MIRANDA v. AGUIRREFACTS:        This is a petition for a writ of prohibition with prayer for preliminary injunction assailing the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 8528, converting the City of Santiago, Isabela from an independent component city to merely a component city.        On May 5, 1994, RA No. 7720 was signed into a law, which converted the municipality of Santiago, Isabela, into an independent component city.        on July 4, 1994, RA No. 7720 was approved by the people of Santiago in a plebiscite.        On February 14, 1998, RA No. 8528 was enacted and it amended RA No. 7720 that practically downgraded the City of Santiago from an independent component city to a merely component city.        Petitioners assail the constitutionality of RA No. 8528 for the lack of provision to submit the law for the approval of the people of Santiago in a proper plebiscite.        Respondents defended the constitutionality of RA No. 8528 saying that the said act merely reclassified the City of Santiago from an independent component city into a component city. It allegedly did not involve any “creation, division, merger, abolition, or substantial alteration of boundaries of local government units,” therefore, a plebiscite of the people of Santiago is unnecessary. They also questioned the standing of petitioners to file the petition and argued that the petition raises a political question over which the Court lacks jurisdiction.ISSUE/S:WHETHER OR NOT RA NO. 8528 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR ITS FAILURE TO SUBMIT IT TO PROPER PLEBISCITE.WHETHER OR NOT THE PETITIONERS LACKS STANDING OR PERSONALITY IN FILING THIS PETITION.WHETHER OR NOT THE COURT HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE PETITION AT BAR ON THE GROUND THAT IT INVOLVES A POLITICAL QUESTION.DECISION:           Petition was GRANTED. RA No. 8528 is declared unconstitutional and the writ of prohibition is hereby issued commanding the respondents to desist from implementing the said law.RATIO DECIDENDI:        RA No. 8528 is declared unconstitutional because Sec. 10 of Art. X of the 1987 Constitution clearly states that: No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary substantially altered, except in accordance with the criteria established in the local government code and subject to approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly affected.        That when an amendment of the law involves creation, merger, division, abolition or substantial alteration of boundaries of local government units, a plebiscite in the political units directly affected is mandatory.        Petitioners are directly affected in the imple-mentation of RA No. 8528. Petitioner Miranda was the mayor of Santiago City, Afiado was the President of the Sangguniang Liga, together with 3 other petitioners were all residents and voters in the City of Santiago. It is their right to be heard in the conversion of their city thru a plebiscite to be conducted by the COMELEC. Thus, denial of their right in RA No. 8528 gives them proper standing to strike down the law as unconstitutional.        Sec. 1 of Art. VIII of the Constitution states that: the judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law. Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instru-mentality of the Government.        That the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction over said petition because it involves not a political question but a justiciable issue, and of which only the court could decide whether or not a law passed by the Congress is unconstitutional.