G.R. No. 131499. November 17, 1999.
Hermie M. Herrera, Donabella T. Sorongon, Julio T. Tamayor, Edeljulio R. Romero, petitioners, vs. The Commission on Elections, respondent.

FACTS

Petitioners, as taxpayers and residents of the Province of Guimaras, filed this petition for certiorari to annul COMELEC Resolution No. 2950 dated November 3, 1997. The Resolution divided Guimaras into two provincial districts and apportioned eight elective Sangguniang Panlalawigan seats for the May 1998 elections. This action followed the province’s reclassification from fifth to fourth class by the Department of Finance, which, under Republic Act No. 6636, entitled it to eight provincial board members. The districting was based on a prior request from the Sangguniang Panlalawigan and consultative meetings conducted by the Provincial Election Supervisor.
Petitioners assailed the districting scheme, contending it violated legal requirements. They argued the districts were not compact, contiguous, and adjacent; the consultative process did not reflect the true voter sentiment; the apportionment was inequitable; and there was a disparity in the voter-to-representative ratio. They proposed an alternative division grouping municipalities differently to achieve a more equitable distribution of seats and voters between the two districts.

ISSUE

Did the Commission on Elections commit grave abuse of discretion in promulgating Resolution No. 2950, which divided the Province of Guimaras into two provincial districts and apportioned eight Sangguniang Panlalawigan seats?

RULING

No, the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The Supreme Court upheld the validity of Resolution No. 2950. The legal framework is established by Republic Act No. 7166, Section 3(b), which mandates that a province with only one legislative district, like Guimaras, shall be divided into two districts for electing Sangguniang Panlalawigan members. The division must be, as nearly as practicable, according to the number of inhabitants, with each district comprising a compact, contiguous, and adjacent territory, and with seats equitably apportioned between the districts.
The Court found that the COMELEC complied with these statutory criteria. First, the reclassification of Guimaras to a fourth-class province legally mandated an increase to eight board members. Second, the consultative meetings held were valid, with due notice and representation from various sectors, as evidenced by attendance sheets. Third, the contiguity requirement was satisfied. The first district comprised the northern municipality of Buenavista and the eastern municipality of San Lorenzo, which share a common border. The second district grouped the municipalities of Jordan, Nueva Valencia, and Sibunag in the south and southeast. The Court clarified that “contiguous” means adjoining or touching along boundaries, a condition met by the municipal groupings in the Resolution. The petitioners’ proposed alternative, while aiming for numerical parity, did not demonstrate that the COMELEC’s chosen configuration was arbitrary or capricious. Absent a showing of grave abuse of discretion—a capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment equivalent to lack of jurisdiction—the COMELEC’s exercise of its administrative and quasi-legislative authority must be respected. The petition was dismissed for lack of merit.