Liga ng mga Barangay Defends Constitutionality of RA 12232 Before the Supreme Court

The Liga ng mga Barangay sa Pilipinas has stood firm in defending the constitutionality of Republic Act 12232, the law setting the term of office for Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) officials.

On Thursday, Liga National President Jessica Dy, Legal Counsel Atty. Alberto Agra, several Provincial Chapter Presidents, and Barangay Captains filed a Petition-in-Intervention with Opposition before the Supreme Court. The petition challenges the case earlier filed by election lawyer Atty. Romulo Macalintal, who questioned the law’s validity.

“RA 12232 is about setting the term of office. The word ‘postponement’ is not in the law,” the Liga stressed. The group argued that moving the Barangay and SK Elections from December 2025 to November 2026 is a natural consequence of realigning terms, intended to strengthen stability and continuity in local governance.

The Liga also drew sharp contrasts between its position and that of Macalintal, particularly on the issue of election validity. It pointed out that RA 12232 did not explicitly postpone the elections, and therefore there was no need to invoke extraordinary grounds such as force majeure, calamities, or terrorism.

Even if the measure were to be seen as a postponement, the Liga argued, extending the term of officials is still reasonable. Officials elected in 2023, it said, are serving only two years instead of the three years prescribed by law, despite carrying multiple functions and responsibilities. “Considering their multifarious functions, two years is unreasonable and inappropriate for those elected in 2023, who are only on their second year,” the group emphasized.

The Liga further asserted that Macalintal’s petition was premature, since RA 12232 had not yet been published on August 15—the date the petition was filed—and therefore had not yet taken effect.

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the case, the Liga maintained that Congress’ authority to set the terms of Barangay and SK officials must be upheld. “The law is presumed constitutional. Petitioner did not present a clear breach of the Constitution,” it said.