Atong Paglaum v COMELEC

DOCTRINE OF THE CASE:

Registration and Cancellation of Party Lists (54 petitions) for not being marginalized or
underrepresented sector within the ‘letter of the law’.

Q: What is within the letter of the law regarding the party-list system?

A: Section 2, RA 7941,

The phrase "marginalized and underrepresented" appears only once in R.A. No. 7941 "to promote
proportional representation in the election of representatives to the House of Representatives
through the party-list system," which will enable Filipinos belonging to the "marginalized and
underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and who lack well-defined political
constituencies," to become members of the House of Representatives.

While the policy declaration in Section 2 of R.A. No. 7941 broadly refers to "marginalized and
underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties," the specific implementing provisions of R.A.
No. 7941 do not define or require that the sectors, organizations or parties must be "marginalized
and underrepresented." On the contrary, to even interpret that all the sectors mentioned in Section
5 are "marginalized and underrepresented" would lead to absurdities.

Q: YES YES, BUT WHAT IS YOUR LEGAL BASIS?

A: RA 7941 “AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE ELECTION OF PARTY-LIST

REPRESENTATIVES THROUGH THE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM, AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

ARTICLE VI Sec 5 of the 1987 Consti (Legislative Department)

Q: What are the sectors according to the Constitution

A: According to RA 7941, Section 3:

a. A sectoral party refers to an organized group of citizens belonging to any of the sectors
enumerated in Section 5 hereof whose principal advocacy pertains to the special interests
and concerns of their sector.

b. A sectoral organization refers to a group of citizens or a coalition of groups of citizens

who share similar physical attributes or characteristics, employment, interest or concerns.
Q: How did the court reason that party-list should be more those above-mentioned?

A: Sir, via the principle of RATIO LEGIS EST ANIMA. Which means that where there is
ambiguity the words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent
of its framers.

Commissioner Christian S. Monsod, the main sponsor of the party-list system, stressed that "the
party-list system is not synonymous with that of the sectoral
representation."

The intent of the framers of the 1987 Constitution to include in the party-list
system both sectoral and non-sectoral parties is clearly written in Section 5 (1), Article VI of the
Constitution, which states:

Section 5.(1) The House of Representative shall …as provided by law, shall be elected through a
party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.

Section 5 (1), Article VI of the Constitution is crystal-clear that there shall be "a party-list system
of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations." The commas after the words
"national[,]" and "regional[,]" separate national and regional parties from sectoral parties. Had the
framers of the 1987 Constitution intended national and regional parties to be at the same time
sectoral, they would have stated "national and regional sectoral parties." They did not, precisely
because it was never their intention to make the party-list system exclusively sectoral.

-To require [them] under the party-list system to represent the 'marginalized and underrepresented'
is to deprive and exclude, by judicial fiat, ideology-based and cause-oriented parties from the
party-list system."

FACTS: Atong Paglaum, Inc. and 51 other parties were disqualified by the Commission on
Elections in the May 2013 party-list elections for various reasons but primarily for not being
qualified as representatives for marginalized or underrepresented sectors.

Atong Paglaum et al then filed a petition for certiorari against COMELEC alleging grave abuse of
discretion on the part of COMELEC in disqualifying them.

ISSUES:
1. WON, the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction in disqualifying petitioners from participating in May 13, 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. WON, the criteria for participating in the party-list system laid down in BANAT v COMELEC
should be applied in the coming May 2013 elections

HELD: No. The COMELEC merely followed the guidelines set in the cases of Ang Bagong
Bayani and BANAT. However, the Supreme Court remanded the cases back to the COMELEC as
the Supreme Court now provides for new guidelines which abandoned some principles established
in the two aforestated cases. The new guidelines are as follows:

I. Parameters. In qualifying party-lists, the COMELEC must use the following parameters:
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
II. In the BANAT case, major political parties are disallowed, as has always been the practice, from
participating in the party-list elections. But, since there’s really no constitutional prohibition nor a
statutory prohibition, major political parties can now participate in the party-list system provided
that they do so through their bona fide sectoral wing (see parameter 3 above).
Allowing major political parties to participate, albeit indirectly, in the party-list elections will
encourage them to work assiduously in extending their constituencies to the “marginalized and
underrepresented” and to those who “lack well-defined political constituencies.”
Ultimately, the Supreme Court gave weight to the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission
when they were drafting the party-list system provision of the Constitution. The Commissioners
deliberated that it was their intention to include all parties into the party-list elections in order to
develop a political system which is pluralistic and multiparty. (In the BANAT case, Justice Puno
emphasized that the will of the people should defeat the intent of the framers; and that the intent
of the people, in ratifying the 1987 Constitution, is that the party-list system should be reserved
for the marginalized sectors.)