Page 1 of 2

G.R. No. 127116, April 8, 1997

Alex L. David vs. COMELEC, Sec of DILG, and Sec of DBM

Statement of the Facts:

As the president of the Liga ng mga Barangay sa Pilipinas, Brgy.
Chariman Alex Davi filed a petition for prohibition to prohibit the holding of
the May 1997 barangay election. The SG filed a comment siding with the
petitioner. COMELEC opposed the petition. Note that this case was solved
in consolidation with GR 128039 for both cases have the same issues.
The petitioner contends that under Sec. 2 of RA 6653, approved on
May 1988, the term of office of barangay officials shall be five years. This is
reiterated in RA 6679, approved on Nov 1988, which reset the elections
from Nov 1988 to Mar 1989 and provided that such five year term shall
begin on May 1, 1989 and ending on May 31, 1994. Petitioner also contends
that (1) Sec. 43 of RA 7160 does not apply to barangay officials beucase RA
6679 is a special law applicable only to barangays while RA 7160 is a
general law which applies to all other local government units, (2) RA 7160
does not expressly or impledly repeal RA 6679, (3) Art X of 1987
Constitution states that the term of barangay officials shall be determined by
law; and (4) it follows that the intention is to give barangay officials any
term, except three years.
Issue/s:
1. Which law governs the term of office of barangay officials: RA
7160 or RA 6679?
2. Is RA 7160 insofar as it shortened such term to only three years
constitutional?
3. Is the petitioner estopped from claiming a term other than that
provided under RA 7160?
Ruling:
 Page 2 of 2

The petition must is devoided of merit.

1. RA 7160. The intent and design of the legislature to limit the term of
barangay officials to three years as provided by RA 7160 emerges as
bright as the sunlight. The cardinal rule in the interpretation of laws is
to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the law. RA 7160 was
enacted later than RA 6679.
2. Yes. “As determined by law”; more precisely as provided for in RA
7160 in its sec. 43-C, limits their term to three years
3. Yes. As pointed out by Amicus Curiae Pimentel, petitioners are barred
by estoppel from pursuing ther petitions. If, as claimed by the
petitioner, the applicable law is RA 6679, then David should not have
run and could not have been elected chairman of his brangay because
under RA 6679, there was no direct election for the punong barangay;
the kagawad candidate who obtained the highest number of votes was
to be automatically elected barangay chairman