G.R. NO.

203766 : April 2, 2013

ATONG PAGLAUM, INC., represented by its President, Mr. Alan

Igot, Petitioner, v.COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.

Case Nature: SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS in the Supreme Court. Certiorari and
Prohibition. [GRANTED, Remanded to COMELEC under new parameters set by the
Court]

FACTS:
• These cases constitute 54 Petitions for Certiorari and Petitions for
Certiorari and Prohibition1 filed by 52 party-list groups and
organizations assailing the Resolutions issued by the Commission on
Elections (COMELEC) disqualifying them from participating in the 13
May 2013 party-list elections, either by denial of their petitions for
registration under the party-list system, or cancellation of their
registration and accreditation as party-list organizations.

• Pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act No. 7941 and COMELEC Resolution Nos.
9366 and 9531, approximately 280 groups and organizations registered and
manifested their desire to participate in the 13 May 2013 party-list elections

• December 5, 2012, the COMELEC En Banc affirmed the COMELEC Second Division’s
resolution to grant Partido ng Bayan ng Bida’s (PBB) registration and accreditation as
a political party in the National Capital Region. However, PBB was denied
participation in the elections because PBB does not represent any "marginalized and
underrepresented" sector.

• 13 petitioners were not able to secure a mandatory injunction from the Court. The
COMELEC, on 7 January 2013 issued Resolution No. 9604, and excluded the names of
these 13 petitioners in the printing of the official.

• Pursuant to paragraph 2 of Resolution No. 9513, the COMELEC En Banc scheduled

summary evidentiary hearings to determine whether the groups and organizations
that filed manifestations of intent to participate in the elections have continually
complied with the requirements of R.A. No. 7941 and Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor
Party v. COMELEC (Ang Bagong Bayani).

• 39 petitioners were able to secure a mandatory injunction from the Court, directing
the COMELEC to include the names of these 39 petitioners in the printing of the
official ballot for the elections.

• Petitioners prayed for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or writ of
preliminary injunction. This Court issued Status Quo Ante Orders in all petitions.

• In disqualifying petitioners, the COMELEC used the criteria prescribed in Ang

Bagong Bayani and BANAT. First, the political party, sector, organization or
coalition must represent the marginalized and underrepresented groups identified
 in Section 5 of RA 7941. Seventh, not only the candidate party or organization must
represent marginalized and underrepresented sectors; so also must its nominees.

ISSUE:

1. Whether or not COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or

excess of jurisdiction in disqualifying 52 party list groups from participating in the
May 2013 elections [NO]
2. Whether or not the criteria for participating in the party-list system laid down in Ang
Bagong Bayani and BANAT vs COMELEC should be applied in the coming May 2013
party-list election [NO]

HELD:
1. No. The COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in following prevailing
decisions of this Court in disqualifying petitioners from participating in the coming 13
May 2013 party-list elections. What COMELEC did was merely follow existing
jurisprudence set forth by the SC in its earlier rulings.
2. No. Since the Court adopts new parameters in the qualification of the party-list
system, thereby abandoning the rulings in the decisions applied by the COMELEC in
disqualifying petitioners, the Court remand to the COMELEC all the present
petitions for the COMELEC to determine who are qualified to register under the
party-list system, and to participate in the coming elections, under the new
parameters prescribed in this Decision.
i. Three different groups may participate in the party-list system: (1) national
parties or organizations, (2) regional parties or organizations, and (3)
sectoral parties or organizations.
ii. National parties or organizations and regional parties or organizations do
not need to organize along sectoral lines and do not need to represent any
"marginalized and underrepresented" sector.
iii. Political parties can participate in party-list elections provided they register
under the party-list system and do not field candidates in legislative
district elections. A political party, whether major or not, that fields
candidates in legislative district elections can participate in party-list
elections only through its sectoral wing that can separately register under
the party-list system. The sectoral wing is by itself an independent sectoral
party, and is linked to a political party through a coalition.
iv. Sectoral parties or organizations may either be "marginalized and
underrepresented" or lacking in "well-defined political constituencies." It is
enough that their principal advocacy pertains to the special interest and
concerns of their sector. The sectors that are "marginalized and
underrepresented" include labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor,
indigenous cultural communities, handicapped, veterans, and overseas
workers. The sectors that lack "well-defined political constituencies"
include professionals, the elderly, women, and the youth.
v. A majority of the members of sectoral parties or organizations that
represent the "marginalized and underrepresented" must belong to the
"marginalized and underrepresented" sector they represent. Similarly, a
 majority of the members of sectoral parties or organizations that lack
"well-defined political constituencies" must belong to the sector they
represent. The nominees of sectoral parties or organizations that
represent the "marginalized and underrepresented," or that represent
those who lack "well-defined political constituencies," either must belong
to their respective sectors, or must have a track record of advocacy for
their respective sectors. The nominees of national and regional parties or
organizations must be bona-fide members of such parties or organizations.
vi. National, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations shall not be
disqualified if some of their nominees are disqualified, provided that they
have at least one nominee who remains qualified.

Decision: The Court remands the cases back to COMELEC to determine whether or not the
52 petitioners are qualified to participate in the May 2013 elections using the six
parameters laid down by the Court.

Other details:
Q: Where can the party-list system be found in the 1987 Constitution?
A: Section 5, Art. VI; Sections 7 and 8, Art. IX-C

Q: What is the rationale behind the party-list system?

A: To democratize political power by giving political parties that cannot win in legislative
district elections a chance to win seats in the House of Representatives.

Q: Is the party-list system synonymous with sectoral representation?

A: No. Under the party-list system, all voters get to have two votes: one for their choice of
legislative district representative, and another for their choice of party-list representative.
But under sectoral representation, majority of the electorate will only have one vote, which
is for their choice of legislative district representative. In contrast, members of sectoral
communities (e.g. farmers, laborers, indigenous cultural communities, etc.) will have two
votes: one for their district representative and another for their choice of sectoral
representative. In other words, sectoral representation is discriminatory.

Q: Is the party-list system exclusive to sectoral parties?

A: No. The party-list system is open to both sectoral and non-sectoral groups. The framers
intended sectoral groups to constitute a part, but not the entirety, of the party-list system.

Q: Who can participate in party-list elections?

A: As per Section 5(1) of Art. VI of the 1987 Constitution, any of the following can take part
in party-list elections: national parties and organizations, regional parties and organizations,
and sectoral parties and organizations.

Q: What is the enabling law of the party-list system?

A: RA No. 7941, or the Party-List System Act.
Q: Do party-list groups need to represent the marginalized and underrepresented sectors?
A: No. Art. 6 of RA No. 7941 identifies six grounds for disqualification of a party-list group,
and none of these grounds touches on the failure of a party to represent the marginalized
and underrepresented. For non-sectoral groups, it is enough that its members are united in
their cause or ideology. But for sectoral groups, a majority of their members must come
from marginalized and underrepresented sectors.

Q: What are the marginalized and underrepresented sectors?

A: Section 5 of RA No. 7941 lists the following as marginalized and underrepresented
sectors: labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities,
handicapped, veterans, overseas workers, and other similar sectors.

Q: Can major political parties join in party-list elections?

A: Yes, but only through their sectoral wings. The initial impression is that: (a) major political
parties do not represent marginalized and underrepresented sectors, and (b) major political
parties have well-defined constituencies. However, the 1987 Constitution and RA No. 7941
allow them to participate in party-list elections so as to encourage them to work assiduously
in extending their constituencies to the marginalized and underrepresented and those who
lack well-defined constituencies. The creation of sectoral wings is allowed as per Section 3
of RA No. 7941.

Q: Should party-list nominees be part of the sector they seek to represent?

A: In BANAT v. COMELEC, the Court held that party-list nominees must come from the
sector they seek to represent. Thus, a party-list representing farmers should have farmer
nominees, too. This was one of COMELEC's bases in disqualifying the 52 petitioners.
However, the Court reverses its ruling in BANAT v. COMELEC by instituting new parameters,
including the guidelines for the choice of nominees. Under the new parameters, a nominee
may either be a member of the sector he seeks to represent or at the very least, should
have a track record of advocacy for such sector.