LEGAL RESEARCH

THE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM: REMOVING BARRIERS

Submitted to:
Atty. Nel Ediza

Submitted by:
Odessa Rieca Ancajas
Section B
TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

II. DEFINITION OF TERMS

III. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

IV. RELEVANT LAWS

a. Pitfalls and Potentials

V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

 Purpose of the Study

The 1987 Constitution introduced a list of proportional representation scheme

that paved the way for marginalized sectors to be represented in the corridors of

power. Early on, the reform constituency acknowledged the promise of the party-list

system but were later frustrated by its sloppy implementation. Since its inception the

party list has been saddled by problems of its definition, implementation and

interpretation. The issues can be broadly categorized into issues of representation and

issues of integration (The quest for a Federal Republic, Teehankee).

This study will mostly focus on the issue of representation. Whether the party-

list representatives truly represent the marginalized as was intended for its enactment

or has it been exploited by rich businessmen and political families vying for more power

in Congress.
 Definition of Terms

Proportional representation - characterizes electoral systems in which divisions in an

electorate are reflected proportionately in the elected body. If n% of the electorate

support a particular political party as their favorite, then roughly n% of seats will be

won by that party.

Marginalized - relegated to a marginal position within a society or group.

Underrepresented - to give inadequate representation to; represent in numbers that

are disproportionately low.

A party - means either a political party or a sectoral party or a coalition of parties.

A sectoral party - refers to an organized group of citizens belonging to any of the

sectors enumerated in Section 5 of the Party-List System Act whose principal

advocacy pertains to the special interest and concerns of their sector

A political party - is an organized group of people who have the same ideology, or

who otherwise have the same political positions, and who field candidates

for elections, in an attempt to get them elected and thereby implement the party's

agenda.

Advocacy - a person who publicly supports or recommends a cause or policy.

 Background of the Study

The Party-list System was an innovation of the 1987 Constitution, it was

instituted to fulfill a noble role: to promote proportional representation and help

marginalized sectors have a voice in Congress. This Act was intended to elect

competent parties with comprehensive program-based advocacies. Under section 2

of Republic Act No. 7941 The Party-List System Act “which will enable Filipino citizens

belonging to the marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and

parties, and who lack well-defined political constituencies but who could contribute to

the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation”. One of the members of the

1986 Constitutional Commission, Rene V. Sarmiento explicitly stated that the party-

list system is “social justice tool and a people empowerment vehicle, is a window for

the Filipino poor to partake in the affairs of the State which is traditionally dominated

by parties with well oiled and funded electoral machineries”. And yet despite all these

noble contentions, the issues arising today is the exploitation of the party-list system

act, some are into abolishment and some want to strengthen the law.

Just recently President Rodrigo Duterte during his speech in Cagayan de Oro

stated that the party-list system is being exploited by wealthy politicians, “The rich

people fund the party lists. They are named after laborers, but their nominees

are…millionares”. Albay 1st district rep. Edcel Lagman, who was the principal author

of this law, during a news conference commented that this law has been bastardized

by the COMELEC and “even the supreme court has come out with rulings which is not

consistent with the spirit of the law”.

 On the other hand, Akbayan representative Tom Villarin commented that “Not

all party-lists are bad. The party list was instituted by framers of the 1987 constitution

to enhance proportional representation and uplift the plight of Filipinos, including

underrepresented sectors”. Party-list representatives helped in passing landmark

measures like the reproductive health law, the Sangguniang Kabataan Reform Law

and the Philippine Competition Act. There are still well-meaning groups that are

actively pursuing the interests of the sector they represent in Congress.

 RELEVANT LAWS

On March 3, 1995, Republic Act No. 7941 “An act providing for the election of

party-list representatives through the party-list system, and appropriating funds

therefor” otherwise known as the Party-List System Act was signed into law. It

mandated that “the state shall promote proportional representation in the election of

representatives to the House of Representatives through a party-list system. The five

political parties with the highest number of members at the start of the 10th Congress

of the Philippines were banned from participating. Each voter can vote only one party

then the votes are tallied nationwide as one large district. The law provides that 20%

of the total number of the members of the House of Representatives be allocated to

party-list organizations. There are 61 seats allocated for party-list organizations last

May 2019 elections. A party-list group that secures at least 2% of the total votes is

entitled to at least 1 slot in the House during the first round of seat allocation.

COMELEC shall rank the groups according to the number of votes received and

allocate the party-list seats proportionately to the percentage of votes obtained by

each group. A party can win a maximum of three seats if it surpasses 6% of the

national vote.

Under section 5 of RA 7941 any organized group of persons may register as a

party, organization or coalition for purposes of the party-list system by filing with the

COMELEC not later than ninety (90) days before the election a petition verified by its

president or secretary stating its desire to participate in the party-list system as a

national, regional or sectoral party or organization or a coalition of such parties or

organizations, attaching thereto its constitution, by-laws, platform or program of

government, list of officers, coalition agreement and other relevant information as the

COMELEC may require: Provided, That the sectors shall include labor, peasant,

fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, women,

youth, veterans, overseas workers, and professionals.

Furthermore under section 6, COMELEC may upon verified complaint of any

interested party, refuse or cancel, after due notice and hearing, the registration of any

national, regional or sectoral party, organization or coalition on any of the following

grounds:

(1) It is a religious sect or denomination, organization or association, organized

for religious purposes;

(2) It advocates violence or unlawful means to seek its goal;

(3) It is a foreign party or organization;

(4) It is receiving support from any foreign government, foreign political party,

foundation, organization, whether directly or through any of its officers or

members or indirectly through third parties for partisan election purposes;

(5) It violates or fails to comply with laws, rules or regulations relating to

elections;

(6) It declares untruthful statements in its petition;

(7) It has ceased to exist for at least one (1) year; or

 (8) It fails to participate in the last two (2) preceding elections or fails to obtain

at least two per centum (2%) of the votes cast under the party-list system in the

two (2) preceding elections for the constituency in which it has registered.

The law was first used for the 1998 election and several parties did meet the 2%

quota during the succeeding elections. However, they did not fill up the required 20%

allocations for the party-list which made the 3 seats maximum limitation useless.

In recent years filling up the party-list seats is not a problem since the 2013

Supreme Court ruling. Lagman observed that this has allowed participation of large

parties and traditional politicians, as well as the rich and powerful, to abuse the system.

For more than a decade, Ang Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC (2001), served to

ensure that participation in the Party-List System be limited to representatives of

marginalized and underprivileged sectors. However, in Atong Paglaum, et. al. v.

COMELEC (2013) the rules are redefined. Justice Antonio T. Carpio wrote, “the party-

list system is not for sectoral parties only, but also for non-sectoral parties” Torres-

Pilapil (The origins of the party-list electoral system, 2015) enumerated the differences

between the two landmark cases:

Whereas Ang Bagong Bayani ruled that the party list is exclusively for

parties and organizations that represent the marginalized and

underrepresented sectors, Atong Paglaum ruled that the party list is now

also open to national and regional parties and organizations that are not

organized along sectoral lines and do not represent any marginalized and

underrepresented sectors. Whereas Ang Bagong Bayani ruled that political

parties that dominated the single-member district elections for the House of
 Representatives in 1995 are barred from the party list, Atong Paglaum ruled

that any political party that runs candidates in the single-member district

elections can now participate in the party list through it sectoral wing. And

whereas Ang Bagong Bayani ruled that the nominee themselves must

belong to the marginalized and underrepresented secretors they represent,

Atong Paglaum ruled that for the nominees of sectoral parties, a track record

in representing the marginalized and underrepresented sectors is enough.

Pitfalls

Much of the criticisms against the party-list system is concentrated at the

bastardization of its original objectives of representing the interests of the marginalized

sectors of society. Philippine politics has a way of mangling even the noblest of

intentions. In the most recent 2019 elections 46 of the 134 participants have at least

one nominee linked to a political clan or powerful figure in the country (Rappler).

Political dynasties have successfully divided bulk of the part-list seats amongst

themselves, with traditional families rapidly discovering that it could be easier to have

one of their kin to set up or even buy a party-list group to enter Congress. For example,

“Probinsyano ako” won 2 seats last May 2019 elections with representatives Rudy and

Lira Farinas. Rudys Caesar G. Farinas I – his father is Rodolfo Farinas, the

representative of Ilocos Norte’s 1st district in the 11th, 15th, 16th, 17th Congress and a

former mayor of Laoag and Governor of Ilocos Norte. His sister Ria Christina is a

member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Ilocos Norte. His cousin-in-law Chevylle

Farinas is the Mayor of Laoag. Lira R. Fuster-Farinas – her mother-in-law is Laoag

Mayor Chevylle Farinas. Her father-in-law is the late vice mayor of Laoag Michael

Farinas, a nephew of Ilocos Norte Representative Rodolfo Farinas. Lira is married ot

Laoag City Administrator John Michael Farinas. With a long list of political ties, clearly

their business is to be in politics.

Another is regarding the issue of misrepresentation of Ronald Cardema and

other nominess of the Duterte Youth Partylist that are currently facing possible

detention by COMELEC. Allegedly they had committed the criminal offense when he

stated under oath that he is qualified to represent the youth sector. Under the party-

list system act, a nominee of the youth sector must not be more than 30 yrs of age on

the day of the election. COMELEC Commissioner Guanzon said that during hearings

Cardema has admitted to being 34 years old. Clearly he is overaged to represent the

youth sector.

Potentials

In the landmark case of Ang Bagong Bayani vs. COMELEC, the Supreme Court

said that the party list system is a social justice tool designed not only to give more

law to the great masses of our people who have less in life, but also to enable them to

become veritable lawmakers themselves, empowered to participate directly in the

enactment of laws designed to benefit them. If done right this could have great impact

to our society. It opens the political process beyond one or two dominating parties. A

party-list system can help create a healthy democracy, providing a citizen’s voice in

Congress and in local government. Political parties are strengthened, encouraging

program and platform-based politics instead of weak affiliations between opportunists.

They push their party’s programs in Congress. They are accountable to the party they

represent.
 Conclusions and Recommendations

The Party-list system has its advantages and disadvantages. It was made for a

noble cause but corrupted by politicians. Instead of representing the poor and

marginalized it has become an electoral vehicle for the rich businessmen, political

dynasties and people who want the money and power that comes from being in

Congress. Just the status of being a Congressman gives power to a wealthy

businessman. More seats in Congress means more power to those whose relatives

are senators or house representatives. Specially with the recent ruling by the Supreme

Court in Atong Paglaum gives way for the rich and powerful to run for Congress. Do

they have the interest of serving the filipino people or themselves?

My recommendation would be to strengthen this Act because I still believe in

the original intention of the framers of the Constitution to represent the marginalized

and underrepresented. My advice would be to give a definite definition to who are the

marginalized and underrepresented, for COMELEC to be stricter in applying of the

law, to do adequate background check on the nominees.