authorized to augment this from savings if necessary. The constitutional mandate that funds for initiatives shall be provided in regular appropriations and released automatically cannot be defeated by the COMELEC's claim of budgetary insufficiency.
• COMELEC's Authority to Review Substance: The COMELEC possesses quasi-judicial and administrative authority to review initiative petitions to determine whether the propositions are within the legal powers of the Sanggunian to enact pursuant to Section 124(b) of the LGC. While Section 127 of the LGC grants courts authority to declare null and void any approved proposition for want of capacity of the Sanggunian to enact the measure, this judicial power applies only to approved ordinances after the initiative election. Prior to approval, the COMELEC has the power to adjudicate proposals that are patently and clearly outside the capacity of the local legislative body to enact.
• Validity of Propositions: The propositions are ultra vires and beyond the Sanggunian's power to enact. First, the LGC vests local legislative power exclusively in the Sangguniang Panlungsod, which consists of elected district and sectoral representatives limited to three members; the creation of a separate 12-member legislative body with power to enact ordinances is prohibited. Second, the proposed functions of the sectoral council overlap with the statutory functions of the Local Development Council. Third, the appropriation of ₱200 million subject to guidelines to be implemented by MPP—a private organization—violates the fundamental principles of local fiscal administration that public funds must be spent solely for public purposes and only pursuant to appropriations ordinances, with transparency and accountability measures ensuring public officers' responsibility for fund management.

• Original vs. Derivative Legislative Power — Initiative is an exercise of original legislative power reserved by the sovereign people to themselves, distinct from the derivative legislative power delegated to Congress and local legislative bodies. The former is superior to the latter. The Constitution reserves to the people the power to directly propose and enact laws through initiative, and this power cannot be defeated by administrative claims of budgetary insufficiency.
• Budgetary Sufficiency for Electoral Exercises — A general appropriation for the "conduct and supervision of elections" includes initiative and referendum proceedings, and the COMELEC cannot refuse to conduct such proceedings for lack of specific budgetary allocation where a line item exists that may be augmented from savings. Funds certified by the COMELEC as necessary for holding initiatives shall be provided in regular appropriations and released automatically upon certification by the Chairman.
• COMELEC Review of Initiative Petitions — In the exercise of its quasi-judicial and administrative functions, the COMELEC may adjudicate initiative petitions not only as to form and language but also as to content where the proposals are patently and clearly outside the capacity of the local legislative body to enact. Judicial review under Section 127 of the LGC applies only to approved propositions after the initiative election; the COMELEC determines sufficiency prior to the election.
• Limitations on Local Legislative Power — The Sangguniang Panlungsod cannot create separate legislative bodies or exceed the statutory limit on sectoral representatives (three elected members under Section 457 of the LGC). Public funds cannot be appropriated for management by private organizations without specific guidelines ensuring transparency and accountability under the supervision of public officers.

• "Initiative has been described as an instrument of direct democracy whereby the citizens directly propose and legislate laws. As it is the citizens themselves who legislate the laws, direct legislation through initiative (along with referendum) is considered as an exercise of original legislative power, as opposed to that of derivative legislative power which has been delegated by the sovereign people to legislative bodies such as the Congress."
• "The COMELEC cannot defeat the exercise of the people's original legislative power for lack of budgetary allocation for its conduct."
• "Inasmuch as the COMELEC also has quasi-judicial and administrative functions, it is the COMELEC which has the power to determine whether the propositions in an initiative petition are within the powers of a concerned Sanggunian to enact."
• "Public funds are the property of the people and must be used prudently at all times with a view to prevent dissipation and waste."

• Goh v. Hon. Bayron, 748 Phil. 282 (2014) — Followed; established that the FY 2014 GAA's appropriation for "conduct and supervision of elections" covers recall elections and may be augmented from savings, applicable by analogy to initiative elections.
• Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Commission on Elections, 330 Phil. 1082 (1996) — Followed; recognized the COMELEC's power to review initiative petitions for compliance with legal requirements, including whether propositions are within the local legislative body's capacity to enact.
• Garcia v. Commission on Elections, 307 Phil. 296 (1994) — Cited; distinguished original legislative power (reserved to the people) from derivative legislative power (delegated to legislative bodies).
• Santiago v. Commission on Elections, 336 Phil. 848 (1997) — Cited; noted for nullifying provisions on initiative to amend the Constitution under RA 6735, but leaving intact provisions on local initiative.

• Article VI, Sections 1 and 32, 1987 Constitution — Vests legislative power in Congress except to the extent reserved to the people by initiative and referendum; mandates Congress to provide for a system of initiative and referendum.
• Article IX-C, Sections 2(1) and 11, 1987 Constitution — Mandates the COMELEC to enforce and administer laws on initiative and referendum; requires that funds for holding initiatives be provided in regular or special appropriations and released automatically upon certification by the COMELEC Chairman.
• Section 124(b), Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code) — Limits local initiative to subjects or matters within the legal powers of the Sanggunian to enact.
• Section 127, Republic Act No. 7160 — Authorizes courts to declare null and void any approved proposition for violation of the Constitution or want of capacity of the Sanggunian to enact the measure.
• Sections 457 and 458, Republic Act No. 7160 — Enumerate the composition and powers of the Sangguniang Panlungsod, limiting sectoral representatives to three elected members and vesting legislative power exclusively in the Sanggunian.
• Section 305, Republic Act No. 7160 — States that no money shall be paid out of the local treasury except in pursuance of an appropriations ordinance or law, and that local government funds shall be spent solely for public purposes.

Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno, Antonio T. Carpio, Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro, Diosdado M. Peralta, Lucas P. Bersamin, Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe, Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, Francis H. Jardeleza, Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa, Samuel R. Martires, Noel Gimenez Tijam, Andres B. Reyes, Jr., Alexander G. Gesmundo.