ISSUE: Whether or not there is an actual case or controversy to challenge the constitutionality of one of the questioned sections of R.A. No. 7854
FACTS: The petitioners assails certain provisions of RA 7854, Section 51 on the ground that it attempts to alter or restart the "3-consecutive term" limit for local elective officials, disregarding the term previously served by them which collides with Section 8 Article X and Section 7, Article VI of the constitution
RATIO DECIDENDI: The requirements before a litigant can challenge the constitutionality of a law are well delineated. They are: 1) there must be an actual case or controversy; (2) the question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party; (3) the constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity; and (4) the decision on the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself. Petitioners have far from complied with these requirements. The petition is premised on the occurrence of many contingent events, i.e., that Mayor Binay will run again in this coming mayoralty elections; that he would be re-elected in said elections; and that he would seek re-election for the same position in the 1998 elections. Considering that these contingencies may or may not happen, petitioners merely pose a hypothetical issue which has yet to ripen to an actual case or controversy. Petitioners who are residents of Taguig (except Mariano) are not also the proper parties to raise this abstract issue. Worse, they hoist this futuristic issue in a petition for declaratory relief over which this Court has no jurisdiction.