8/6/2019 Tolentino vs. Comelec (Digest 1)

1/2

ARTURO M. TOLENTINO vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

G.R. No. L-34150 October 16, 1971

FACTS: The case is a petition for prohibition to restrain respondent

Commission on Elections "from undertaking to hold a plebisciteon November 8, 1971," at which the proposed constitutionalamendment "reducing the voting age" in Section 1 of Article Vof the Constitution of the Philippines to eighteen years "shall be,submitted" for ratification by the people pursuant to OrganicResolution No. 1 of the Constitutional Convention of 1971, and thesubsequent implementing resolutions, by declaring said resolutionsto be without the force and effect of law for being violative of theConstitution of the Philippines. The Constitutional Convention of

1971 came into being by virtue of two resolutions of the Congress ofthe Philippines approved in its capacity as a constituent assemblyconvened for the purpose of calling a convention to proposeamendments to the Constitution namely, Resolutions 2 and 4 of the

joint sessions of Congress held on March 16, 1967 and June 17, 1969respectively. The delegates to the said Convention were all electedunder and by virtue of said resolutions and the implementinglegislation thereof, Republic Act 6132.

ISSUE:Is it within the powers of the Constitutional Convention of 1971 toorder the holding of a plebiscite for the ratification of the proposedamendment/s.

HELD:The Court holds that all amendments to be proposed mustbe submitted to the people in a single "election" or plebiscite. Wehold that the plebiscite being called for the purpose of submittingthe same for ratification of the people on November 8, 1971 is notauthorized by Section 1 of Article XV of the Constitution, hence allacts of the Convention and the respondent Comelec in that directionare null and void. lt says distinctly that either Congress sitting as aconstituent assembly or a convention called for the purpose "maypropose amendments to this Constitution,". The same provision alsoas definitely provides that "such amendments shall be valid as partof this Constitution when approved by a majority of the votes castat an election at which the amendments are submitted to the people

8/6/2019 Tolentino vs. Comelec (Digest 1)

2/2

for their ratification," thus leaving no room for doubt as to howmany "elections" or plebiscites may be held to ratify anyamendment or amendments proposed by the same constituentassembly of Congress or convention, and the provisionunequivocably says "an election" which means only one.

The petition herein is granted. Organic Resolution No. 1 of theConstitutional Convention of 1971 and the implementing acts andresolutions of the Convention, insofar as they provide for the holdingof a plebiscite on November 8, 1971, as well as the resolution of therespondent Comelec complying therewith (RR Resolution No. 695)are hereby declared null and void. The respondents Comelec,Disbursing Officer, Chief Accountant and Auditor of theConstitutional Convention are hereby enjoined from taking anyaction in compliance with the said organic resolution. In view of the

peculiar circumstances of this case, the Court declares this decisionimmediately executory. No costs