Banat vs Comelec-full

8/13/2019 Banat vs Comelec-full

1/22

EN BANC

BARANGAY ASSOCIATION FOR G.R. No. 179271

NATIONAL ADVANCEMENT

AND TRANSPARENCY (BANAT),

Petitioner,

- versus -

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

(sitting as the National Board of

Canvassers),

Respondent.

x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

D E C I S I O N

CARPIO, J.:

The Case

Petitioner in G.R. No. 179271 Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency

(BANAT) in a petition for certiorari and mandamus,[1]assails the Resolution[2]promulgated on 3 August

2007 by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) in NBC No. 07-041 (PL). The COMELECs resolution in

NBC No. 07-041 (PL) approved the recommendation of Atty. Alioden D. Dalaig, Head of the National Board

of Canvassers (NBC) Legal Group, to deny the petition of BANAT for being moot. BANAT filed before the

COMELEC En Banc, acting as NBC, a Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-List Representatives

Provided by the Constitution.

The following are intervenors in G.R. No. 179271: Arts Business and Science Professionals (ABS),Aangat Tayo (AT), and Coalition of Associations of Senior Citizens in the Philippines, Inc. (Senior Citizens).

Petitioners in G.R. No. 179295 Bayan Muna, Abono, and Advocacy for Teacher Empowerment

Through Action, Cooperation and Harmony Towards Educational Reforms (A Teacher) in a petition for

certiorari with mandamus and prohibition,[3]assails NBC Resolution No. 07-60[4]promulgated on 9 July

2007. NBC No. 07-60 made a partial proclamation of parties, organizations and coalitions that obtained at

least two percent of the total votes cast under the Party-List System. The COMELEC announced that, upon
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn1


2/22

completion of the canvass of the party-list results, it would determine the total number of seats of each

winning party, organization, or coalition in accordance with Veterans Federation Party v.

COMELEC[5] (Veterans).

Estrella DL Santos, in her capacity as President and First Nominee of the Veterans Freedom Party,

filed a motion to intervene in both G.R. Nos. 179271 and 179295.

The Facts

The 14 May 2007 elections included the elections for the party-list representatives. The COMELEC

counted 15,950,900 votes cast for 93 parties under the Party-List System.[6]

On 27 June 2002, BANAT filed a Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-List Representatives

Provided by the Constitution, docketed as NBC No. 07-041 (PL) before the NBC. BANAT filed its petition

because [t]he Chairman and the Members of the [COMELEC] have recently been quoted in the national

papers that the [COMELEC] is duty bound to and shall implement the Veteransruling, that is, would apply

the Panganiban formula in allocating party-list seats.[7] There were no intervenors in BANATs petition

before the NBC. BANAT filed a memorandum on 19 July 2007.

On 9 July 2007, the COMELEC, sitting as the NBC, promulgated NBC Resolution No. 07-60. NBC

Resolution No. 07-60 proclaimed thirteen (13) parties as winners in the party-list elections, namely: Buhay

Hayaan Yumabong (BUHAY), Bayan Muna, Citizens Battle Against Corruption (CIBAC), Gabrielas Women

Party (Gabriela), Association of Philippine Electric Cooperatives (APEC), A Teacher, Akbayan! Citizens

Action Party (AKBAYAN), Alagad, Luzon Farmers Party (BUTIL), Cooperative-Natco Network Party (COOP-

NATCCO), Anak Pawis, Alliance of Rural Concerns (ARC), and Abono. We quote NBC Resolution No. 07-

60 in its entirety below:

WHEREAS, the Commission on Elections sitting en bancas National Board ofCanvassers, thru its Sub-Committee for Party-List, as of 03 July 2007, had officiallycanvassed, in open and public proceedings, a total of fifteen million two hundred eightythree thousand six hundred fifty-nine (15,283,659)votes under the Party-List System ofRepresentation, in connection with the National and Local Elections conducted last 14 May2007;

WHEREAS, the study conducted by the Legal and Tabulation Groups of the NationalBoard of Canvassers reveals that the projected/maximum total party-list votes cannot go anyhigher than sixteen million seven hundred twenty three thousand one hundred twenty-one (16,723,121)votes given the following statistical data:

Projected/Maximum Party-List Votes for May 2007 Elections

i. Total party-list votes already canvassed/tabulated 15,283,659

ii. Total party-list votes remaining uncanvassed/
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn5


3/22

untabulated (i.e. canvass deferred) 1,337,032

iii. Maximum party-list votes (based on 100%

outcome) from areas not yet submitted for canvass

(Bogo, Cebu; Bais City; Pantar, Lanao del Norte; and

Pagalungan, Maguindanao) 102,430

Maximum Total Party-List Votes 16,723,121

WHEREAS, Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7941 (Party-List System Act) provides inpart:

The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two percent(2%) of the total votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one seateach: provided, that those garnering more than two percent (2%) of the votesshall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes:provided, finally, that each party, organization, or coalition shall be entitled tonot more than three (3) seats.

WHEREAS, for the 2007 Elections, based on the above projected total of party-listvotes, the presumptive two percent (2%) threshold can be pegged at three hundred thirtyfour thousand four hundred sixty-two (334,462)votes;

WHEREAS, the Supreme Court, in Citizens Battle Against Corruption (CIBAC)versus COMELEC, reiterated its ruling inVeterans Federation Party versusCOMELECadopting a formula for the additional seats of each party, organization or coalitionreceving more than the required two percent (2%) votes, stating that the same shall bedetermined only after all party-list ballots have been completely canvassed;

WHEREAS, the parties, organizations, and coalitions that have thus far garnered at

least three hundred thirty four thousand four hundred sixty-two (334,462)votes are asfollows:

RANK PARTY/ORGANIZATION/COALITION VOTES RECEIVED

1 BUHAY 1,163,218

2 BAYAN MUNA 972,730

3 CIBAC 760,260

4 GABRIELA 610,451

5 APEC 538,971

6 A TEACHER 476,036

7 AKBAYAN 470,872

8 ALAGAD 423,076

9 BUTIL 405,052


4/22

10 COOP-NATCO 390,029

11 BATAS 386,361

12 ANAK PAWIS 376,036

13 ARC 338,194

14 ABONO 337,046

WHEREAS, except for Bagong Alyansang Tagapagtaguyod ng AdhikaingSambayanan (BATAS), against which an URGENT PETITION FORCANCELLATION/REMOVAL OF REGISTRATION AND DISQUALIFICATION OF PARTY-LIST NOMINEE (With Prayer for the Issuance of Restraining Order)has been filed before theCommission, docketed as SPC No. 07-250, all the parties, organizations and coalitionsincluded in the aforementioned list are therefore entitled to at least one seat under the party-list system of representation in the meantime.

NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the powers vested in it by the Constitution, theOmnibus Election Code, Executive Order No. 144, Republic Act Nos. 6646, 7166, 7941, and

other election laws, the Commission on Elections, sitting en bancas the National Board ofCanvassers, hereby RESOLVES to PARTIALLY PROCLAIM, subject to certain conditionsset forth below, the following parties, organizations and coalitions participating under theParty-List System:

1 Buhay Hayaan Yumabong BUHAY

2 Bayan Muna BAYAN MUNA

3 Citizens Battle Against Corruption CIBAC

4 Gabriela Womens Party GABRIELA

5 Association of Philippine Electric

Cooperatives

APEC

6 Advocacy for Teacher Empowerment

Through Action, Cooperation and Harmony

Towards Educational Reforms, Inc.

A TEACHER

7 Akbayan! Citizens Action Party AKBAYAN

8 Alagad ALAGAD

9 Luzon Farmers Party BUTIL

10 Cooperative-Natco Network Party COOP-NATCCO

11 Anak Pawis ANAKPAWIS

12 Alliance of Rural Concerns ARC

13 Abono ABONO


5/22

This is without prejudice to the proclamation of other parties, organizations, orcoalitions which may later on be established to have obtained at least two percent (2%) ofthe total actual votes cast under the Party-List System.

The total number of seats of each winning party, organization or coalition shall bedetermined pursuant to Veterans Federation Party versus COMELEC formula uponcompletion of the canvass of the party-list results.

The proclamation of Bagong Alyansang Tagapagtaguyod ng Adhikaing Sambayanan(BATAS) is hereby deferred until final resolution of SPC No. 07-250, in order not to renderthe proceedings therein moot and academic.

Finally, all proclamation of the nominees of concerned parties, organizations andcoalitions with pending disputes shall likewise be held in abeyance until final resolution oftheir respective cases.

Let the Clerk of the Commission implement this Resolution, furnishing a copy thereofto the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Philippines.

SO ORDERED.[8](Emphasis in the original)

Pursuant to NBC Resolution No. 07-60, the COMELEC, acting as NBC, promulgated NBC Resolution

No. 07-72, which declared the additional seats allocated to the appropriate parties. We quote from the

COMELECs interpretation of the Veteransformula as found in NBC Resolution No. 07-72:

WHEREAS, on July 9, 2007, the Commission on Elections sitting en bancas theNational Board of Canvassers proclaimed thirteen (13) qualified parties, organization[s] andcoalitions based on the presumptive two percent (2%) threshold of 334,462 votes from the

projected maximum total number of party-list votes of 16,723,121, and were thus given one(1) guaranteed party-list seat each;

WHEREAS, per Report of the Tabulation Group and Supervisory Committee of theNational Board of Canvassers, the projected maximum total party-list votes, as of July 11,2007, based on the votes actually canvassed, votes canvassed but not included in ReportNo. 29, votes received but uncanvassed, and maximum votes expected for Pantar, Lanaodel Norte, is 16,261,369; and that the projected maximum total votes for the thirteen (13)qualified parties, organizations and coalition[s] are as follows:

Party-List Projected total number of votes

1 BUHAY 1,178,747

2 BAYAN MUNA 977,476

3 CIBAC 755,964

4 GABRIELA 621,718

5 APEC 622,489

6 A TEACHER 492,369
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn8


6/22

7 AKBAYAN 462,674

8 ALAGAD 423,190

9 BUTIL 409,298

10 COOP-NATCO 412,920

11 ANAKPAWIS 370,165

12 ARC 375,846

13 ABONO 340,151

WHEREAS, based on the above Report, Buhay Hayaan Yumabong(Buhay) obtainedthe highest number of votes among the thirteen (13) qualified parties, organizations andcoalitions, making it the first party in accordance withVeterans Federation Party versusCOMELEC, reiterated in Citizens Battle Against Corruption (CIBAC) versus COMELEC;

WHEREAS, qualified parties, organizations and coalitions participating under the

party-list system of representation that have obtained one guaranteed (1) seat may beentitled to an additional seat or seats based on the formula prescribed by the Supreme Courtin Veterans;

WHEREAS, in determining the additional seats for the first party, the correct formulaas expressed in Veterans, is:

Number of votes of first party Proportion of votes of first- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = party relative to total votes forTotal votes for party-list system party-list system

wherein the proportion of votes received by the first party (without rounding off) shall entitle it

to additional seats:

Proportion of votes received

by the first party

Additional seats

Equal to or at least 6% Two (2) additional seats

Equal to or greater than 4% but less than 6% One (1) additional seat

Less than 4% No additional seat

WHEREAS, applying the above formula, Buhay obtained the following percentage:

1,178,747- - - - - - - - = 0.07248 or 7.2%16,261,369

which entitles it to two (2) additional seats.

WHEREAS, in determining the additional seats for the other qualified parties,organizations and coalitions, the correct formula as expressed in Veterans and reiteratedin CIBACis, as follows:


7/22

No. of votes ofconcerned party No. of additional

Additional seats for = ------------------- x seats allocated toa concerned party No. of votes of first party

first party

WHEREAS, applying the above formula, the results are as follows:

Party List Percentage Additional Seat

BAYAN MUNA 1.65 1

CIBAC 1.28 1

GABRIELA 1.05 1

APEC 1.05 1

A TEACHER 0.83 0

AKBAYAN 0.78 0

ALAGAD 0.71 0

BUTIL 0.69 0

COOP-NATCO 0.69 0

ANAKPAWIS 0.62 0

ARC 0.63 0

ABONO 0.57 0

NOW THEREFORE, by virtue of the powers vested in it by the Constitution, OmnibusElection Code, Executive Order No. 144, Republic Act Nos. 6646, 7166, 7941 and otherelections laws, the Commission on Elections en bancsitting as the National Board ofCanvassers, hereby RESOLVED, as it hereby RESOLVES, to proclaim the following parties,organizations or coalitions as entitled to additional seats, to wit:

Party List Additional Seats

BUHAY 2

BAYAN MUNA 1

CIBAC 1

GABRIELA 1

APEC 1


8/22

This is without prejudice to the proclamation of other parties, organizations orcoalitions which may later on be established to have obtained at least two per cent (2%) ofthe total votes cast under the party-list system to entitle them to one (1) guaranteed seat, orto the appropriate percentage of votes to entitle them to one (1) additional seat.

Finally, all proclamation of the nominees of concerned parties, organizations andcoalitions with pending disputes shall likewise be held in abeyance until final resolution oftheir respective cases.

Let the National Board of Canvassers Secretariat implement this Resolution,furnishing a copy hereof to the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Philippines.

SO ORDERED.[9]

Acting on BANATs petition, the NBC promulgated NBC Resolution No. 07-88 on 3 August 2007,

which reads as follows:

This pertains to the Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-ListRepresentatives Provided by the Constitution filed by the Barangay Association for National

Advancement and Transparency (BANAT).

Acting on the foregoing Petition of the Barangay Association for NationalAdvancement and Transparency (BANAT) party-list, Atty. Alioden D. Dalaig, Head, NationalBoard of Canvassers Legal Group submitted his comments/observations andrecommendation thereon [NBC 07-041 (PL)], which reads:

COMMENTS / OBSERVATIONS:

Petitioner Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency(BANAT), in its Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-ListRepresentatives Provided by the Constitution prayed for the following reliefs,to wit:

1. That the full number -- twenty percent (20%) -- of Party-Listrepresentatives as mandated by Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution shallbe proclaimed.

2. Paragraph (b), Section 11 of RA 7941 which prescribes the 2%threshold votes, should be harmonized with Section 5, Article VI of theConstitution and with Section 12 of the same RA 7941 in that it should be

applicable only to the first party-list representative seats to be allotted on thebasis of their initial/first ranking.

3. The 3-seat limit prescribed by RA 7941 shall be applied; and

4. Initially, all party-list groups shall be given the number of seatscorresponding to every 2% of the votes they received and the additional seatsshall be allocated in accordance with Section 12 of RA 7941, that is, inproportion to the percentage of votes obtained by each party-list group inrelation to the total nationwide votes cast in the party-list election, afterdeducting the corresponding votes of those which were allotted seats under


9/22

the 2% threshold rule. In fine, the formula/procedure prescribed in theALLOCATION OF PARTY-LIST SEATS, ANNEX A of COMELECRESOLUTION 2847 dated 25 June 1996, shall be used for [the] purpose ofdetermining how many seats shall be proclaimed, which party-list groups areentitled to representative seats and how many of their nominees shall seat[sic].

5. In the alternative, to declare as unconstitutional Section 11 of Republic

Act No. 7941 and that the procedure in allocating seats for party-listrepresentative prescribed by Section 12 of RA 7941 shall be followed.

RECOMMENDATION:

The petition of BANAT is now moot and academic.

The Commission En Banc in NBC Resolution No. 07-60 promulgated July9, 2007 reIn the Matter of the Canvass of Votes and Partial Proclamation ofthe Parties, Organizations and Coalitions Participating Under the Party-ListSystem During the May 14, 2007 National and Local Electionsresolvedamong others that the total number of seats of each winning party,

organization or coalition shall be determined pursuant to the VeteransFederation Party versus COMELEC formula upon completion of the canvassof the party-list results.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the National Board of Canvassers RESOLVED,as it hereby RESOLVES, to approve and adopt the recommendation of Atty. Alioden D.Dalaig, Head, NBC Legal Group, to DENY the herein petition of BANAT for being moot andacademic.

Let the Supervisory Committee implement this resolution.

SO ORDERED.[10]

BANAT filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus assailing the ruling in NBC Resolution No. 07-

88. BANAT did not file a motion for reconsideration of NBC Resolution No. 07-88.

On 9 July 2007, Bayan Muna, Abono, and A Teacher asked the COMELEC, acting as NBC, to

reconsider its decision to use the Veterans formula as stated in its NBC Resolution No. 07-60 because

the Veterans formula is violative of the Constitution and of Republic Act No. 7941 (R.A. No. 7941). On the

same day, the COMELEC denied reconsideration during the proceedings of the NBC.[11]

Aside from the thirteen party-list organizations proclaimed on 9 July 2007, the COMELEC proclaimed

three other party-list organizations as qualified parties entitled to one guaranteed seat under the Party-List

System: Agricultural Sector Alliance of the Philippines, Inc. (AGAP),[12]Anak Mindanao (AMIN),[13]and An

Waray.[14] Per the certification[15]by COMELEC, the following party-list organizations have been proclaimed

as of 19 May 2008:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn10


10/22

Party-List No. of Seat(s)

1.1 Buhay 3

1.2 Bayan Muna 2

1.3 CIBAC 2

1.4 Gabriela 2

1.5 APEC 2

1.6 A Teacher 1

1.7 Akbayan 1

1.8 Alagad 1

1.9 Butil 1

1.10 Coop-Natco [sic] 1

1.11 Anak Pawis 1

1.12 ARC 1

1.13 Abono 1

1.14 AGAP 1

1.15 AMIN 1

The proclamation of Bagong Alyansang Tagapagtaguyod ng Adhikaing Sambayanan (BATAS), against

which an Urgent Petition for Cancellation/Removal of Registration and Disqualification of Party-list Nominee

(with Prayer for the Issuance of Restraining Order) has been filed before the COMELEC, was deferred

pending final resolution of SPC No. 07-250.

Issues

BANAT brought the following issues before this Court:

1. Is the twenty percent allocation for party-list representatives provided inSection 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution mandatory or is it merely a ceiling?

2. Is the three-seat limit provided in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 constitutional?

3. Is the two percent threshold and qualifier votes prescribed by the sameSection 11(b) of RA 7941 constitutional?

4. How shall the party-list representatives be allocated?[16]
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn16


11/22

Bayan Muna, A Teacher, and Abono, on the other hand, raised the following issues in their petition:

I. Respondent Commission on Elections, acting as National Board of Canvassers,committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when itpromulgated NBC Resolution No. 07-60 to implement the First-Party Rule in theallocation of seats to qualified party-list organizations as said rule:

A. Violates the constitutional principle ofproportional representation.

B. Violates the provisions of RA 7941 particularly:

1. The 2-4-6 Formula used by the First Party Rule in allocatingadditional seats for the First Party violates the principle of proportionalrepresentation under RA 7941.

2. The use of two formulas in the allocation of additional seats, one forthe First Party and another for the qualifying parties, violates Section 11(b) of RA 7941.

3. The proportional relationships under the First Party Rule are differentfrom those required under RA 7941;

C. Violates the Four Inviolable Parameters of the Philippineparty-list system asprovided for under the same case of Veterans Federation Party, et al. v. COMELEC.

II. Presuming that the Commission on Elections did not commit grave abuse ofdiscretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it implemented the First-PartyRule in the allocation of seats to qualified party-list organizations, the same being merelyin consonance with the ruling in Veterans Federations Party, et al.v. COMELEC,the instant Petition is a justiciable case as the issues involved herein

are constitutional in nature, involving the correct interpretation and implementation ofRA 7941, and are of transcendental importance to our nation.[17]

Considering the allegations in the petitions and the comments of the parties in these cases, we

defined the following issues in our advisory for the oral arguments set on 22 April 2008:

1. Is the twenty percent allocation for party-list representatives in Section 5(2),Article VI of the Constitution mandatory or merely a ceiling?

2. Is the three-seat limit in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 constitutional?

3. Is the two percent threshold prescribed in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 to qualify forone seat constitutional?

4. How shall the party-list representative seats be allocated?

5. Does the Constitution prohibit the major political parties from participating in theparty-list elections? If not, can the major political parties be barred from participating in theparty-list elections?[18]
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn18http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn18http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn18http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn17


12/22

The Ruling of the Court

The petitions have partial merit. We maintain that a Philippine-style party-list election has at least

four inviolable parameters as clearly stated in Veterans. For easy reference, these are:

First, the twenty percent allocation the combined number of all party-list

congressmen shall not exceed twenty percent of the total membership of the House ofRepresentatives, including those elected under the party list;

Second, the two percent threshold only those parties garnering a minimum of twopercent of the total valid votes cast for the party-list system are qualified to have a seat inthe House of Representatives;

Third,the three-seat limit each qualified party, regardless of the number of votes itactually obtained, is entitled to a maximum of three seats; that is, one qualifying and twoadditional seats;

Fourth, proportional representation the additional seats which a qualified party is

entitled to shall be computed in proportion to their total number of votes.[19]

However, because the formula in Veterans has flaws in its mathematical interpretation of the term

proportional representation, this Court is compelled to revisit the formula for the allocation of additional

seats to party-list organizations.

Number of Party-List Representat ives:

The Form ula Mandated by the Consti tut io n

Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution provides:

Section 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than twohundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected fromlegislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila areain accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniformand progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.

(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the totalnumber of representatives including those under the party-list. For three consecutive termsafter the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-listrepresentatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the labor,peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such other sectorsas may be provided by law, except the religious sector.

The first paragraph of Section 11 of R.A. No. 7941 reads:


13/22

Section 11. Number of Party-List Representatives. The party-list representativesshall constitute twenty per centum (20%) of the total number of the members of the House ofRepresentatives including those under the party-list.

x x x

Section 5(1), Article VI of the Constitution states that the House of Representatives shall be

composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law. The House of

Representatives shall be composed of district representatives and party-list representatives. The

Constitution allows the legislature to modify the number of the members of the House of Representatives.

Section 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution, on the other hand, states the ratio of party-list

representatives to the total number of representatives. We compute the number of seats available to party-

list representatives from the number of legislative districts. On this point, we do not deviate from the first

formula in Veterans, thus:

Number of seats available

to legislative districts x .20 =

Number of seats available to

party-list representatives

.80

This formula allows for the corresponding increase in the number of seats available for party-list

representatives whenever a legislative district is created by law. Since the 14 thCongress of the Philippines

has 220 district representatives, there are 55 seats available to party-list representatives.

220 x .20 = 55

.80

After prescribing the ratio of the number of party-list representatives to the total number of

representatives, the Constitution left the manner of allocating the seats available to party-list

representatives to the wisdom of the legislature.

Allocation of Seats for Party-List Representat ives:

The Statutory Limits Presented by t he Two Percent Threshold

and the Thr ee-Seat Cap

All parties agree on the formula to determine the maximum number of seats reserved under the

Party-List System, as well as on the formula to determine the guaranteed seats to party-list candidates


14/22

garnering at least two-percent of the total party-list votes. However, there are numerous interpretations of

the provisions of R.A. No. 7941 on the allocation of additional seatsunder the Party-List

System. Veteransproduced the First Party Rule,[20]and Justice Vicente V. Mendozas dissent

in Veteranspresented Germanys Niemeyer formula[21]as an alternative.

The Constitution left to Congress the determination of the manner of allocating the seats for party-

list representatives. Congress enacted R.A. No. 7941, paragraphs (a) and (b) of Section 11 and Section

12 of which provide:

Section 11. Number of Party-List Representatives.x x x

In determining the allocation of seats for the second vote,[22]the following procedureshall be observed:

(a) The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the highest to thelowest based on the number of votes they garnered during the elections.

(b) The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two percent (2%) of thetotal votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one seat each: Provided, Thatthose garnering more than two percent (2%) of the votes shall be entitled to additionalseats in proportion to their total number of votes: Provided, finally, That each party,organization, or coalition shall be entitled to not more than three (3) seats.

Section 12. Procedure in Allocating Seats for Party-List Representatives. TheCOMELEC shall tally all the votes for the parties, organizations, or coalitions on a nationwidebasis, rank them according to the number of votes received and allocate party-listrepresentatives proportionately according to the percentage of votes obtained by each party,organization, or coalition as against the total nationwide votes cast for the party-list system.(Emphasis supplied)

In G.R. No. 179271, BANAT presents two interpretations through three formulas to allocate party-list

representative seats.

The first interpretation allegedly harmonizes the provisions of Section 11(b) on the 2% requirement

with Section 12 of R.A. No. 7941. BANAT described this procedure as follows:

(a) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty percent (20%) of the totalMembers of the House of Representatives including those from the party-list groups asprescribed by Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution, Section 11 (1stpar.) of RA 7941 andComelec Resolution No. 2847 dated 25 June 1996. Since there are 220 DistrictRepresentatives in the 14thCongress, there shall be 55 Party-List Representatives. All seatsshall have to be proclaimed.

(b) All party-list groups shall initially be allotted one (1) seat for every two per centum(2%) of the total party-list votes they obtained; provided, that no party-list groups shall havemore than three (3) seats (Section 11, RA 7941).
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn20http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn20http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn20http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn20


15/22


16/22

Table 1. Ranking of the participating parties from the highest to the lowest based on thenumber of votes garnered during the elections.[27]

The first clause of Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941 states that parties, organizations, andcoalitions receiving at least two percent (2%) of the total votes cast for the party-list system

shall be entitled to one seat each. This clause guarantees a seat to the two-percenters. InTable 2 below, we use the first 20 party-list candidates for illustration purposes. Thepercentage of votes garnered by each party is arrived at by dividing the number of votesgarnered by each party by 15,950,900, the total number of votes cast for all party-listcandidates.

Table 2. The first 20 party-list candidates and their respective percentage of votes garneredover the total votes for the party-list.[28]

From Table 2 above, we see that only 17 party-list candidates received at least 2% from the total

number of votes cast for party-list candidates. The 17 qualified party-list candidates, or the two-percenters,

are the party-list candidates that are entitled to one seat each, or the guaranteed seat. In this first round of

seat allocation, we distributed 17 guaranteed seats.

The second clause of Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941 provides that those garnering more than two

percent (2%) of the votes shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of

votes. This is where petitioners and intervenors problem with the formula

in Veterans lies. Veteransinterprets the clause in proportion to their total number of votes to be in

proportion to the votes of the first party. This interpretation is contrary to the express language of R.A.

No. 7941.

We rule that, in computing the allocation of additional seats, the continued operation of the two

percent threshold for the distribution of the additional seats as found in the second clause of Section 11(b)

of R.A. No. 7941 is unconstitutional. This Court finds that the two percent threshold makes it

mathematically impossible to achieve the maximum number of available party list seats when the number of

available party list seats exceeds 50. The continued operation of the two percent threshold in the

distribution of the additional seats frustrates the attainment of the permissive ceiling that 20% of the

members of the House of Representatives shall consist of party-list representatives.

To illustrate: There are 55 available party-list seats. Suppose there are 50 million votes cast for the

100 participants in the party list elections. A party that has two percent of the votes cast, or one million

votes, gets a guaranteed seat. Let us further assume that the first 50 parties all get one million votes. Only

50 parties get a seat despite the availability of 55 seats. Because of the operation of the two percent

threshold, this situation will repeat itself even if we increase the available party-list seats to 60 seats and

even if we increase the votes cast to 100 million. Thus, even if the maximum number of parties get two

percent of the votes for every party, it is always impossible for the number of occupied party-list seats to

exceed 50 seats as long as the two percent threshold is present.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn27


17/22

We therefore strike down the two percent threshold only in relation to the distribution of the additional

seats as found in the second clause of Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941. The two percent threshold presents

an unwarranted obstacle to the full implementation of Section 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution and

prevents the attainment of the broadest possible representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the

House of Representatives.[30]

In determining the allocation of seats for party-list representatives under Section 11 of R.A. No. 7941,

the following procedure shall be observed:

1. The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the highest to the lowest based

on the number of votes they garnered during the elections.

2. The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two percent (2%) of the total votes

cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one guaranteed seat each.

3. Those garnering sufficient number of votes, according to the ranking in paragraph 1, shall be

entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes until all the additional seats are

allocated.

4. Each party, organization, or coalition shall be entitled to not more than three (3) seats.

In computing the additional seats, the guaranteed seats shall no longer be included because they

have already been allocated, at one seat each, to every two-percenter. Thus, the remaining available seats

for allocation as additional seats are the maximum seats reserved under the Party List System less the

guaranteed seats. Fractional seats are disregarded in the absence of a provision in R.A. No. 7941 allowing

for a rounding off of fractional seats.

In declaring the two percent threshold unconstitutional, we do not limit our allocation of additional

seats in Table 3 below to the two-percenters. The percentage of votes garnered by each party-list

candidate is arrived at by dividing the number of votes garnered by each party by 15,950,900, the total

number of votes cast for party-list candidates. There are two steps in the second round of seat allocation.

First, the percentage is multiplied by the remaining available seats, 38, which is the difference between the

55 maximum seats reserved under the Party-List System and the 17 guaranteed seats of the two-

percenters. The whole integer of the product of the percentage and of the remaining available seats

corresponds to a partys share in the remaining available seats. Second, we assign one party-list seat to

each of the parties next in rank until all available seats are completely distributed. We distributed all of the

remaining 38 seats in the second round of seat allocation. Finally, we apply the three-seat cap to determine

the number of seats each qualified party-list candidate is entitled. Thus:


18/22

Table 3. Distribution of Available Party-List Seats

Applying the procedure of seat allocation as illustrated in Table 3 above, there are 55 party-list

representatives from the 36 winning party-list organizations. All 55 available party-list seats are filled. The

additional seats allocated to the parties with sufficient number of votes for one whole seat, in no case toexceed a total of three seats for each party, are shown in column (D).

Part ic ipation of Major Poli t ical Part ies in Party-List Elections

The Constitutional Commission adopted a multi-party system that allowed all political parties to

participate in the party-list elections. The deliberations of the Constitutional Commission clearly bear

this out, thus:

MR. MONSOD. Madam President, I just want to say that we suggested or proposedthe party list system because we wanted to open up the political system to a pluralisticsociety through a multiparty system. x x x We are for opening up the system, and wewould like very much for the sectors to be there. That is why one of the ways to dothat is to put a ceiling on the number of representatives from any single party that cansit within the 50 allocated under the party list system. x x x.

x x x

MR. MONSOD. Madam President, the candidacy for the 198 seats is not limited topolitical parties. My question is this: Are we going to classify for example ChristianDemocrats and Social Democrats as political parties? Can they run under the party list

concept or must they be under the district legislation side of it only?

MR. VILLACORTA. In reply to that query, I think these parties that the Commissionermentioned can field candidates for the Senate as well as for the House ofRepresentatives. Likewise, they can also field sectoral candidates for the 20 percent or30 percent, whichever is adopted, of the seats that we are allocating under the partylist system.

MR. MONSOD. In other words, the Christian Democrats can field district candidatesand can also participate in the party list system?

MR. VILLACORTA. Why not? When they come to the party list system, they will

be fielding only sectoral candidates.

MR. MONSOD. May I be clarified on that? Can UNIDO participate in the party listsystem?

MR. VILLACORTA. Yes, why not? For as long as they field candidates whocome from the different marginalized sectors that we shall designate in thisConstitution.

MR. MONSOD. Suppose Senator Taada wants to run under BAYAN group andsays that he represents the farmers, would he qualify?


19/22

MR. VILLACORTA. No, Senator Taada would not qualify.

MR. MONSOD. But UNIDO can field candidates under the party list system and sayJuan dela Cruz is a farmer. Who would pass on whether he is a farmer or not?

MR. TADEO. Kay Commissioner Monsod, gusto ko lamang linawin ito. Politicalparties, particularly minority political parties, are not prohibited to participate in the

party list election if they can prove that they are also organized along sectoral lines.

MR. MONSOD. What the Commissioner is saying is that all political parties canparticipate because it is precisely the contention of political parties that they represent thebroad base of citizens and that all sectors are represented in them. Would theCommissioner agree?

MR. TADEO. Ang punto lamang namin, pag pinayagan mo ang UNIDO na isangpolitical party, it will dominate the party list at mawawalang saysay din yungsector. Lalamunin mismo ng political parties ang party list system. Gusto ko lamang bigyanng diin ang reserve. Hindi ito reserve seat sa marginalized sectors. Kung titingnan natinitong 198 seats, reserved din ito sa political parties.

MR. MONSOD. Hindi po reserved iyon kasi anybody can run there. But my questionto Commissioner Villacorta and probably also to Commissioner Tadeo is that under thissystem, would UNIDO be banned from running under the party list system?

MR. VILLACORTA. No, as I said, UNIDO may field sectoral candidates. On thatcondition alone, UNIDO may be allowed to register for the party list system.

MR. MONSOD. May I inquire from Commissioner Tadeo if he shares that answer?

MR. TADEO. The same.

MR. VILLACORTA. Puwede po ang UNIDO, pero sa sectoral lines.

x x x x

MR. OPLE. x x x In my opinion, this will also create the stimulus for political partiesand mass organizations to seek common ground. For example, we have the PDP-Labanand the UNIDO. I see no reason why they should not be able to make common goals withmass organizations so that the very leadership of these parties can be transformed throughthe participation of mass organizations. And if this is true of the administration parties, thiswill be true of others like the Partido ng Bayan which is now being formed. There is noquestion that they will be attractive to many mass organizations. In the opposition parties towhich we belong, there will be a stimulus for us to contact mass organizations so that with

their participation, the policies of such parties can be radically transformed because thisamendment will create conditions that will challenge both the mass organizations and thepolitical parties to come together. And the party list system is certainly available, although itis open to all the parties. It is understood that the parties will enter in the roll of theCOMELEC the names of representatives of mass organizations affiliated with them. So thatwe may, in time, develop this excellent system that they have in Europe where labororganizations and cooperatives, for example, distribute themselves either in the SocialDemocratic Party and the Christian Democratic Party in Germany, and their very presencethere has a transforming effect upon the philosophies and the leadership of those parties.


20/22

It is also a fact well known to all that in the United States, the AFL-CIO always votewith the Democratic Party. But the businessmen, most of them, always vote with theRepublican Party, meaning that there is no reason at all why political parties and massorganizations should not combine, reenforce, influence and interact with each other so thatthe very objectives that we set in this Constitution for sectoral representation are achieved ina wider, more lasting, and more institutionalized way. Therefore, I support this [Monsod-Villacorta] amendment. It installs sectoral representation as a constitutional gift, but at thesame time, it challenges the sector to rise to the majesty of being elected representatives

later on through a party list system; and even beyond that, to become actual political partiescapable of contesting political power in the wider constitutional arena for major politicalparties.

x x x[32](Emphasis supplied)

R.A. No. 7941 provided the details for the concepts put forward by the Constitutional

Commission. Section 3 of R.A. No. 7941 reads:

Definition of Terms.(a) The party-list system is a mechanism of proportionalrepresentation in the election of representatives to the House of Representatives fromnational, regional and sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof registered with

the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Component parties or organizations of a coalitionmay participate independently provided the coalition of which they form part does notparticipate in the party-list system.

(b) A party means either a political party or a sectoral party or a coalition of parties.

(c) A political party refers to an organized group of citizens advocating an ideology orplatform, principles and policies for the general conduct of government and which, as themost immediate means of securing their adoption, regularly nominates and supports certainof its leaders and members as candidates for public office.

It is a national party when its constituency is spread over the geographical territory of

at least a majority of the regions. It is a regional party when its constituency is spread overthe geographical territory of at least a majority of the cities and provinces comprising theregion.

(d) A sectoral party refers to an organized group of citizens belonging to any of thesectors enumerated in Section 5 hereof whose principal advocacy pertains to the specialinterests and concerns of their sector,

(e) A sectoral organization refers to a group of citizens or a coalition of groups ofcitizens who share similar physical attributes or characteristics, employment, interests orconcerns.

(f) A coalition refers to an aggrupation of duly registered national, regional, sectoralparties or organizations for political and/or election purposes.

Congress, in enacting R.A. No. 7941, put the three-seat cap to prevent any party from dominating the party-

list elections.

Neither the Constitution nor R.A. No. 7941 prohibits major political parties from participating in the

party-list system. On the contrary, the framers of the Constitution clearly intended the major political parties


21/22

to participate in party-list elections through their sectoral wings. In fact, the members of the Constitutional

Commission voted down, 19-22, any permanent sectoral seats, and in the alternative the reservation of the

party-list system to the sectoral groups.[33] In defining a party that participates in party-list elections as

either a political party or a sectoral party, R.A. No. 7941 also clearly intended that major political parties

will participate in the party-list elections. Excluding the major political parties in party-list elections is

manifestly against the Constitution, the intent of the Constitutional Commission, and R.A. No. 7941. This

Court cannot engage in socio-political engineering and judicially legislate the exclusion of major political

parties from the party-list elections in patent violation of the Constitution and the law.

Read together, R.A. No. 7941 and the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission state that major

political parties are allowed to establish, or form coalitions with, sectoral organizations for electoral or

political purposes. There should not be a problem if, for example, the Liberal Party participates in the party-

list election through the Kabataang Liberal ng Pilipinas (KALIPI), its sectoral youth wing. The other major

political parties can thus organize, or affiliate with, their chosen sector or sectors. To further illustrate, the

Nacionalista Party can establish a fisherfolk wing to participate in the party-list election, and this

fisherfolk wing can field its fisherfolk nominees. Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino (KAMPI) can do the same

for the urban poor.

The qualifications of party-list nominees are prescribed in Section 9 of R.A. No. 7941:

Qualifications of Party-List Nominees. No person shall be nominated as party-listrepresentative unless he is a natural born citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter, a

resident of the Philippines for a period of not less than one (1) year immediately precedingthe day of the elections, able to read and write, bona fidemember of the party ororganization which he seeks to represent for at least ninety (90) days preceding the day ofthe election, and is at least twenty-five (25) years of age on the day of the election.

In case of a nominee of the youth sector, he must at least be twenty-five (25) but notmore than thirty (30) years of age on the day of the election. Any youth sectoralrepresentative who attains the age of thirty (30) during his term shall be allowed tocontinue until the expiration of his term.

Under Section 9 of R.A. No. 7941, it is not necessary that the party-list organizations nominee wallow in

poverty, destitution and infirmity[34]

as there is no financial status required in the law. It is enough that thenominee of the sectoral party/organization/coalition belongs to the marginalized and underrepresented

sectors,[35]that is, if the nominee represents the fisherfolk, he or she must be a fisherfolk, or if the nominee

represents the senior citizens, he or she must be a senior citizen.

Neither the Constitution nor R.A. No. 7941 mandates the filling-up of the entire 20% allocation of

party-list representatives found in the Constitution. The Constitution, in paragraph 1, Section 5 of Article VI,

left the determination of the number of the members of the House of Representatives to Congress: The
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn33http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn33http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn33http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn34http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn34http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn34http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn34http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/179271.htm#_ftn33


22/22

House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless

otherwise fixed by law, x x x. The 20% allocation of party-list representatives is merely a ceiling; party-list

representatives cannot be more than 20% of the members of the House of Representatives. However, we

cannot allow the continued existence of a provision in the law which will systematically prevent the

constitutionally allocated 20% party-list representatives from being filled. The three-seat cap, as a limitation

to the number of seats that a qualified party-list organization may occupy, remains a valid statutory device

that prevents any party from dominating the party-list elections. Seats for party-list representatives shall

thus be allocated in accordance with the procedure used in Table 3 above.

However, by a vote of 8-7, the Court decided to continue the ruling in Veteransdisallowing major

political parties from participating in the party-list elections, directly or indirectly. Those who voted to

continue disallowing major political parties from the party-list elections joined Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno

in his separate opinion. On the formula to allocate party-list seats, the Court is unanimous in concurring

with thisponencia.

WHEREFORE,we PARTIALLY GRANT the petition. We SET ASIDE the Resolution of the

COMELEC dated 3 August 2007 in NBC No. 07-041 (PL) as well as the Resolution dated 9 July 2007 in

NBC No. 07-60. We declare unconstitutional the two percent threshold in the distribution of additional

party-list seats. The allocation of additional seats under the Party-List System shall be in accordance with

the procedure used in Table 3 of this Decision. Major political parties are disallowed from participating in

party-list elections. This Decision is immediately executory. No pronouncement as to costs.

SO ORDERED.

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	roland-s-alivio
View:	226 times
Download:	0 times

Banat vs Comelec-full

Documents