DIGEST
MACIAS VS COMELEC G.R. No. L-18684     law giving provinces with less number of inhabitants more
LAMBERTO MACIAS, LORENZO TEVES, FAUSTO
DUGENIO, ROGACIANO MERCADO and MARIANO
PERDICES, petitioners,
vs.
THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and VICENTE GELLA
in his Capacity as National Treasurer, respondents.
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:
1. 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.
2. It was approved more than 3 years after the return of
the last census of the population.
3. 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
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.
 Rulings: NO. The Court concluded that the statute be
declared invalid. Republic Act 3040 clearly violates the said
constitutional provision in several ways namely:
 It gave Cebu seven members, while Rizal with a bigger
number of inhabitants got four only.
 It gave Manila four members, while Cotabato with a
bigger population got three only
 Pangasinan with less inhabitants than both Manila and
Cotabato got more than both, five members having been
assigned to it.
 Samar (with 871,857) was allotted four members while
Davao with 903,224 got three only.
 Bulacan with 557,691 got two only, while Albay with
less inhabitants (515,691) got three.
 Misamis Oriental with 387,839 was given one member
only, while Cavite with less inhabitants (379,904) got two.
These were not the only instances of unequal
apportionment.
 Mountain Province has 3 whereas Isabela, Laguna and
Cagayan with more inhabitants have 2 each. And then,
Capiz, La Union and Ilocos Norte got 2 each, whereas
Sulu that has more inhabitants got 1 only. And Leyte with
967,323 inhabitants got 4 only, whereas Iloilo with less
inhabitants (966,145) was given 5.