The Supreme Court (SC) has decided to consolidate into one case the three petitions that challenged the constitutionality of the new law that extended the term of office of Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) officials from three to four years, and postponed to November 2026 the elections set on Dec. 1, 2025.

After consolidation, the SC required the respondents in the petitions – the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Office of the Executive Secretary, and the Commission on Elections (Comelec) – to file their comments within a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of the SC notice.

The comments should also tackle the pleas for temporary restraining order (TRO) sought in the petitions filed separately by lawyer Romulo B. Macalintal, John Barry T. Tayam, and a group of young voters led by Mystro Yushi P. Fujii, the SC said.

Also, the SC directed Macalintal and the respondents in the three petitions to comment, also in a non-extendible period of 10 days, on the petition for intervention sought by the Liga ng Mga Barangays sa Pilipinas which asked the High Court to declare as constitutional Republic Act (RA) No. 12232.

RA 12232 was enacted into law by President Marcos last Aug. 13.

Once the comments are filed, the SC is expected to resolve the pleas for TRO that could stop the implementation of RA 12232.

In his petition, Macalintal told the SC that Congress has no power to postpone a scheduled election or extend the term of office of any elective officials.

Citing a ruling of the SC, he said that the High Court had declared that the postponement of an election is "a subtle but nonetheless self-serving proposition to lengthen governance without a mandate from the governed."

“Thus, the grave abuse of discretion committed by the Public Respondents is further aggravated by their decision to impose ‘appointed’ barangay leaders upon the people by allowing them to hold over for almost a year without a mandate from the electorate,” he stressed.

In their petition, the young voters led by Fujii told the SC that many of them will not be able to run for SK posts since they would be 24 years old after Dec. 1, 2025. Under the law, SK posts are limited to Filipino voters aged 15 to 24 at the time of the elections.

Also, they said that voters who will be 30 years old after Dec. 1, 2025 will no longer be able to vote for SK candidates since the voting for SK candidates are limited to those aged 15 to 30.

They told the SC that the postponement of the BSKE would deprive them of their right of suffrage due to age limitations under the law.

They said that unlike in national elections where suffrage is continually exercisable throughout one’s adult life, participation in the SK electoral process is a unique constitutional and statutory entitlement afforded only to the youth sector, in recognition of their special role in local governance.

They also said the postponement of BSKE under RA 12232 “directly disenfranchises an entire cohort of youth voters and potential candidates, whose rights are uniquely age-specific and time-bound under the law.”

“Once lost due to aging out, the opportunity to vote and/or run in the SK can no longer be restored, effectively resulting in irreparable and direct injury to their right to political participation, unlike in regular national elections where a citizen’s right to vote continues throughout their lifetime,” they pointed out.

A copy of the petition filed by Tayam was not immediately available and has not been posted by the SC in its website.

In its petition for intervention, the association of more than 42,000 barangays nationwide, represented by its National President Maria Katrina Jessica G. Dy, asked the SC to dismiss the two earlier petitions which challenged the constitutionality of RA 12232.

Dy was joined in the petition by about 50 barangay chairpersons in Isabela, Leyte, and Misamis Oriental, and represented by lawyers Alberto C. Agra, Janice Kristine R. Ramos, and Uella Vida V. Mancenido-Gayo.

They told the SC that Congress has the power to fix the term of office of barangay and SK officials under Sections 3 and 8 of Article X and Section 1, Article VI of the Constitution.

They pointed out that the 2023 SC decision that invalided RA 11935, which postponed the Dec. 5, 2022 BSKE, “is fundamentally distinct from the present law, RA 12232.”

While RA 11935 postponed the BSKE, RA 12232 fixed the term of office of barangay and SK officials at four years, and effectively postponed the Dec. 1, 2025 elections, they said.

Thus, they said, the two laws “are materially different legislative acts, and, accordingly, the SC ruling in the 2023 case cannot be invoked to strike down RA 12232.”

In their petition, the barangay chairpersons said that if the elections are held on Dec. 1, 2025, their term of office would only be for two years from Oct. 30, 2023, the date of the last BSKE, while RA 9164 (synchronized barangay and SK elections) fixes their term of office to three years for three consecutive terms.

Thus, they pointed out to the SC that “it is all the more proper for the BSKE to be moved for one year as this bolsters our legal right to intervene.”