Topic: Legislative Department (Composition of Congress – On party-list)

Title: BARANGAY ASSOCIATION FOR NATIONAL ADVANCEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY (BANAT),

Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS (sitting as the National Board of Canvassers), Respondent.
Citation: G.R. No. 179271 April 21, 2009

Facts:
During the 2007 elections, the Comelec counted 15,950,900 votes cast for 93 parties under the Party-List
System.

Comelec sitting as National Board of Canvassers (NBC) promulgated NBC Resolution No. 07-60
proclaimed thirteen parties as winners in the party-list elections; that the maximum total party-list votes is
16,723,121; that in accordance to Section 11 of RA 7941, the presumptive two percent can be pegged at
334, 462; and that the total number of seats of each winning party, organization or coalition shall be
determined pursuant to Veterans Federation Party versus Comelec formula upon completion of the canvass
of the party-list results.

Comelec further issued NBC Resolution No. 07-72 declaring the additional seat allocated to the appropriate
parties in Accordance to the Veterans formula.

BANAT filed a petition to proclaim the full number of party-list representatives provided by the Constitution.
Accordingly, Comelec issued a NBC Resolution no. 07-88 which declares the petition moot and academic
as it has previously promulgated Resolutions No. 07-60 and 07-72.

BANAT filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus assailing the NBC resolution. Other petitions from
Bayan Muna, Abono, and A Teacher asked NBC to reconsider the use of Veterans formula because it
violates the Constitution and Republic Act 7941.

Issue:
1. Whether or not the twenty percent allocation of party-list in the Constitution is mandatory.
2. Whether or not the three-seat limit provided in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 and the two percent threshold
of RA 7491 are unconstitutional.
3. Whether or not major political parties can participate in the party-list elections.

Ruling:
1. No. 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 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.
2. Yes. 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.

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."

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 declaring the two percent threshold unconstitutional, we do not limit our allocation of additional seats
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 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 which is the difference between the maximum seats reserved under the
Party-List System and the guaranteed seats of the two-percenters. The whole integer of the product of
the percentage and of the remaining available seats corresponds to a party’s 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 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.

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.

3. Yes 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 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.

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.

The petition is partially granted. We SET ASIDE the Resolution of the COMELEC in NBC No. 07-041
(PL) as well as the Resolution 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.