Romulo B. Macalintal v. Office of the President, et al. — Decision — Official PDF

Decision 10 G.R. No. E-08557 On the other hand, the power of judicial review may be exercised only when the following requisites concur: (1) there must be an actual case or controversy; (2) the person challenging the act must have standing; (3) the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest opportunity; and (4) the issue of constitutionality must be the very lis mota of the case.'° These requisites are present. Republic Act No. 12326 is already in effect, and the COMELEC has acted on it by discontinuing all activities for the November 2026 BSKE. Macalintal sues as a registered voter of Las Pifias City, a taxpayer, and:a practicing lawyer.”° In 2025 Macalintal, the Court recognized the standing of the same petitioner, in the same capacities, to challenge Republic Act No. 12232, holding that the postponement of the BSKE “is an actual and direct violation of their right to participate in the BSKE, or at the very least, is an imminent threat of violation of their right of suffrage.” There is no reason to rule differently here. The Petition was filed within days of the law’s effectivity, and the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 12326 is the lis mota of the case. Ii, Larida’s intervention should be denied : Intervention is not a matter of right. It is addressed to the sound discretion of the Court, and may be allowed only when (a) the movant has a legal interest in the matter in litigation, or is otherwise qualified; and (b) the intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties, taking into account whether the intervenor’s rights may be fully protected in a separate proceeding. The legal interest must be of a direct and immediate character, such that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation of the judgment. It must be actual and material, and not indirect and contingent, indirect and remote, conjectural, consequential, or collateral.?! Larida does not meet the first requisite. He claims only that the outcome of the case “could either favorably or adversely affect” his status as Punong Barangay.” Whatever effect a ruling may have on the length of his stay in office, it does not give him a legal interest in the matter in litigation. Public office is a public trust. It is not a property right, and no one has a vested right to hold any public office, much less a vested right to an expectancy of holding a public office.” On this basis, the Court in 2025 Macalintal denied the intervention cf the Liga ng mga Barangay sa 9 Republic v. Abaya, et al., 928 Phil. 182, 206 (2022) fPer J. Lopez, J., En Banc}. © Petition, pp. 11-12. : 21 Republic v, Rubin, 887 Phil. 600 (2020) {Per J. Lazaro-Javier, First Division]. . 2 Motion for Leave of Court to Intervene and to Admit Attached Comment-in-Intervention, p. 1. 33 Macalintal v. Senate of the Philippines. G_R.™ 02002, 8-02010, B-02142 & E-02276, November il, 2025 [Per J. Lopez, J., Ex Banc]. citing Civil Service Commission v. Javier, 570 Phil. 89, 114 (2008) [Per J. Ausiria-Martinez, Ex 2 any. Exec. Sec. Ochoa, 888 Phil. 434, 497 ion on Elections v. Cruz, 620 Phil. 175, 200 (2009) (2020) [Per J. Leonen, En Bancl; and Ce [Per J. Brion, Ex Banc}.