OP, others given 5 days to answer BSKE deferment plea
A legal challenge to the postponement of the Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan Elections (BSKE) is filed with the Supreme Court in Manila on September 28, 2026.
Edd Gumban / The Philippine STAR
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has directed the Office of the President, the Commission on Elections and both chambers of Congress to comment within five days on the petition against the postponement of the barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan elections (BSKE) to November 2028.
The SC’s order stemmed from a petition for certiorari and prohibition filed by election lawyer Romulo Macalintal contesting the implementation of Republic Act 12326 postponing the elections. RA 12326 was signed by President Marcos on Sept. 24 and became immediately executory.
The SC gave the respondents “a non-extendible period of five calendar days from notice” to submit their comments.
Macalintal said he was “deeply glad and thankful that the SC immediately acted on our petition.”
The development, he added, was “a clear indication that the High Court sees substantial merits in our petition.”
In his petition, Macalintal wants the SC to issue a temporary restraining order or status quo ante order on RA 12326.
The law signed by Marcos also fixed the term of BSK officials to five years from the current four, with two terms for barangay officials and one term for SK officials.
Macalintal earlier said RA 12326 “violates the electorate’s right to vote by postponing the 2026 BSKE under the guise of fixing the officials’ term of office.”
He said the postponement was “unduly long” starting with the rescheduling of the December 2025 BSKE to November this year, and another postponement to November 2028, or a total of three years of extension.
He said the Comelec should continue with its preparations for BSKE, originally scheduled in November, as the high court might rule in his favor.
He also cited a favorable SC ruling on his petition questioning the postponement of the BSKE in December 2022 through RA 11935.
Macalintal said the SC’s decision then to declare RA 11935 unconstitutional was a “very clear precedent.”
KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.