Government urges SC: Junk petition vs BSKE postponement

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court should dismiss the challenge to the law fixing the term of barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan Elections (BSKE) officials and resetting the election to November 2028, as well as deny efforts to prevent its enforcement, several government agencies appealed.

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), which represented the Office of the President, the Senate, the House of Representatives and the Commission on Elections (Comelec), filed on Oct. 5 its 64-page comment to the petition for certiorari and prohibition submitted by election lawyer Romulo Macalintal.

The comment disputed Macalintal’s arguments in his petition filed on Sept. 27, including his claim that Republic Act 12326, which fixed the term of barangay and SK officials from four to five years and rescheduled their election to November 2028, “infringes the electorate’s right of suffrage by postponing the November 2026 BSKE under the guise of fixing terms.”

RA 12326, signed into law by President Marcos on Sept. 24, moved the next regular BSKE from Nov. 2, 2026 to the second Monday of November 2028 and set succeeding elections every five years. It also fixed the term of barangay and SK officials at five years.

“RA 12326 is a valid term-fixing law. Hence, the 2023 Macalintal guidelines do not apply to the present case,” the OSG declared.

The agency referred to RA 12232, which set the term of barangay and SK officials to four years and scheduled the election to the first Monday of November 2026, in justifying the validity of RA 12326 that scheduled the next BSKE to the second Monday of November 2028.

“Like RA 12232, the main purpose of RA 12326 is to extend the terms of BSK officials from four years to five years. The resulting postponement of elections is but a logistical consequence of the term extension,” according to the OSG.

It also maintained that Congress has the discretion to set the terms of barangay and SK officials.

“It is a political question which brings to the fore the wisdom of the law, taking into account both Congress’ role as legislators and as representatives of the people keenly aware of the realities at the grassroots level,” said the OSG.

TRO urgently sought

Macalintal, however, renewed his plea for the SC to stop the implementation of RA 12326.

In an urgent omnibus motion and reply filed electronically with the SC yesterday, Macalintal reiterated his request for a temporary restraining order and/or status quo ante order.

He also asked the court to direct the Comelec to resume preparations for the Nov. 2 BSKE or, if the polls could no longer be held on that date, conduct them on a date reasonably close to it under the Omnibus Election Code.

Macalintal disputed the government’s interpretation, pointing to Section 5 of RA 12326, which states” “Considering the extension of their terms by two (2) years, incumbent elective barangay officials shall be regarded as having completed one (1) term in their respective positions.”

“If this is not an extension of the term of incumbent barangay officials, then what is?” Macalintal said.

He argued that Congress’ authority to determine the term of barangay officials does not include the power to prolong the existing term of incumbents after they have been elected.

Macalintal also rejected the government’s characterization of the 2028 election date as merely an “incidental setting,” arguing that moving an election to a later date constitutes a postponement when it keeps incumbents in office beyond the period for which they were elected.

Macalintal also disputed the government’s reliance on governance continuity and multiyear projects, saying these reasons did not satisfy the standards previously laid down by the SC for postponing elections.

He challenged the administration’s reasons for retaining incumbent barangay officials, including their role in crime prevention, flood response and garbage collection. — Christine Boton