No legal impediment to hold BOL plebiscite on January 21

There is no legal impediment in the holding of the plebiscite on January 21 to ratify the Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL) that expands the present Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) through Republic Act No. 11054.

The Supreme Court (SC) did not issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) that would stop the implementation of the BOL or the plebiscite as pleaded in the second petition filed by the Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa), SC Court Administrator and Spokesman Jose Midas P. Marquez said yesterday.

The first petition, which also failed to secure a TRO, was filed by the Sulu provincial government through Gov. Abdusakur Tan II.

Both petitions would be consolidated by the SC for decision on their merits.

RA 11054 was signed into law by President Duterte in July last year. It expanded the ARMM with the new Bangsamoro Autonomous Region (BAR) with greater fiscal autonomy, regional government, parliament, and justice system.

BAR will be composed of the current ARMM members – Tawi-Tawi, Sulu, Basilan, Maguindanao, and Lanao del Sur. To be added to the region are six municipalities in Lanao del Norte, 39 villages in Cotabato and the cities of Isabela and Cotabato subject to the approval of voters in the areas.

The Commission on Elections (Comelec) has set the plebiscite for the BOL on January 21.

In its petition, Philconsa claimed that the BOL violates Sections 18 and 19 of Article X of the 1987 Constitution, which provide for the enactment of only one Organic Act to establish the autonomous region in Muslim Mindanao.

It alleged that the establishment of a parliamentary form of government in the BAR in Mindanao is violative of the Constitution, which specifically recognized only the ARMM and the Cordillera Autonomous Region (CAR).

"It is indubitable the ARMM and the Cordilleras were created by the Constitution. They are the only autonomous regions recognized by the Constitution. The BAR was created by Congress in violation of the Constitution...,” it said.

“Any exercise of power of the legislative and the executive departments or any of their respective functionaries beyond what is circumscribed by the Constitution and the law is unconstitutional, and a nullity," it added.

Philconsa is represented in the petition by its chairman Manuel Lazaro.

Named respondents were Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, members of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Earlier in its comment on the first petition, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) had asked the SC to dismiss the petition and uphold the constitutionality of the BOL.

Solicitor General Jose C. Calida – who represented both the Executive and the Legislative departments – told the SC that RA 11054 does not violate Sections 18 and 19, Article X of the Constitution that mandates only one organic act to establish the ARMM.

Calida said that the RA 11054 which created the BAR was not exactly a creation of a new autonomous region as described in the Constitution, but rather an amendment of the organic act and an expansion of the territorial jurisdiction of ARMM.

As signed and approved by the President, he said RA 11054 is “an Act providing for the organic law for the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, repealing for the purpose RA 6734, entitled ‘An Act Providing for an Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao,’ as amended by RA 9054, entitled 'An Act to Strengthen and Expand the Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.’”

This week, a group of Muslim accountants and several individuals have joined the government in asking the SC to dismiss the petition against the constitutionality of the BOL.

In their pleading, the Philippine Association of Islamic Accountants (PAIA) told the SC that the Constitution allows Congress to amend, revise, or strengthen the law that created the ARMM.

The PAIA said the BOL did not violate the constitutional principle of separation of powers in the government.