CASE DIGEST: MACIAS vs.

COMELEC, 32 SCRA 1

G.R. No. L-18684, September 14, 1961

Facts:

Petitioners are members of the House of Representatives from Negros Oriental, Misamis
Oriental and Bulacan and the provincial Governor of Negros Oriental. They are
requesting that the respondent officials be prevented to implement RA 3040, an act that
apportions representative districts in the country. They alleged that their respective
provinces were discriminated because they were given less representation. Furthermore,
they allege that RA 3040 is unconstitutional and void because:

It was passed without printed final copies which must be furnished to the members of the
HOR at least 3 calendar days prior to passage.

It was approved more than 3 years after the return of the last census of the population.

It apportioned districts without regard to the number of inhabitants of the several

provinces.

Issues:

Whether or not the apportionment of representative districts under Republic Act 3040 is
in accordance with the constitution.

Discussions:

The Constitution directs that the one hundred twenty Members of the House of
Representatives “shall be apportioned among the several provinces as nearly as may be
according to the member of their respective inhabitants.” A law giving provinces with less
number of inhabitants more representative districts than those with bigger population is
invalid because it violates the principle of proportional representation prescribed by the
Constitution. Inequality of apportionment law is “arbitrary and capricious and against the
vital principle of equality.” as held in Houghton County v. Blacker.