MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has deferred ruling on an immediate plea for a restraining order against Republic Act No. 12326, which postpones the November 2 Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan Elections (BSKE) to the second Monday of November 2028.
Instead, the High Court—during a full bench session on Wednesday, September 30—ordered the named respondents to submit their formal response within a non-extendible period of five calendar days from notice.
Directed to file comments on both the main petition and the requests for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) or a Status Quo Ante Order (SQAO) are the Office of the President, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Commission on Elections (COMELEC).
The tribunal is expected to address the injunctive relief requests once the required submissions are received.
The legal action, filed by veteran election lawyer Atty. Romulo Macalintal alongside co-counsels Antonio Carlos Bautista, James Kenneth Adolor, and William Kyle Santos, challenges the constitutionality of RA 12326.
Signed by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on September 24 and published on September 25, the law extends the tenure of current local and youth officials until the 2028 polls, setting all subsequent elections to five-year intervals.
The SC’s directive was issued during an en banc session led by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen as acting chief justice, while Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo attends official duties abroad.
Beyond seeking to halt the law’s implementation, Macalintal requested that the SC order COMELEC to continue preparations to guarantee clean and credible voting on November 2. Should time constraints make that date unfeasible, the petition requests an alternate election date as close as possible to the original November schedule.
Macalintal underscored that the BSKE was initially scheduled for December 2025 before being shifted to November 2026.
“This initial delay gave incumbent officials a one-year term extension. The new law pushes the elections further to November 2028, adding another two years to their terms. This results in a cumulative three-year extension for current officials and a three-year denial of the public’s right to vote,” he stressed.
He argued that while Congress holds authority over term lengths, it cannot use that power to indefinitely delay scheduled elections or extend terms beyond constitutional bounds, citing past judicial rulings mandating that postponements must not be unreasonable.
The petition also questioned the swift legislative process surrounding the measure, pointing to its immediate enactment and publication on Friday, September 25, following its signing a day prior.
Additionally, the suit argues that RA 12326 violates the single-subject requirement for legislative titles, asserting that a measure titled around fixing terms acts merely as an election delay mechanism.
“Thus, the November 2026 BSKE may not be postponed on the pretext of fixing the term of office of BSK officials. The reasons in support of RA No. 12326 are unfortunately superficial and farcical, falling within what this Honorable Court has described as insufficient to justify the postponement of an election,” Macalintal said.
He emphasized that any newly defined term duration must apply moving forward rather than retroactively.
“Thus, if Congress sincerely believes that the term of office of these barangay officials must be five years, then such law must be applied to those who will win in the scheduled Nov. 2, 2026 BSKE,” he added.