Comelec V Ca.docx

MONTESCLAROS v. COMELEC Sangguniang Kabataan| 2002| Carpio, J.

FACTS: 1. March 6, 2002: Bicameral Committee consolidated bill resetting SK and barangay elections to July 15, 2002, and lowered membership age to at least 15 but not more than 18. (was passed to be RA 9164) 2. Petitioners seek to prevent the postponement of the SK elections originally scheduled May 6, 2002. Petitioners, who are all 20 yeas old, claim that they are all in danger of being disqualified to vote and be voted for should the SK elections be postponed to a later date. Under the LGC, membership is limited to youths at least 15 years old but not more than 21 years old. 3. They allege that private respondents connived, confederated and conspired to postpone the May 6, 2002 elections and lower the membership age to at least 15, but less than 18. 4. Respondent COMELEC: It was operationally difficult to hold both barangay and SK elections simultaneously on May 6, 2002, hence they submitted recommendations to Congress

PETITION IS BEREFT OF MERIT

1. NO ACTUAL CONTROVERSY. A proposed bill is not subject to judicial review. A proposed bill creates no legal effect. It vests no right or obligation. 2. SEPARATION OF POWERS: The Court cannot restrain Congress from passing any law, or from setting into motion the legislative mill according to its internal rules. Court has no power to dictate to Congress the object or subject of bills that Congress should enact into law. 3. CONGRESS MERELY RESTORED THE AGE REQUIREMENT IN THE ORIGINAL SK CHARTER. Petitioners do not have a vested right of permanence of the age requirement in the LGC. Congress has the power to amend and repeal laws. 4. PETITIONERS HAVE NO SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN THE SUIT. Petitioners have ceased to be members of the SK and are no longer qualified to participate in the July 15, 2002 elections. 5. Contrary to petitioner’s claim, they have no property right over their SK membership. A public office is not a property right. It is not a property. It is a public trust. No one has a vested right to any public office, much less a vested right to an expectancy of holding public office.

6. Furthermore, the law does not confer on petitioners a proprietary right or expectancy to sit in local legislative councils. 7. Congress has the power to define who are the youth and who are qualified to be members of the SK. 8. No GAD attended the postponement of elections. RA 9164 is now a law which prescribes qualifications for voters and candidates. As a law, it also enjoys the presumption of constitutionality. COMELEC for their recommendation of postponing the elections, also enjoys the presumption of regularity in the performance of their duties.