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

Decision 29 G.R. No. E-08557 authority to set terms and their commencement, subject to constitutional limits, petitioner’s claimed right to the November 2026 date remains seriously disputed. ‘That dispute must be resolved on the merits, not presumed in his favor at the interim-relief stage. In 2023 Macalintal, petitioner likewise prayed for the issuance of a TRO and a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction, alleging that the COMELEC had already stopped its preparations for the December 5, 2022 BSKE. That date passed while the case remained pending. The Court nonetheless held that “despite the lapse of the originally scheduled date of the BSKE, i.e., December 5, 2022, the case has not been rendered moot as to preclude the exercise by this Court of its judicial review power.”” Having declared Republic Act No. 11935 unconstitutional, the Court then fashioned the appropriate relief, applying the operative fact doctrine. In 2025 Macalinial, petitioner again moved for interim relief and for early resolution, citing the COMELEC’s termination of its preparations for the December 2025 BSKE. Yet, the Court proceeded to resolve the case on the merits. Currently, petitioner recognizes that the Court’s power to grant effective relief does not lapse on November 2, 2026. He prays, in the alternative, that the COMELEC be directed to conduct the BSKE “on a date reasonably close to November 2, 2026 pursuant to Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code.””? Had he prevailed, the Court could have granted precisely that relief. A final judgment in his favor would thus not have been a mere paper victory. Neither is the continued service of the incumbents in a hold-over capacity an irreparable injury. Whatever injury the hold-over may cause is temporary and reparable. A held-over lasts only until successors are elected and qualified. Had petitioner prevailed, the Court could have directed the holding of elections, and the hold-over would have ended once the newly elected officials assumed office. This is what the Court did in 2023 Macalintal: even after declaring Republic Act No. 11935 unconstitutional, it allowed the sitting BSK officials to “continue to hold office until their successor shall have been elected and qualified.” If the hold-over did not call for the incumbents’ immediate removal even after a final declaration of unconstitutionality, it can hardiy be an irreparable injury that warrants a TRO before any such declaration has been made. Nor is the pecuniary aspect of the claimed injury beyond measure. As argued by the respondents, the honoraria and allowances paid to the incumbents are definite sums, paid for services actually rendered.” ”. Macalintal v. COMELEC, 943 Phil ® Petition, p. 24; Omnibus Motion, p. 16 7 Comment, p: 54. 279 (20235 [Per J. Kho, Jr, En Banc].