RULING:

1) Yes
Under the Constitution and RA 7941, private respondents cannot be disqualified from the party-
list elections, merely on the ground that they are political parties. Section 5, Article VI of the
Constitution provides that members of the House of Representatives may be elected through a
party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.
Furthermore, under Sections 7 and 8, Article IX (C) of the Constitution, political parties may be
registered under the party-list system. Lastly, Section 3 of RA 7941 expressly states that a party
is either a political party or a sectoral party or a coalition of parties.

2) No
That political parties may participate in the party-list elections does not mean, however, that any
political party -- or any organization or group for that matter -- may do so. The requisite character
of these parties or organizations must be consistent with the purpose of the party-list system, as
laid down in the Constitution and RA 7941. (See: Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution).

The foregoing provision (RA 7941) mandates a state policy of promoting proportional
representation by means of the Filipino-style party-list system, which will enable the election to
the House of Representatives of Filipino citizens,
1. Who belong to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties;
and
2. Who lack well-defined constituencies; but
3. Who could contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that
will benefit the nation as a whole.

However, it is not enough for the candidate to claim representation of the marginalized and
underrepresented, because representation is easy to claim and to feign. The party-list
organization or party must factually and truly represent the marginalized and underrepresented
constituencies mentioned in Section

While the enumeration of marginalized and underrepresented sectors is not exclusive, it

demonstrates the clear intent of the law that not all sectors can be represented under the party-
list system.

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.
It intends to make the marginalized and the underrepresented not merely passive recipients of
the States benevolence, but active participants in the mainstream of representative democracy.
Thus, allowing all individuals and groups, including those which now dominate district elections,
to have the same opportunity to participate in party-list elections would desecrate this lofty
objective and mongrelize the social justice mechanism into an atrocious veneer for traditional
politics.

Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency (BANAT v. COMELEC

[G.R. No. 179271, 179295, April 21, 2009, 604 Phil. 131-184]

ELECTION LAW DIGESTS | R.D. PEÑA

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. 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 Veterans
ruling, that is, would apply the Panganiban formula in allocating party-list seats.

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.
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.
The COMELEC used the formula prescribed by the Supreme Court in the case of Veterans
Federation Party vs. COMELEC. Whereas in determining the additional seats for the other
qualified parties, organizations and coalitions, the correct formula as expressed in Veterans and
reiterated in CIBAC is, as follows:

Petitioners question the decision of the COMELEC in using the Veterans formula contending that
it violates the Constitution.

ISSUES:
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 for one seat
constitutional?
4) How shall the party-list representative seats be allocated?
5) Does the Constitution prohibit the major political parties from participating in the party-
list elections? If not, can the major political parties be barred from participating in the
party-list elections?

RULING:
1) The 20% allocation for party-list representatives is merely a ceiling – meaning, the
number of party-list representatives shall not exceed 20% of the total number of the
members of the lower house. However, it is not mandatory that the 20% shall be filled.

2) Yes
The 3-seat limit rule is valid. This is one way to ensure that no one party shall dominate the
party-list system.

3) The Court ruled 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. The 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.

ELECTION LAW DIGESTS | R.D. PEÑA

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.

The Court 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.

4) In determining the allocation of seats for party-list representatives under Section 11 of

R.A. No. 7941, the following procedure shall be observed:

a) 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.
b) 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.
c) 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.
d) 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. (Please pakicheck yung
NOTE sa baba for computation)

5) 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 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.

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. However, by a
vote of 8-7, the Court decided to continue the ruling in Veterans disallowing major political
parties from participating in the party-list elections, directly or indirectly. (Justice Puno, in his
separate opinion, concurred by 7 other justices, explained that the will of the people defeats the
will of the framers of the Constitution precisely because it is the people who ultimately ratified

ELECTION LAW DIGESTS | R.D. PEÑA

the Constitution – and the will of the people is that only the marginalized sections of the country
shall participate in the party-list elections. Hence, major political parties cannot participate in
the party-list elections, directly or indirectly.)

NOTE: The number of remaining seats, in this case 38, shall be used in the second round,
particularly, in determining, first, the additional seats for the two-percenters, and second, in
determining seats for the party-lists that did not garner at least 2% of the votes cast, and in the
process filling up the 20% allocation for party-list representatives.

Atong Paglaum v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 203766, April 2, 2013]

FACTS: Pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act No. 7941 (R.A. 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. However, the
Commission on Elections (COMELEC) issued a Resolution 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. Petitioners now filed a Petitions for Certiorari and Petitions for Certiorari and
Prohibition.

ISSUES:
1) Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
of jurisdiction in disqualifying petitioners from participating in the 13 May 2013 party-
list elections, either by denial of their new petitions for registration under the party-list
system, or by cancellation of their existing registration and accreditation as party-list
organizations.
2) Whether the criteria for participating in the party-list system laid down in Ang Bagong
Bayani and Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency v.
Commission on Elections (BANAT) should be applied by the COMELEC in the coming 13
May 2013 party-list elections.

RULING:

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. However, since the Court adopts in this Decision new parameters in the qualification
of national, regional, and sectoral parties under 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 13 May 2013 party-list
elections, under the new parameters prescribed in this Decision.

The party-list system is composed of three different groups: (1) national parties or organizations;
(2) regional parties or organizations; and (3) sectoral parties or organizations. National and
regional parties or organizations are different from sectoral parties or organizations. National
and regional parties or organizations need not be organized along sectoral lines and need not
represent any particular sector.

ELECTION LAW DIGESTS | R.D. PEÑA