Editor's note: This is the fifth in our series of year beginners.

If there is one thing that makes 2008 a surprising year for local governments, it is the fact that the Supreme Court voided and questioned the legality of the creation and conversion of a number of local government units (LGUs).

Most of these cases are still on appeal. Next year, the High Tribunal must decide on these pending cases.

In 2008, the High Court voided the creation of a province in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), junked the 16 laws converting municipalities into cities, and issued a temporary restraining order on the release of the plebiscite held to determine the people’s opinion on a proposal to divide a province in the southern Luzon.

The final ruling of the Supreme Court on the case of the 16 cities will not only settle the legality issue of their creation but will also serve as guidelines for the Department of Budget of Management in determining whether these cities will receive the city-rate or the municipality rate internal revenue allotment (IRA).

In July, the SC, in an 8-6 vote, voided the creation of Shariff Kabunsuan province in ARMM and declared unconstitutional the power of the ARMM’s lawmaking body—the Regional Legislative Assembly (RLA)—to create provinces.

Shariff Kabunsuan, one of the newly created provinces in the country, was carved out of Maguindanao province and is composed of 11 towns.

Fate of Shariff Kabunsuan

Local officials have filed a motion for reconsideration at the Supreme Court; a final ruling has yet to be made. The province’s officials had warned that the dissolution of the province would result in job loss and would derail delivery of services in the new province.

If the Supreme Court will uphold its early decision, the RLA will be stripped of its power to create new provinces in the ARMM. However, if it reverses its decision, the regional assembly can still fragment the existing provinces in the region into smaller ones.

Under the expanded ARMM law, the RLA has the power to create, merge, abolish and divide existing local government units in the region—provinces, municipalities and barangays . It also gives it the power to set their own criteria in creating new LGUs.

LGUs created by the RLA that do not meet the criteria of the Local Government Code are not entitled to a share in the tax collection of the national government (or the Internal Revenue Allotment) and will depend on the general funds of the ARMM regional government.

The SC decision, however, only declared unconstitutional the RLA’s power to create new provinces since the process requires creation of a congressional district—a power that only Congress can exercise.

The ARMM has experienced a surge in the number of LGUs in recent years. In December 2005, the region was composed only of 5 provinces, 101 municipalities, and 2,461 barangays. Since then, one province (Shariff Kabunsuan), 12 municipalities, and nine barangays have been created.

Critics of this creation argued that most of the new LGUs created are carved out of poor mother LGUs and are not financially viable. However, some experts in the region said that the process has alleviated the peace situation in the region, where rifts between political clans often result in bloody confrontation.

Benedicto Bacani of the think tank Institute for Autonomy and Governance told us in a previous interview that the creation of new LGUs has become a” conflict-resolution” tool in the region by giving each clan a territory to govern.

Cities vs. cities

In November, the High Tribunal junked the cityhood bills of 16 cities and declared their conversion as unconstitutional.

The SC decision voided the 16 cityhood laws of the following cities: Tabuk in Kalinga, Tayabas in Quezon, Batac in Ilocos Norte; Naga, Bogo and Carcar in Cebu; Baybay in Leyte, Guihulngan in Negros Oriental, Catbalogan in Samar, Borongan in Eastern Samar, Tandag in Surigao del Sur, Bayugan in Agusan del Sur, El Salvador in Misamis Oriental, Mati in Davao Oriental, Lamitan in Basilan and Cabadbaran in Agusan del Norte.

The SC argued that the 16 cities violated the Constitution because they were converted without meeting the minimum income requirement of P100 million and their cityhood laws contain provisions granting them exemptions to this rule.

The SC decision stemmed from a complaint filed by the League of Cities of the Philippines questioning the conversion of 16 municipalities. The LCP member cities said the conversion of 16 municipalities is illegal and had resulted in their reduced share in the pie of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) for the cities.

The mayors of the 16 cities, however, filed a motion for reconsideration and the case is still pending.

Former Budget Secretary Emilia Boncodin told us in a previous interview that the 16 cities will still receive city-rate IRA as long as the case is not yet fully resolved.

Similarly, the SC final decision on will have an impact on pending cityhood bills. If the SC favors the LCP, pending cityhood bills with provisions seeking exemption from the income requirement will, therefore, be considered as illegal.

However, a reversal of the SC ruling can result in another round of what critics consider as “wholesale conversion” of the municipalities into cities since provisions in the bills that seek exemptions from the Local Government Code will make the conversion easier.

There are 13 cityhood bills pending in the House committee on local government.

Quezon division: still hanging
 
On December 13, a plebiscite is held in pursuant to Republic Act 9495, which seeks to divide Quezon province—which is composed of 40 towns and the city of Lucena—into  Quezon del Norte and Quezon del Sur.

The proposed Quezon del Norte will be composed of Burdeos, General Nakar, Infanta, Jamalig, Lucban, Mauban, Pagbilao, Panukulan, Patnanungan, Polillo, Real, Sampaloc, Tayabas City, Candelaria, Dolores, San Antonio, Sariaya and Tiaong  with Lucens City as the capital.

Quezon del Sur, meanwhile, will be composed of Agdangan, Buenavista, Catanauan, General Luna, Macalelon, Mulanay, Padre Burgos, Pitogo, San Andres, San Francisco, San Narciso, Unisan, Alabat, Atimonan, Calauag, Guinayangan, Gumaca, Lopez, Perez, Plaridel, Quezon and Tagkawayan with Gumaca as the capital.

Although the plebiscite is over, the official results are not yet proclaimed. The Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) in response to the petition of the Save the Quezon province.

The petitioners argued that no province-wide public hearings were held when the proposed law was deliberated in the House of Representatives and the Senate.

RELATED STORIES:

• Supreme Court voids creation of Shariff Kabunsuan
• Bai Sema vs. Comelec: Supreme Court Decision
• Jobless officials, confusing poll preparations follow province's dissolution
• 'Creating More LGUs Prevents Conflicts in ARMM'
• Cities Contemplate Tax Boycott, Work Stoppage
• SC decision voiding the creation of 16 cities
• Mayors glad, sad over SC decision voiding 16 cities
• 16 cities to revert to towns; face huge revenue cuts
• 'Lawmakers should be careful in passing cityhood laws'