So which section applies?

Several issues ago in this paper, a person commented on my narratives on the special election, that the lieutenant governor does not get elected. I know that, and I agree. See Article III, Section-3, 2nd sentence of our constitution. That sentence says that whenever the lieutenant governor’s office is vacant, the governor shall appoint a successor with advice and consent of the senate. It’s plain and simple sentence. Acting lieutenant governor Hocog does not get elected. He gets appointed by acting governor Torres. And when Senate President Hocog vacated his office for the Executive Branch, the fact that the Senate re-organized itself quickly is a good assumption that the re-organization was an acquiescence vice the hearing on the “…advice and consent of the Senate.” I say the appointment does not have to be blared out, just a light but serious offer and acceptance conversation between the Governor’s Office and Senate President. I say that’s good enough.

One legal issue that I cannot find is the clause stating that if a legislator accepts a position in the Executive Branch, then that legislator must resign from his legislative position. That’s U.S. Constitution Amendment-25, but not in our constitution. If I am looking for clarity, Amendment-25 is it. Why? Because of Baron Montesquieu’s political concept, and de Tocqueville, and John Locke, the British constitution, the Federalists, the Anti-Federalists, Berger, Rossiter, Tribes, Choper, Chemerensky, Cooke, etc., have it that we have a separation of powers, legislature, executive, and judiciary, and a person could only hold one position in one Branch and not hold two or more positions in one, or two or three Branches simultaneously. But where is it in our constitution? I’m just comparing provisions on succession. On our special election article, one person commented that the special election is not needed. But the last sentence in Article III Section 7 call for a special election.

There has to be one so that the “acting” title could be removed, otherwise, acting governor Torres will be “acting” Aating governor until the apocalypse. I will take the last sentence anytime. Another one added that Section 7 of Article III has to be taken as a “bundle” and not be broken up. I disagree. The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court says the bundle is not absolute. A composition jam. The bundle would have to be broken up, and each sentence evaluated and taken for its subject number individually. For example, the last (3rd) sentence is singular per its sentence structure. It says an acting governor or lieutenant governor who assumes office when more than a year remains in the term may serve only until a governor or lieutenant governor is chosen in a special election provided by law. The sentence immediately before that shows two positions, connected by and Frank R. Agulto is correct. The second sentence of Section 7 does not apply. It talks about two simultaneous vacancies link by a conjunction, which is not the issue at this instance.

If the offices of the governor and lieutenant governor (something of a chateaubriand-for-two recipe) are both (simultaneously) vacant, the president of the senate shall become acting governor and the speaker of the house shall become acting lieutenant governor. And, I disagree that Section 7 is a bundle and should be read as one. Sometimes, two ideas are compiled into one section or paragraph, and the readings become nebulous. The contradiction is that acting lieutenant governor Hocog is not required to resign from the legislature to accept a position in the Executive Branch, despite the Montesquieu doctrine. And my question is, do we have a special election law? I say yes, we do. This constitution. Are we looking somewhere else? This is a written document with a legislative history. It’s the law. The same goes with the second constitutional convention. It also has a legislative history. Most of the delegates and attorneys are still alive. Legal advisors shouldn’t be brash or too aggressive in their opinions on the provisions of the constitution. Legal advisors should not second-guess or do a “Monday-morning quarterbacking” of thecConstitution.

The much-discussed Article III, Section 7 is unclear as to gubernatorial succession because of the way it is composed. That one talks about death. I assume it means “death in situ.” Died here in the Commonwealth. What about Section 8? It talks about physically absent from the Commonwealth. Shouldn’t we delve in that section, and then go back to Section 7 and Section3?

The analysis of our CNMI constitution on Article III, Section 3 says, “Whenever the office of the lieutenant governor is vacant, the governor shall appoint a successor with the advice and consent of the senate. But, Section 7 addresses two simultaneous vacancies, then a single vacancy. It says, in part, an acting governor or lieutenant governor who assumes office when more than a year remains in the term may serve only until a governor or lieutenant governor is chosen in a special election provided by law.

Everything about this sentence is about a single issue. And Section 7 doesn’t discuss about absence when the governor physically leaves the Commonwealth. But Section 8 does. Our constitution allows the Senate president to migrate to the Executive Branch without resignation from one branch. That’s against Montesquieu principle. But, right now, I am espousing Article III, Section 8 immediately, to be followed by Section 7, sort of a makeshift compilation of the two. Both sections talk about “acting.” I figure that only a special election could remove the “acting,” and elevate the acting incumbent to a full-fledge governor. So first, Inos physically left the CNMI. I say Section 8 would be applicable because that’s the only section that talks about being physically absent from the Commonwealth. I would say that Section 7 “death” would be “death in situ” which, to me, would be died here in the Commonwealth. That’s not a wild guess. Only two sections deal with succession. One deals with only “death.” The other one deals with being physical absence from the CNMI. So, which section applies. Section 8, then Section 7, with Section 3 on the side? And, let’s remember that our CNMI constitution mirrors, for the most part, the U.S. Constitution. Hey, turn the election mechanism on.

Rudolfo M. Sablan
Garapan