By Gemma Q. Casas
Variety News Staff

HOUSE legal counsel Ian Catlett says the CNMI Supreme Court’s ruling changing the reapportionment of seats for the House of Representatives from 18 to 20 — or two more for Saipan — should be reflected on the ballot for the Nov. 3 midterm elections.
But he said there seems to be a legal dilemma because the deadline for the filing of petitions for candidacy with the Commonwealth Election Commission ended on Monday.
“The (high court) decision is effective as of (Tuesday),” said Catlett.
Gregorio C. Sablan, the commission’s executive director, could not be immediately reached for comment.
Chief Justice Miguel S. Demapan, Associate Justices Alexandro C. Castro and John A. Manglona ruled that for purposes of reapportioning seats for the House of Representatives, the number of nonresident workers should be included, not just that of residents.
The justices said although the term nonresident worker is an immigration status bearing no direct relationship with legislative apportionment, their numbers must not be excluded in the reapportionment and redistricting of the House.
“We conclude that Article II, Section 4(a) of the CNMI Constitution does not, by its own language, exclude nonresident workers. Nor do we find the Legislature has signaled a desire to exclude nonresident workers from reapportionment figures. Evidence indicates that the Legislature considered total population as reported by the United States Census in both reapportionments since our Constitution’s drafting,” the justices said.
On May 14, Sen. Maria T. Pangelinan, D-Saipan, and citizens advocate Tina E. Sablan petitioned the Supreme Court to exercise its constitutional mandate to reapportion and redistrict the House of Representatives, as both the Legislature and the governor failed to act within the constitutional time frame.
According to Pangelinan and Sablan, “because the majority of people residing in the commonwealth are non-citizens — the only United States jurisdiction so situated — counting non-citizens for purposes of legislative apportionment impermissibly dilutes the votes of Rota and Tinian residents.” This, they maintain, is a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s one person, one vote rule.
The current 18 seats of the House was last set in 1991. In 2000, the U.S. Census came up with a new population base for the islands, noting an increase from 38,932 to 62,398, most of them residing on Saipan.
The petitioners argued the votes of Rota and Tinian residents are diluted by 71 percent and 83 percent respectively in relation to Saipan residents taking into account the 2000 U.S. Census.
However, the justices said all persons residing in the commonwealth should be counted for legislative apportionment.
They noted that the Legislature previously utilized total population figures when reapportioning, and “if any category of persons is to be excluded for purposes of legislative apportionment, the court is not the proper body to pioneer it.”
“Based on increased population as reported in the 2000 United States Census, we conclude the House of Representatives shall be enlarged by two members to give Saipan 18 representatives,” the high court said.
“Accordingly, Saipan shall be redistricted into five election districts by grouping census block groups. The districts seeks to maintain populations with historically and/or geographically similar interests while adhering to the constitutional requirement of ‘contiguous and compact districts’ which ensure representation by each member of the House of Representatives of approximately the same number of residents to the extent permitted by the separate islands and the distribution of population in the commonwealth,” the court added.
Sablan expressed disappointment over the ruling but added that “the most important result of the court’s order is that the CNMI is brought back into compliance with our Constitution.”
She added, “Although I am, of course, disappointed with any move that will increase the size of government, what this means to me is that the next Legislature will simply have to work harder to cut costs in the coming years.”
The court said it will issue a supplemental opinion with a detailed analysis.