The Party-List System

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator © Foxit Software
http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

A-PDF Merger DEMO : Purchase from www.A-PDF.com to remove the watermark
Jose Maria B. Buenagua is a fourth year high school

seminarian of Our Lady of Guadalupe Minor Seminary
School Year 2009-2010.
During his third year, He was the Editor-in-Chief of the

“The Seed”, the official publication of the Our Lady of
Guadalupe Minor Seminary. He was also the director of the
stage play “OTHELLO, the Moor of Venice” and the Vice
President of the Student Council.
As a fourth year seminarian, He was among the four pillars

of the Student Council holding the office of the Academic
Life Coordinator.
THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE

14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY
A Thesis
Presented to
The English Department of
Our Lady of Guadalupe Minor Seminary
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements of
English IV – Methods of Research
By:
Seminarian Jose Maria Bosito Buenagua
05 March 2010
i|
OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE MINOR SEMINARY
APPROVAL SHEET
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for English IV-Research Methods, this thesis, entitled:
THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH
CONGRESS: A STUDY
has been prepared and submitted by:
Seminarian Jose Maria Bosito Buenagua

Diocese of Novaliches
______________________________
Ms. Tanya Namit

Moderator
Approved by the moderator with the grade of
______________________________
______________________________
Rev. Fr. Maxell Lowell C. Aranilla, Ph. D.

Academic Dean
ii |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The researcher would like to thank the people who had been an inspiration to him. He
wishes to extend his gratitude to his collaborators who tirelessly, tediously, and meticulously
dedicated their time and efforts for the accomplishment of this study.
To his family, who had ever been so supportive and understanding amidst the pressures
and hectic schedules.
To Rev. Fr. Leo Ignacio who had ever been so affirming since the start of the school year.
To Ms. Tanya Namit who indefatigably had re-checked each chapters.
To Ms. Josephine Lacandazo-Malicdem who not even once had doubted.
To Mark Philip Sunga, Daniel Mark Kelvin Eblahan and Juan Fernando Gabriel Bautista
who had invested time in reading and criticizing the paper.
To Michael Vincent Pasicolan for the biscuits during the re-editing period.
To his classmates: Junie, Ben, Alfred, Nico, Jomari, Dodong, Milo, Mark, Patrick, Paul,
Jaime, Roy, Rusty, Michael, Ryan, Yep, Awos, Kurt who had been a valuable source of strength
during moments of despairs and failures in the computer laboratory.
And to God, as what Rev. Fr. Maxell had said, who “freely, fruitfully, fully and
faithfully” bear the researcher’s shortcomings.
Without you all, this wouldn’t be possible.
MARAMING, MARAMING SALAMAT PO!
iii |
DEDICATION
This study is entirely dedicated to the Filipino constituents
that they who are less in life should have more of law.
iv |
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 – THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND 1
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 7
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 8
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS 9
CHAPTER 2 – REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES 10
JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY 40
CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY 41
CHAPTER 4 - PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA 43
CHAPTER 5 – SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 90
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION 90
RECOMMENDATIONS 96
DEFINITION OF TERMS 97
v|
THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 1
CHAPTER 1
The Problem and Its Background
Introduction
“The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people
and all government authority emanates from them” (Constitution of the Republic of the
Philippines, 2005)
Such are the striking words brought by our very own constitution. It gives forth to a new
spirit in which every Filipino partakes, shares and holds in the authority exercised by our
government. If only such whimsical phrases, perhaps written by flattering pens, wouldn’t remain
to be verses of insincerity and pretentiousness, it could have been better. It could have been. If
only these salient words be turned into actions and realizations, wouldn’t it be more endearing
for a Filipino to promulgate the 1987 preamble and proudly say that true enough, “We are a
sovereign Filipino People”, who after “imploring the aid of Almighty God” was able to “to build
a just and humane society”.
But is it not quite puzzling that after several attempts in our country’s effort to progress,
still the Filipino finds himself as someone who merely belongs to a “Nation of Servants” (Tsao,
2009) , who after all the battles he’d been through, still is facing new insurgencies just to earn
his bread and butter. But unfortunately, this Filipino who used to selflessly fight foreign
vanquishers is now facing his most arduous enemy – his captain. It’s a pity that a Filipino
suffers such constraints just because of the political instability and the government’s inadequacy
to govern its people. And that in truth, the country is helplessly trying to stand strong behind the
1 |P a ge
staggering effects of corruption and financial adversities mainly caused by its leaders’
subversion. And that after all the struggles the Filipino had fought, he finds himself wounded,
incapacitated and defeated. In the 2008 Most and Least Corrupt Nations Survey of Berlin-based
Transparency International, the Philippines ranked 141st out of the 180 nations studied, with a
2.3 rating, together with Cameroon, Iran and Yemen. The index score ranges between 10 and 0,
which is very corrupt, and 10, which is very clean.
In the midst of a disturbing economic situation in the Philippines, the Filipino wakes up
bewildered and disoriented. There is this inglorious plethora of riches growing only among the
few, only among the royalty and only among the politicians. The thin line that used to ramify the
financially stable and the less fortunate breaks up. And that consequently, the gap becomes
wider. The Filipino worker, after decades of toil, still is a worker. While on the other hand, the
rich, “who already used to be rich, grows richer” (Asian Economic News, 1998) . It’s quite
ironic, as it would always be. Yet, after his incessant efforts to work, the Filipino still furnaces
and tries to saturate this breach, he bridges the gap. His hope continues to clamor in every island
the Philippines is composed of. He longs for something better.
And into these reasons did the researcher write this study. The Filipino’s continuous
efforts to indemnify his loss are admirable. He remains steadfast amidst the poverty, inequality
and injustice, which are in complete contrary to the 1987 preamble. But in response, the
government reaches out to its people. The government implements
laws which would further support the Filipino in his everyday endeavors. The Republic Act 9502
or the Cheaper Medicines Act would serve as a concrete proof. Furthermore, the government
2 |P a ge
responds in every way to at least compensate to its loss. Efforts to advance the primordial vote
tallying would be clearly seen as the 2010 automated elections are being seriously pushed. The
researcher would particularly dwell into the government’s idea of Party-List System in the
Philippine as its way of meeting on both ends to the Filipino people’s crusade to a society of
“truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace.” (Constitution of the Republic of the
Philippines, 2005)
The upcoming 2010 elections are undeniably near. Several political figures would slowly
conquer television advertisements as their way of telling their intention to vie for a government
position. They would spend “millions” (Reyes. 2009) if not billions of pesos just to at least gain
name recognition as musical campaign commercials would serve. While some would proudly
show their rags to riches story and use this to convince voters, some would use their well-
founded clan names as an asset and showcase their strategically engineered political profiles and
achievements. No matter how small the salary may be, politicians would tend to sacrifice a lot
more as what the Commission on Elections would declare. It seems that a government position is
more alluring than what private businesses and money could offer. But is it not more ironic that
rather than few people would have this desire to vie for a government seat which would dedicate
a life of pure service to others, more and more people would want to run and take a government
seat. Sad to say, some would even use the Philippine Party-List System as their vehicle using the
back door of being placed in the legislative body of the Philippines, the House of
Representatives. (Lujan, 2009)
3 |P a ge
In the attempts of the government to provide a better living to its people, the government
adopted the Party-List System which was already very much common in European countries
such as Slovakia, Germany and Switzerland as well as Russia, South Africa and Israel. The
Party-List System is “a mechanism of proportional representation in the election of
representatives to the House of Representatives from marginalized or underrepresented national,
regional and sectoral parties, or organizations or coalitions registered with the Commission on
Elections.” (Party-List System Act of 1995) It is part of the electoral process that enables small
political parties and marginalized and underrepresented sectors to obtain possible representation
in the House of Representatives, which traditionally is dominated by parties with big political
machineries. (Ager, 2008). In this noble objective did the Philippine Party-List System exist. But
unfortunately, this renowned mission is gradually tarnished by self seekers who use this system
to malevolently gain control of authority in the House of Representatives.
This innovation of Party-List System was introduced in the constitution to further
empower its people. Through the Party-List System, the once unrepresented comes to be fully
represented and acknowledged. Irrefutably, the less heard minorities, who used to be
underrepresented, gain recognition and now partake in the authority offered by the legislative
body of the country. The House of the Representatives that used to represent only legislative
territories now has its representative coming from the marginalized organizations or sectors of
the country. Indeed, the Party-List System had captured the yearnings of sectoral dilemmas
which weren’t then, properly addressed by representatives who tend to be parochial or choosy in
extending their support.
4 |P a ge
Unarguably, the Party-List system is a timely response to the growing marginalized
communities in the country. It is through this system that the marginalized and underrepresented
becomes lawmakers themselves (Ang Bagong Bayani VS COMELEC GR NO. 147589, 2001). It
is through this system that enables the election to the House of Representatives of typical
Filipino citizens “who lack well defined constituencies but could definitely contribute to the
formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole.”
(Party-List System Act of 1995) Through this system, the socially and economically
underrepresented minority acquires a voice in which it could address its necessities to the
legislative body and requests for an immediate aid.
Since the Party-List System Act of 1995 was introduced, the Philippine Party-List
System had already been in its existence for almost 15 years. But unknowingly, this concept of
Party-List system, even before its inclusion in the 1987 Constitution, was already progressively
introduced in the Philippines as President Ferdinand Marcos used to appoint sectoral
representatives during the 1972-1981 Martial Law in which later on was framed and adopted in
the 1987 constitution. But many years later, after its establishment, still, it is not yet certain that
after many elections that had passed how many of the Filipino voters do intimately know what
the Party-List System is? How much of them have even invested time to know this system? How
could have some Filipinos neglect their obligation of being in communion into this social
endeavor of patriotism? Into these realizations did the researcher find a more vivid reason to
conduct this study and to say, that after all, this study is worthwhile, worth every Filipino who
hopes for a better and more lucid political system.
5 |P a ge
It was on May of 1998 that the Filipino electorate was first introduced to the Party-List
System of elections. During this time a number of 123 (Solidarity Philippines Australia Network,
2003) party-list organizations filed certificates of candidacies and were proven qualified and
eligible by the Commission on Elections to run for legislative seats. But it is very disturbing that
out of 80% total voter turnout on May 1998 elections, only a small portion of 26% cast their
party-list vote and the remaining 54% simply ignored the system. Only a total 14 representatives
coming from the party-lists have passed the 2% threshold declared by the Commission on
Elections and as a result around 38 party-list seats in Congress were left unfilled, a good number
that could perhaps have advanced or introduced a good pro poor and pro people legislation.
In a country like Philippines, a single vote echoes a full expression of democracy. It is an
indication of a citizen’s capacity to elect his leader of choice. It is a sacred power vested on his
hands. It is through this power that his little voice may be heard. He holds a single vote that
could possibly change history (Quindlen, 2008). And so, it is very disappointing that a Filipino
tends to neglect such a capacity to elect and participate in a party-list election of a representative.
Perhaps there was also this shortcoming on the end of the government. It may have been
expected that at the first attempt to include the Party-List System in the elections, there will be a
small response from the voters, especially that at that time, it was also synchronized with the
national elections. It may also have been due to lack of a comprehensive education campaign,
but still, the votes were already casted. The ballots were already counted. There was already this
partial participation in the 1998 elections. And so, this study would at least attempt to inform and
educate as on how important and on how crucial the Party-List System is.
6 |P a ge
The researcher’s interest and enthusiasm into this study were greatly influenced by his
father who had already been a lawyer for 21 years. Furthermore, his father had also served as the
legal counsel of the National Confederation of Cooperatives or COOP-NATCCO Party and was
also, at a time, a nominee of the party. His father had also been the legal counsel of numerous
cooperatives including the billionaire Novaliches Development Cooperative or NOVADECI. He
was also the former chief of staff of Cong. Henry Lanot of Pasig, Cong. Vicente Valera of Abra
and currently is the legal officer of Hon. Datu Pax Mangudadatu of Sultan Kudarat. Into this, did
the researcher draw inspiration, for ever since, it had been his ardent desire to seek for a
transparent and progressive legislation.
Statement of the Problem
There is this big obscurity in distinguishing what comprises the marginalized and
underrepresented. It seems that as the Party-List System gradually gains recognition and due
importance, a lot of pseudo party-lists appear in which a party-list runs under a faux banner and
is accordingly controlled and made just to gain attain a legislative seat. Into these sad truths that
from an initial of 123 party-list organizations during the 1998 elections, a sudden efflux of party-
lists occurred. Consequently, the Commission on Elections, on the process, disqualified a lot of
party-lists. In relation, this study hopes to specifically answer the following questions:
1. Are the measures introduced by non-multi-sectoral party-list representatives in
accordance with the claims of the sector they represent?
2. What are the issues currently faced by the Philippine Party-List System?
3. What is the system or basis of winning a legislative seat in the Party-List System?
7 |P a ge
Significance of the Study
In response to the call of a multi-party system, the Party-List System was introduced in
1995. Rather than electing the “trapos” or the traditional politicians, this system seeks to elect
competent parties with comprehensive program based advocacies. This system intends to raise
representations coming from the unrepresented sectors and to “enhance transparency and
accountability, leading to a more efficient government. Parties are strengthened, encouraging
program and platform-based politics instead of weak affiliations between opportunists. This
challenges moneyed and patronage politics that have bred corruption and inefficiency, hindering
the country’s development” (Solidarity Philippines Australia Network, 2003)
This study is very much timely for the society at present. This will serve as a key for
assessing the upcoming 2010 elections especially to the party-list elections. This would be of
great importance to the Filipino electorate who are still uninformed and uneducated about the
party-list system in the Philippines. This study would be a good source of deliberation for a
single precious vote. This would also help future researchers who might as well have a deeper
study of the Philippine politics. And lastly, this study aims to educate and inform every Filipino
about the Philippine Party-List System so that through this system, they may find hope.
8 |P a ge
Scope and Limitations
This study focuses only on the Philippine Party-list system. Though at times, it may
discuss a little of history in relation to the topic, it would greatly focus on the 14th Congress. And
whenever the researcher speaks of the party-list, it pertains to the party-lists in the Philippines as
Bayan Muna, Gabriela, Akbayan, Coop-Natcco, etc. or more specifically sectoral organizations
or coalitions and not the major political parties in the Philippines such as Liberal Party,
Nacionalista Party, Lakas-Kampi etc. Thus, the study would give more emphasis to the non-
multi-sectoral party-list representatives in the 14th Congress of the Philippines and the measures
they have submitted. The measures submitted by party-list representatives in this study will be
limited only until December 15, 2010 due to time constraints. While on Chapter 4 of the study,
the researcher didn’t anymore include or consider multi-sectoral parties in presenting the tables
of the data gathered, because in reality, their sectors, being multi-sectoral in nature, encompass
every concern of different sectors.
For the purposes of this research, the researcher limited his classification of a sectoral bill
if it only directly involves the sector. Also, for the purposes of this research, the local bill of a
party-list congressman from a regional party was considered as a sectoral bill.
9 |P a ge
CHAPTER 2
Review of Related Literature and Related Studies
Introduction
The researcher had used literatures such as books and written articles on topics regarding
the Philippine Party-List System. This study surely solicits copious controversial dilemmas from
many different researchers and experts. Thus, the researcher, in order for him to gather
information, had emphasized a lot of reviews. Reviews in this chapter were mostly taken from
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, Republic Act No. 7941, Supreme Court Decisions and
several written articles by different authors and writers. The researcher made a concise summary
of the said literatures in presenting the reviews found in this chapter. He also posed guide
questions before some paragraphs to make the study clearer and more beneficial to the reader.
And so, he only chose articles which he only found very much relevant to the study per se.
11 years after the first party-list election, 12 years after the enactment of Republic Act
7941, and 22 years after the ratification of the present Constitution “is the party-list system
serving the avowed purpose of giving voice to the voiceless? (Remollino, 2007)”
Where did the Party-list System originate? Is this system legal or constitutional?
The Philippine Party-list System has its roots from the 1987 Constitution of the
Philippines. But by constitutional mandate, the House of Representative was vested by the
Constitution, to enact enabling law in setting the particular guidelines and implementing laws
with regards to the Party-List System. The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines clearly states the
general rules in the election of the House of Representatives, such as:
10 | P a g e
“(1) The House of Representatives, shall be composed of not more two

hundred fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by the law, who shall be elected
from legislatives districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the
Metropolitan area in accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants,
and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by
the law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional,
and sectoral parties or organizations.
(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the
total number of representatives including those under the list. For three consecutive
terms after the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to
party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election
from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women,
youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious
sector.”
Are the Party-list representatives different from district representatives in terms of

salaries, services and rights? What are their differences?
There are two kinds of Congressional representatives in the Philippines. It could be of a
district representative and the party-list representative. District representatives refer to
Congressmen who “shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among provinces,
cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of their respective
inhabitants” or in other words, these are representatives, in which, by geographical boundaries in
local territories were elected by their inhabitants who should also belong in the same area. These
representatives act as a immediate liaisons from the local government to the national
government. They act on behalf of the residences on their legislative boundaries and pass laws
for the betterment of their respective constituents and also at times, the nation as a whole.
Common projects often submitted by this kind of representatives are local covered courts,
common waiting sheds and others of local application. This kind of representatives tends to be
parochial in extending their support as their loyalty would often be bounded on their local
constituents. This approach may be a little subjective for their concern reaches only to the people
11 | P a g e
they are in command of by geographical boundaries. While on the other hand, party-list
representatives, in a sense, have broader vision of platforms and programs. They are elected
through national elections with voters coming from all over the country and they are not bound
to any regional ties as compared to the district representatives. They have this more nationalistic
and unifying approach in being elected for they promote a nationwide campaign. They are
elected not on the basis of person oriented politics and political machineries, rather, they are
enthroned in the House of Representatives because of the platforms, programs and advocacies
they push as a sectoral organization. And thus, this defeats traditional politics and surfaces a
more accountable politician. The Filipino electorate in the Philippines has the right to vote twice
in choosing their Congressional representatives.
Party-list representatives are also entitled to the same rights the district representatives
receive as matters of salaries and emoluments including its perks or the so called “pork barrel”.
They also serve for 3 years and shall be treated as regular members of the House for they are also
equally elected as compared to the district representatives, in a much more, nationwide basis.
In brief, Soliman M. Santos1 ( commented that the “1987 Constitution provision for a
Party-List System can be seen an attempt to institutionalize both sectoral representation in
national legislative governance and a mature multi-party system. Stated otherwise, it is an
attempt towards a politics of sectors, parties and programs.” And so, basically, the Party-List
System had its roots from the 1987 constitution and that this attempt for a new politics is geared
towards a more efficient political system. As its objective would always state, this system is a
1
A lawyer who wrote articles regarding the Progressive Party-lists in the Philippines and the Party-list System’s
development.
12 | P a g e
boat for the marginalized and underrepresented that their voice may also be heard in the
Congress.
If the 1987 Constitution framed the general outline of the Party-list System, what are the
specific guidelines provided by the law?
The RA No. 7941 or the Party-List System Act of 1995 was signed by President Fidel
Ramos on March 3, 1995. It was the result of the mandate given by the 1987 Constitution that
says that the House of Representatives should secure the specific laws governing the Party-List
System in the Philippines. In a general view, the Party-List System Act of 1995 has the following
elements.
1. To enable Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and

underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and who lack well defined
constituents but who could contribute to the formulation and enactment of
appropriate legislation, to become members of the House of Representatives;
2. The State shall develop and guarantee a full, free and open party system
in order to attain the broadest possible representation of party, sectoral or
group interests in the House of Representatives
3. To enhance their chances to compete for and win seats in the simplest
scheme possible.
In RA No. 7941, it says that instead of having individual candidates during election, only
registered groups or parties may participate in the Party-List System. And thus, rather than
voting for the specific name of a nominee, a voter writes the name of the party-list he wants to
vote. In turn, the party list organization is required to submit its list of nominees to a maximum
of 10 nominees so that in the event their party is elected, the first nominee gets a seat in the
Congress and the second and third nominees also seats if ever they qualify for the second and
third seat, while the rest of the nominees from 4th to 10th are just their spare in cases of death,
13 | P a g e
incapacity or disqualification of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd nominee as the case may be. RA No. 7941
demands an organized group that is duly registered with the Commission on Elections that have
manifested its desire to participate in a party list election. Follow up requirements may also
follow and meeting the 90 days deadline of filing party candidacy before the election will
certainly be one. Attached in the certificate of candidacy should be a verification coming from
the organization’s president or secretary stating its desire to participate in the elections. It may
also include the organization’s by-laws, platform or program of government, list of officers,
coalition agreement and other relevant information as the COMELEC may require.
The primary requirement of being in a “marginalized and underrepresented” sector, group
or organization should be considerably met. And its primary goals of representing these
communities should be evident in the party’s constitution, articles of incorporation, by-laws,
history, platform of government and track record. Nonetheless, the majority members of the said
sector should also belong and comply with the statutory of being in the marginalized and
underrepresented communities so that in matters of interests, the interest of the party should be
favored.
What are the disqualifying factors in the Party-List System Act of 1995 that warrants
registered party-lists disbarment?
The Commission on Elections, in accordance with the provisions of Party-List System
Act of 1995, particularly Section 6 may “motu proprio or upon verified complaint of any
interested party, remove or can cancel, after due notice and hearing, the registration of any
national, regional or sectoral party, organization or coalition on any of the following grounds:”
14 | P a g e
1. It is a religious sect or denomination or association organized for religious

purposes.
(In this case however, nominees as priests, religious leaders, pastors or imams
may still represent their own party provided that they are duly elected by their
members and are capable of being a representative to their parties without
religious biases.)
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 in relation to

elections;
6. It declares untruthful statements in its petition;
7. It has ceased to exist for at least one year or
8. It fails to participate in the last two (2) preceding elections or fails to obtain at
least two percentum (2%) of the votes cast under the party-list system in the
two (2) preceding elections for the constituency in which it has registered.
As part of a disqualification ground for elected representatives, representatives from the
Party-List System who deliberately changed their political affiliation in their incumbency would
deem automatic disqualification as well as those who do not perform their duties bound to their
party-lists. The party-list has the due right to impeach their representatives and replace them with
the nominated persons the party list had earlier submitted. Also, in the same manner, nominees
who had changed their political affiliation, six months before the election, would be subjected in
the same consequences. This was mainly in response to a more mature multi-party system.
15 | P a g e
The Party-List System Act of 1995 also states that “for the purposes of the 1998 elections
the first five political parties on the party representation in the House of Representatives at the
start of the Tenth Congress of the Philippines shall not be entitled to participate in the party-list
system.” This was mainly done to give other party-lists a head start that these major political
parties will not dominate the upcoming 11th Congress with their already established group.
Are there any rules in the Party-List System Act of 1995 that set up the guidelines in the
selection of party nominees?
Nominations of the party-list representatives are also crucial in its administration as a party.
If ever a party wins, the nominees who where duly nominated by party-list members will be
chosen as party-list representatives. But nominees, after being nominated, should submit a letter
of consent and approval to the Commission on Elections as for being nominated. Furthermore,
the nominee should only be nominated in a single party and the nominee should not have run in
the immediate preceding election and has lost his bid in the elective office. Alteration of the list
of nominees is not allowed right after its submission to the Commission on Elections, not unless,
the nominee withdraws through a letter of consent, becomes incapacitated or dies. In case, any of
these reasons pursue, the nominee next to the one who resigned shall substitute and take his
place. But if ever the incumbent representative of the party is also nominated, he is not
considered resigned.
Section 9 of RA 7941 states the qualification of a party-list nominee:
“No person shall be nominated as party-list representative, unless he is a

natural born citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter, a resident of the
Philippines for a period not less than one (1) year immediately preceding the day
of the election, able to read and write, bona fide member of the party or
organization which he seeks to represent for at least ninety (90) days preceding
the day of the election, and is at least twenty-five (25) years of age on the day of
16 | P a g e
election. But in case of the youth sector, he must at least be twenty-five (25) but
not more than thirty (30) years of age on the day of the election. Any youth
sectoral representative who attains the age of thirty during his term shall be
allowed to continue until the expiration of his term.”
A party-list is often composed of smaller sub organizations. It is not one by itself, rather,
smaller coalitions with a certain goal unite and form a single party-list in which could represent
their sectoral organization in the House of Representatives. And so, component organizations
that make up a certain party are allowed to participate independently in a Party-List System
election provided that the main party in which they belong will not participate in the Party-List
System.
Based on the Party-List System Act of 1995, how does the Commission on Elections declare
party-list winners?
The parties who are able to receive at least the 2% qualifying votes cast are automatically
entitled of a legislative seat in the House of Representatives and thus are the only ones qualified
to obtain legislative seats. If ever a certain party-list receives another 2% of votes cast, the party
is again entitled to another seat provided that the maximum number of seats allotted for each
party-list would not be more than 3 seats so that other parties may also be equally
accommodated. This formula was known to be the 2-4-6% formula (This formula was later
changed by a Supreme Court Decision and that these changes will be discuss in the next
chapters.) which indeed was simple to comprehend. The computation with regards on how to
cross the 2% threshold or 2% qualifying vote is computed by dividing the number of votes
obtained by a certain party-list to the number of votes obtained by the whole Party-List System.
17 | P a g e
The Party-List System was intended to empower the multi-party system in the Philippines.
And thus the 3 seat cap was created so that the bigger political parties or coalitions would break
up and that authority would be equally distributed. By history, in the 2001 party-list election,
Bayan Muna received 11.3% party-list votes. The existence of the 3 seat cap hindered the Bayan
Muna party-list to get more than three seats. And so, later on, after seeing a much greater
potential of getting larger number of seats, Bayan Muna party decided to break up into smaller
groups or parties, and that these break up groups namely Gabriela, Anakpawis, Anakbayan,
would participate independently in the upcoming 2004 elections. Henceforth, in the 2004 party-
system elections, together with its party allies, it secured 6 legislative seats.
The Commission on Elections is the one in-charge in tallying all the votes for a certain
party on a nationwide basis. The COMELEC convenes as National Board of Canvassers tasked
with tallying all the votes garnered by a certain party. Also, the COMELEC is the one
responsible in the allocation of seats as to how many legislative seats will be taken by the
concerned party. Then, they proclaim the winning party-list organization.
And so, briefly, the Party-List System of electing Congressional representatives was
designed to enable underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties who lack well defined
constituency but could contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation to
be legislators themselves. The Party-List Act of 1995 provides the specific guidelines for party-
lists like grounds for suspension, nomination of nominees and disqualifying factors for the Party-
List System.
18 | P a g e
Were there problems encountered by the Party-List System with regards to its allocation
and computation of winners?
On greater emphasis to the Party-List System, the Supreme Court had the occasion to rule
on some issue raised concerning the new system in the case of Veterans’ Federation et al. VS.
Commission on Elections G.R. No 136781 dated on October 6, 2000. The Veterans’
Federation Party, together with numerous party-lists, filed a petition to the Commission on
Elections and raised several arguments concerning the party-list election that occurred on May
1998. As part of their duty as National Board of Canvassers, the Commission on Elections
proclaimed 13 party-lists with 14 representatives on July 6, 1998. But the Veterans Federation
Party, with its co-petitioners, said that the proclamation held was only a partial proclamation.
And thus, the Veterans Federation Party sought for a full proclamation. They said that since there
are 208 district representatives during that time then there should be 52 party-list representatives
to seat in Congress, for the Constitution states that there should be 20% allocation for party-list
representatives and that this 20% allocation was mandatory. But since 14 were already
proclaimed, the Veterans Federation Party sought for 38 additional members of the House and
asked the Commission on Elections to proclaim the full number of party-list representatives. The
Veterans Federation Party even added that “the filling up of the twenty percent membership of
party-list representatives in the House of Representatives, as provided by the Constitution, was
mandatory (Veterans’ Federation VS. COMLEC G.R. No 136781, 2000)”. It further claimed that
“the literal application of the two percent vote requirement and the three seat limit under RA
7941 would defeat this constitutional provision”
On October 15, 1998, with favorable reception to the petition filed by the Veterans
Federation Party, the Commission on Elections declared that “In allocating 52 seats, it
19 | P a g e
disregarded the two percent-vote requirement under Section 11(b) of RA 7941. Instead, it
identified three elements of the Party-List System, which should supposedly determine how the
52 seats should be filled up. First, the system was conceived to enable the marginalized sectors
of the Philippine society to be represented in the House of Representatives. Second, the system
should represent the broadest sectors of the society. Third, it should encourage multi-party
system. Considering these elements, but ignoring the two percent threshold requirement under
RA 7941, it concluded that the party-list groups ranked Nos. 1-51 should have at least one
representative.2” Briefly, the Commission on Elections agreed that the 20% allocation for the
party-list representatives was mandatory or should be filled up at all time and that in the
apportioning of the 52 seats or the 20% allocation it should disregard the 2% threshold. And so,
duty-bound, the Commission on Elections should proclaim the 38 additional party-list
representatives sought by the Veterans’ Federation Party since the 1987 Constitution clearly
states such rule.
With the Commission on Elections’ favorable response to the Veterans Federation Party,
were the questions regarding the 2% threshold and the mandatory filling up of the 20%
allocation to party-list representatives in the Party-List System Act disregarded?
Unfortunately, with its decision of full proclamation of party-list representatives, the
Commission on Elections was objected by 12 newly proclaimed party-list representatives. The
latter argued that since they passed through the 2% threshold as prescribed by RA 7941, the
additional 38 party-list representatives should be taken from their parties and not to other party-
lists who were not able to cross the provided 2% threshold.
In response to the objection, the Commission on Elections, en banc, made another
decision on January 7, 1999 stating that “the poll body held that to allocate the remaining seats
20 | P a g e
only to those who had hurdled the two percent vote requirement will mean the concentration of
representation to thirteen organizations representing two political parties, three coalitions and
four sectors: urban poor, veterans, women, and peasantry. Such strict application of the 2%
threshold does not serve the essence and object of the Constitution and the legislature – to
develop and guarantee a full free and open party system in order to attain the broadest possible
scheme possible representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the House of
Representatives. Additionally, it will also prevent this commission from complying with the
constitutional and statutory decrees for party-list representatives to compose 20% of the House
of Representatives.” And so, the Commission on Elections, reaffirmed the previous decision
nullifying the objection recently made.
What was the stand of the Supreme Court on these issues raised by the Veterans’
Federation Party?
But so as it is about to be finished, the issue with regards to the full proclamation of
party-list representatives reached the Supreme Court. And so, the Supreme Court ordered the
Commission on Elections a status quo order holding that the main question of how to
determine the winners of the party-list election can be fully settled by addressing the following
issues.
1. Is the twenty percent allocation for party-list representatives mentioned in

Section 5(2) Article VI of the Constitution, mandatory or is it a mere ceiling?
In other words, should the twenty percent allocation for party-list solons be
filled up completely all the time?
2. Are the two percent threshold and the three seat limit provided in section 11
(b) of RA 7941 constitutional
3. If the answer to issue 2 is in the affirmative, how should the additional seats of
a qualified party be determined?
21 | P a g e
The Supreme Court’s ruling however, was in complete contrast to the decision made by
the Commission on Elections. It stated that the “Supreme Court agrees that the COMELEC
resolution should be nullified, but disagrees that they should all be guaranteed additional seats.”
The Supreme Court also added that the 20% allocation was not really mandatory and is just a
mere ceiling. Furthermore, the 2% threshold guaranteeing a single legislative seat was in fact
constitutional, but the 4% and 6% that enables the further addition of remaining 2 seats is
unconstitutional. As the Supreme Court’s ruling would read “On the contention that a strict
application of the two percent threshold may result in a mathematical impossibility, suffice it to
say that the prerogative to determine whether to adjust or change this percentage requirement
rests in Congress (emphasis supplied). Our task now, as should have been the Comelec’s, is not
to find fault in the wisdom of the law through highly unlikely scenarios of clinical extremes, but
to craft an innovative mathematical formula that can, as far as practicable, implement it within
the context of the actual election process.”
Thus, the Supreme Court came out with the formula to be known as the “Veterans’
Formula”. The “Veterans’ Formula” disregarded the earlier way of declaring a winning party
through the 2-4-6% formula. This formula was to be used in the 2001 elections as the basis of
declaring party-list winners. In the formula, it states the following steps:
First, the initial step is to rank all the participating parties, organizations and coalitions
from the highest to the lowest based on the number of votes they each received. Then the ratio
for each party is computed by dividing its votes by the total votes for all the parties participating
in the system. All parties with at least two percent of the total votes are guaranteed one seat each.
22 | P a g e
Only these parties shall be considered in the computation of additional seats. The party receiving
the highest number of votes shall thenceforth be referred to as the first party.
The next step is to determine the number of seats the first party is entitled to, in order to
be able to compute that for other parties. Since the distribution is based on proportional
representation, the number of seats to be allotted to other parties cannot possibly exceed that to
which the first party is entitled by virtue of its obtaining the most number of votes.
The formula for the allocation of additional seats would be greatly dependent to the
number of seats allotted to the first party and to the number of votes the first party had garnered.
It can be computed by dividing the number of votes garnered by the concerned party to the
number of votes of the first party. After which, the quotient should be multiplied to the number
of seat of the first party had earlier secured. If the product resulted reached more than 2, then the
concerned party is guaranteed for another seat.
In the same ruling, enveloped was also a decision banning political parties to participate
in the Party-list System, since the court said that they were not really in representation to the
marginalized and underrepresented and thus was defeating the purpose of Party-List System.
What were the reasons for the disqualification of a number of parties during the 2001
Party-List System elections?
The 2001 Party-List System was also bombarded with several issues. In the Ang Bagong
BAYANI OFW-Labor Party et al. VS. Commission on Elections et al. G.R. No. 147589
dated June 21, 2001, legal disputes against several parties were filed by the petitioner Ang
Bagong Bayani OFW-Labor Party. For the said party says that “the inclusion of political parties
in the party-list system is the most objectionable portion of the questioned resolution”. It had
23 | P a g e
argued the disqualification of party-lists such as Citizens Drug Watch: Mamamayang Ayaw sa
Droga, True Marcos Loyalists, Chamber of Real State Builders Association, Ang Buhay
Hayaang Yumabong, Nationalist People’s Coalition, Liberal Party, Lakas NUCD-UMDP party-
lists etc. The petitioner questioned the party-lists mentioned as to the sector they represent. They
seek to disqualify other party-lists arguing mainly that the Party-List System was intended to
benefit the marginalized and underrepresented. Ang Bagong OFW-Labor Party argues that these
parties are ineligible to partake in the elections for the grounds amended by RA No. 7921
Section 6 in which they violated rules. Also the Ang Bagong Bayani OFW-Labor Party says that
political parties were already earlier banned in the Party-List System as Veterans VS.
COMELEC would prescribe. In short, this issue primarily raised the following questions:
1. Whether or not political parties may participate in the party-list elections
2. Whether or not the Party-List System is exclusive to “marginalized and

underrepresented” sectors and organizations.
Ang Bagong Bayani OFW-Labor Party says that Richard Gomez’s Citizens Drug Watch:
Mamamayang Ayaw sa Droga is a government related and funded organization. It is considered
an affiliate of the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) and the Philippine
National Police (PNP). And so, it clearly assaults the party-list guideline which states that “the
party or an organization must not be an adjunct of, or a project organized or an entity funded or
assisted by, the government” such as the Philippine National Police and the Department of
Interior and Local Government which are public offices and government controlled departments.
Moreover, parties such as Chamber of Real State Builders Association is hardly
marginalized and underrepresented. Although in a sense, they are what they claimed
24 | P a g e
marginalized and underrepresented because of their small number as sector. But based on the
decision released by the Supreme Court, it doesn’t necessarily mean that an organization
representing the extremely rich of Forbes Park or Dasmariñas Village, which are small in terms
of population, could also vie for legislative seat as a party, for basically, they are already
privileged of their social status. In addition, interests of sectors coming from the majority of less
fortunate as compared to the sectors coming from privileged few are highly different from each
other and so should not be an object of comparison.
The researcher, as he may quote a paragraph from the “Ang Bagong Bayani OFW-Labor
Party VS. Commission on Elections “while the business moguls and mega rich are numerically
speaking, a tiny minority, they are neither marginalized nor underrepresented, for the stark
reality is that their economic clout engenders political power more awesome than their numerical
limitation. Traditionally, political power does not necessarily emanate from the size of
constituency; indeed, it is likely to arise more directly from the number and amount of one’s
bank accounts.” in brief , the Ang Bagong Bayani OFW-Labor Party seeks to disqualify the
Chamber of Real State Builders Association and Filipino Chinese Chamber of Commerce and
Industry, Inc parties because of their already privileged social status that despite their being
minority are more adequate and capable of demanding their interests as compared to the true
marginalized and underrepresented sectors. The Ang Bagong Bayani OFW-Labor Party argues
that other sectors, who are less in life, are in much more need of legislative seats as against to
other already privileged sectors.
25 | P a g e
But what does it really mean to be marginalized and underrepresented?
The marginalized and the underrepresented is the heart of the Party-List System. It is
through these words that party-lists continue to exist even up to now. Amidst the controversies it
faces, the Philippine Party-list System bears along the challenge of being a proportional
representation to the marginalized and underrepresented. But what does it really take to be a
marginalized and underrepresented? For it seems, that behind the simplicity of purpose it brings,
a lot of ambiguity occurs which consequently hinders its salutary mission.
Indeed, a vast of words seems to be fitting enough to be considered marginalized and
underrepresented. All the more, these problems continue to arise desecrating a patriotic and
selfless purpose of the Party-List System Act of 1995. Did the framers of the RA 7941
deliberately write this ambiguity? Or did these persons forget to see the impending cases these
words may bring. And so, to further clarify these issues, the researcher would like to define the
term “marginalized and underrepresented” in its simple meaning and implication.
Merriam Webster Online Dictionary defines marginalized and underrepresented as the
persons who are in “powerless position within a society or group or those who are inadequately
represented.”
But in a Supreme Court decision in the case of Ang Bagong BAYANI OFW-Labor Party
VS. Commissions on Elections, the term marginalized and underrepresented were elaborately
defined on regards to its legal basis in the Party-List System. The term marginalized and
underrepresented mean persons who belong to the “labor, peasant urban poor, indigenous
cultural communities, women, youth, and other such sectors as may be provided by the law,
26 | P a g e
except the religious sector. (Party-List System Act of 1995 Article VI Section 2) ” Furthermore,
the Supreme Court added that “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. It is a fundamental principle of statutory construction
that words employed in a statute are interpreted in connection with, and their meaning is
ascertained by reference to, the words and phrases with which they are associated or related.
Thus, the meaning of a term in a statute may be limited, qualified, or specialized by those in
immediate association.” Hence, marginalized and underrepresented may be explained through its
number, being in a minority block, but yet coupled with a disadvantage that it does not have a
strong hold on the political nor economical influence and authority. Thus, it would not be easily
feigned, for such claims that a person belongs to a marginalized and underrepresented sector is
considerably easy to say.
Ang Buhay Hayaang Yumabong is a party-list endorsed by El Shaddai of Bro. Mike
Velarde with its son Rene Velarde, as one of its representatives. The petitioners also seek to
disqualify Buhay Hayaang Yumabong for they say that this party may be clearly categorized as
a religious organization or association because of its obvious affiliation to the El Shaddai.
In response, the petitioned parties says that they had fully complied to the requirements
prescribed under Section 5 of RA 7941 and are very much eligible to participate in the elections.
In addition to, they added that the Party-List System is supposed to be open to all parties and
should not, in any grounds, disbar the petitioned party-lists without any proper legal grounds.
But the court’s decision still overrules as it states that “Clearly, therefore, the Court
cannot accept the submissions of the Comelec and the other respondents that the party-list
27 | P a g e
system is, without any qualification, open to all. Such position does not only weaken the
electoral chances of the marginalized and underrepresented; it also prejudices them. It would gut
the substance of the party-list system. Instead of generating hope, it would create a mirage.
Instead of enabling the marginalized, it would further weaken them and aggravate their
marginalization." The Supreme Court further reaffirmed that “This court cannot allow the Party-
List System to be sullied and prostituted by those who are neither marginalized nor
underrepresented. It cannot let the flicker of hope be snuffed out.” Thus, the Supreme Court
remanded the same case to the Commission on Elections to conduct its study using the
guidelines as laid down by the Supreme Court. Consequently some parties were disqualified
including Citizens Drug Watch: Mamamayang Ayaw sa Droga, True Marcos Loyalists, Chamber
of Real State Builders Association and etc. The 3 seat limit, though not legally challenged was
declared constitutional. While some filed for reconsiderations, political parties were again
allowed to participate in the Party-List System provided that they are to represent the
marginalized and underrepresented.
In a nutshell, the principle of justice should always subdue any provisions and acts that
those who have less in life should have more of law.
In April of 2009, there was this addition of representatives to the 14 th Congress, what was
the basis for this sudden increase? And shouldn’t there be not more than 250 members of the
house?
It is quite notable that in the present Congress, there are 268 Members of the lower
House, and so perhaps, there have been a violation in the Constitution: “The House of
Representatives shall be composed of not more two hundred fifty members” but in the
continuation of the same article, a phrase “unless otherwise fixed by law” subdues. This means
28 | P a g e
that the number of representatives in the House is not literally limited to 250 members. Instead, it
is still dependent to the adjustments that may be made by the law. And so legally, there was still
no violation that occurred, rather everything went on a legal basis and was constitutional.
In April 2009, around 36 party-list representatives were added on the roster of
Congressmen, and so one may ask “what happened?” In the Barangay Association for National
Advancement and Transparency (BANAT) VS. Commission on Elections G.R. No. 179271
dated April 21, 2007, the BANAT party-list questioned the COMELEC’s partial proclamation
of the full number of party-lists representatives as provided by the constitution and the
participation of major political parties in the 2007 elections such as Lakas-Kampi, Nacionalista
Party and etc. In these elections, there were 93 party-lists qualified by the Commission on
Elections.
In particular, what were the issues raised in the petition filed by the BANAT Party?
The BANAT party-list reinstated questions which were very much similar to the
questions raised by the Veterans Federation Party years ago. In brief, the party argued the
following:
1. Is the 20% allocation mandatory?
2. Is the 3 seat limit constitutional?
3. Is the 2% threshold and qualifier vote constitutional?
4. How shall the Party-List System be allocated?
Although it is explicitly stated in RA 7941 Section 11 that on the following elections
after the 1998 elections, political parties are already allowed to participate in the coming Party-
29 | P a g e
List System. But still, as part of petition filed by the BANAT party-list, the party argued that
major political parties were already earlier banned in the Party-List System as the Supreme Court
decision Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party VS. COMELEC would attest. In response, the
court said that “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.” Yet this stand was not held and preserved long after a voting concurs
from the Supreme Court justices with result 8-7 holding that political parties be perpetually
banned on the Party-List System.
Then, the BANAT party-list contended the partial proclamation of the Commission on
Elections during the May 2007 elections. The said party says that the 1987 Constitution of the
Philippines particularly on Article VI Section 5 (2) states “The party-list representatives shall
constitute twenty per centum of the total representatives including those under the party-list.
(emphasis supplied)” and thus, as the word “shall” implies, it is required. Therefore, the 20%
rule regarding the composition of the House of Representatives is mandatory and is not just a
mere ceiling. And so, the reason why in April of 2009, there was this addition of several
Congressional seats from 236 it became 268 was because of the decision or ruling of the
Supreme Court, which further emphasizes that the party-lists representatives should constitute
the 20% of the over all number of representatives and that this should be met at all times as
provided by the 1987 Constitution.
Also, BANAT party-list questioned the three-seat limit in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 and
asked for its being constitutional. The ruling of the court, in response, declared that “the three-
30 | P a g e
seat limit – each qualified party, regardless of the number of the votes it actually obtained, is
entitled to a maximum of three seats that is one “qualifying” and two additional seats” and
therefore is also constitutional. The Supreme Court believes that through this three-seat limit the
marginalized and underrepresented becomes truly represented and thus denies the domination of
bigger political parties which may dominate the Party-List System through their colossal
machineries.
The 2% threshold prescribed in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 was also questioned for its
existence as being unconstitutional. It should be remembered that in order for a party-list to
reserve a seat in the House of Representatives, the party-list should at least, cross this 2%
threshold and follow the “Veterans Formula” as earlier prescribed by the Supreme Court. But
problems arose when the 20% rule from the Constitution, the highest law of the land, subdued.
BANAT party argues that this 2% threshold hinders the achievement of the 20% allocation
mandated by the Constitution. And as noted by the Supreme Court “Today, a little over eight
years after this Court’s decision in the Veterans Federation Party, we see that in the 14th
Congress, 55 seats are allocated to party list-representatives, using the Veterans formula. But that
figure can never be realized, because the 2-percent threshold vote requirement makes it
mathematically impossible to have more than 50 seats. (emphasis supplied)” And so, “The 2-
percent threshold” the Supreme Court said, “prevents the attainment of the broadest
representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the House of Representatives.”
Consequently, the qualifying 2% threshold was abolished but not its assurance that if ever a party
crosses this threshold it would automatically secure one seat.
31 | P a g e
In a descriptive illustration provided in Barangay Association for National Advancement
and Transparency (BANAT) VS. Commission on Elections G.R. No. 179271, it declared that
“There are 55 available seats. Suppose there are 50 million votes cast for the 100 participants in
the party-list elections. A party that has two percent votes cast, or one million votes, gets a
guaranteed seat. Let us further assume that the first 50 parties will 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 availability of 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 gets two percent of the votes cast for every party it is always impossible for the
number of occupied party-list seats to exceed 50 seats as long as the 2% threshold is present.
And so, the court overruled to nullify the two percent threshold only in relation of the additional
seats as found in RA No. 7941.” Furthermore, the court stated that such a threshold in the
additional seats “hinders” the mandated provision by the constitution that the “The party-list
representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total representatives including those
under the party-list. (emphasis supplied).”
What were the primary contributions of the decisions held in the BANAT Party
arguments?
The decision in Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency
(BANAT) VS. Commission on Elections G.R. No. 179271 paved way to the addition of more
party-list representatives in the Congress. Through the ruling of the Supreme Court in
determining the allocation of seats for party-list representatives under Section 11 of RA No.
7941, several rules were formulated. These rules are the guidelines the Philippine Party-List
32 | P a g e
System currently uses. This formula is known as the “Carpio Formula”. For it was Justice
Carpio, one of present 15 justices, who was the ponente of this formula.
First, in determining the number of allocated seats for party-list representatives, the
number of district representatives should be divided to .80 then multiplied to .20. The results
from this operation would be the number of allocated seats to be filled up by the party-list
representatives.
Second, the number of votes obtained by the concerned party should be divided from the
number of votes obtained from the whole Party-List System. Afterwards, all the parties should be
ranked from the highest to lowest according to percentage and those who would be getting more
than 2%, regardless of getting more than 4% and 6%, will be guaranteed to only 1 seat.
Third, after counting the number of the already guaranteed seats, it should be subtracted
from the number of the allocated seats for party-list representatives as of the first step did show.
Fourth, the number of left seats, after taking the guaranteed seats, should be multiplied to
the percentage of votes the concerned party had received in step two. Those parties who would
get a result of more than 1 is guaranteed to 1 additional seat, but if ever they get more than 2,
they would be granted additional 2 seats, provided that, the number of seats should not exceed 3.
By doing so, the Supreme Court did not only limit the additional seats from the 2 percenters,
rather it opened the Party-List System to any parties who are next in ranked, though they did not
cross the 2% threshold as long as they got more than “1” from the result of the fourth step they
still have the chance of getting a legislative seat until the whole 20% allocation is filled.
33 | P a g e
In brief, the Supreme Court stressed that indeed this 20% allocation is, at all time,
mandatory. Furthermore, in its decision, it said that those parties who had received more than 2%
are already guaranteed to one seat and thus declaring the 2% threshold constitutional. But in
relation to the addition of seats in filling up the 20% allocation for party-list representatives, the
Supreme Court does not limit the seats to parties who were able to cross this 2% threshold, rather
those would be getting more than 1 from step four are still chanced to secure a slot on the
Congress. Hence, it would be possible to fill the 20% allocation and more parties may be
represented in the house. Therefore, the Supreme Court had ruled that the “Veterans Formula”,
which was formerly used in the previous elections had its mathematical flaws making it
impossible to fill the 20% allocation and that in the allocation matters, the Supreme Court had
stated that the formula they had submitted should be followed. In addition, as part of the
Supreme Court’s ruling, political parties were permanently banned in the Party-List System.
The above court decision was only decided under the rule of Justice Reynato Puno, the
present chief justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines. It should be noted that the issues
from the Veterans Federation Party VS. COMELEC and BANAT Party VS. COMELEC were
quite similar in the issues they raised. But by order of precedence, the later court decision in the
petition filed by the BANAT party-list should be followed no matter that an earlier decision was
already made. Logically, it is very much easy to say that since the two court decisions were
tried under two different chief justices, each justice should have a different perception and
interpretation of the concerned laws. But, as ordered, the later decision should always prevail.
The first court decision which was the Veterans Federation Party VS. COMELEC under by
Justice Panganiban could not be considered an erratum. There may have been lapses that
occurred but nevertheless the Supreme Court’s decision on regards to the petitioned case was
34 | P a g e
only meant for betterment of the none other than, the Filipino constituents. Lastly would like to
make it clear that the Supreme Court remains supreme even with its errors.
Recently, Ang Ladlad Party was denied of accreditation from Commission on Elections,
thus forfeiting it to participate in the 2010 elections, what were the primary reasons submitted
by the Commission on Elections for its denial?
In a promulgation submitted by the Commission on Elections on November 11, 2009
entitled “In The Matter Of The Petition For Registration Of Ang Ladlad LGBT Party For
The Party-List System Of Representation In The House Of Representatives” the
commission had decided that the Ang Ladlad Party-list, again, be denied of accreditation
resulting to its non-participation to the upcoming 2010 elections.
Ang Ladlad Party-list seeks to represent the lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgenders
(LGBT) of the Philippines. This party defines the LGBT communities in the Philippines as “a
marginalized and under-represented sector that is particularly disadvantaged because of their
sexual orientation and gender identity." And defines sexual orientation as “refer to a person's
capacity for profound emotional, affectional and sexual attraction to, and intimate and sexual
relations with, individuals of a different gender, of the same gender, or more than one
gender.(underline from the COMELEC resolution)” According to the COMELEC “This
definition of sexual orientation makes it crystal clear that petitioner tolerates immorality which
offends religious beliefs”
Although the Ang Ladlad Party-list had complied with the rules submitted by the Party-
List System Act of 1995, the Commission on Elections said that their petition is “dismissable on
moral grounds” and that their party advocates nothing but “sexual immorality” and “immoral
doctrines”.
35 | P a g e
The Commission on Elections had further elaborated this decision through their citation
from the Bible and the Koran. In The Letters of Paul to the Romans 1:26, 27, Paul wrote:
"For this cause God gave them up into vile affections: for even their women
did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the
men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward
another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in
themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."
The next verses were taken from the Koran:
"For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women "ye are indeed a
people transgressing beyond bounds." (7.81). "And we rained down on them a
shower (of brimstone): Then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin
and crime!" (7:84) "He said: "0 my Lord! Help Thou me against people who do
mischief!""(29:30)."
The Commission on Elections had also added that “should this Commission grant the
petition, we will be exposing our youth to an environment that does not conform to the
teachings of our faith.” After this statement, the COMELEC had quoted Lehman Strauss saying
“older practicing homosexuals are a threat to the youth.” And to that the COMELEC resolution
concluded that “We are not condemning the LGBT, but we cannot compromise the well-being
of the greater number of our people, especially the youth.” (Lately however, Ang Ladlad was
ordered by the Supreme Court to be temporarily included in the official ballot list subject to a
final Supreme Court decision.)
36 | P a g e
What are the particular problems faced by the Philippine Party-List System?
In an article written by Dean Raul C. Pangalangan of the UP College of Law entitled
“The Party-list Experiment: Three Challenges to Reformers” he started by providing a
descriptive statement the Philippine Party-List System is currently facing “Our post-Marcos
constitution engaged in a constitutional experiment. Democracies tend to reward only the best-
funded parties, and push out smaller groups. Worse, our people tended to vote for personalities
rather than platforms. Corrective mechanisms were needed. The drafters thus said that, in
addition to the Congressmen elected traditionally through districts, we will elect Congressmen
nontraditionally through the party-list system. We carved out an enclave seemingly insulated
from the trapos. It would enable people to vote for parties rather than candidates. It
would enable candidates outside the political mainstream to run for office. That
experiment has gone awry. (emphasis supplied)”
The author, Raul C. Pangalangan, enumerated the primary problems the Philippine Party-
List System is currently facing.
“Maintaining the balance between trapos and party-list groups.” Raul Pangalangan
said that the “The first problem lies in the perennial failure to fill all the Congressional seats
allocated by the Constitution for party-list groups. When the Constitution reserves 20% of the
House (or 55 seats) for party-list groups representing the marginalized and underrepresented,
but the law time and again fills only a small fraction of those seats” In other words, the author
pointed out the inconsistency of the formulae the Commission on Elections used in declaring
winners for party-list representatives.
37 | P a g e
“Malacañang’s cooptation of the party-list system” The author said that “The second
problem is precisely that some party-list groups are bogus. They front for government-funded or
sponsored organizations, a façade groups for religious believers otherwise barred by the
Constitution, or serve merely as buffers to ward off impeachment attempts against President
Arroyo.” Indeed, a lot of pseudo party-lists appear in our Party-List System. And clearly, this
defeats the purpose of its establishment.
“A social justice tool or a complement to the major parties” The Philippine Party-
List System was created for party-lists to have a “league of their own”. And so as to speak, it
was created for proportional representation to the marginalized and underrepresented. But it as
an awe to know that most party-lists in Philippines that participate in the elections are not
basically in the same spirit, and thus make up to the long list of disqualified parties the
Commission on Elections had been declaring. This system was created to defeat traditional
politics. And into these problems, did the Supreme Court on 2007 require the Commission on
Elections to open up to the public the list of nominees party-lists had been submitting. By doing
so, the Filipino electorate would have the appropriate information in deliberating their vote. In
brief, lawyer Oscar Tan concludes that “The great dilemma facing anyone studying the party-
list system is whether one believes it was intended to expand the party system, or whether it was
intended as a social justice tool to empower marginalized sectors.”
What was the problem with the election of the 4 th Arroyo in the House of
Representatives?
In an article written by Annie Ruth C. Sabangan entitled “4th Arroyo in the House: A
landed elite who will represent the marginalized” the primary dilemma was that the Party-List
System was used as a vehicle for backdoor entrance to the House of Representatives. The Party-
38 | P a g e
List System was used as a “front” for personal gains. Ms. Sabangan said that “The fourth
Arroyo (Ma. Lourdes Arroyo) who will join the 14th Congress and is expected to give voice to
the marginalized through party-list group Kasangga, belongs to the haciendero clans of the
Tuasons and the Arroyos. (emphasis supplied)” And that this representative from Kasangga
Party-List is “the sister of First Gentleman Jose Miguel “Mike" Arroyo and Negros Occidental
Rep. Ignacio “Iggy" Arroyo, and the aunt of Pampanga Rep. Juan Miguel “Mikey" Arroyo and
Camarines Sur Rep. Diosdado “Dato" Arroyo” making them all in the family.
Also Ms. Sabangan, in her article said that “Akbayan further claims that Kasangga is
connected with the Palace’s Office of External Affairs. Akbayan says that Kasangga’s officers
include Cristeta Absolor, regional director of the Department of Social Welfare and
Development, and Elizabeth Manuel, reportedly the acting executive director of the Philippine
Trade Training Center.”
Federico D. Pascual Jr. of the Philippine Star describes the Philippine Party-List System
to these words “HIJACKED: The tragedy staring us in the face is that the Party-List system
appears to have been hijacked by the same dynasties and their co-conspirators lording it over the
Congress.
Aside from legitimate representatives of marginalized and underrepresented sectors, we
have PL Congressmen who are actually surrogates of the dynasties, vested interests, political
parties and power blocs” And so, it is not surprising to know that abuses are being committed in
this kind of system.
39 | P a g e
Justification of the Study
In an article written by Helen Flores last February 11, 2010 in Philippine Star, it says
that to according to a Pulse Asia survey conducted in January “Seven out of 10 Filipinos are still
unaware of the party-list system, also known as sectoral representation.
The survey, conducted from Jan. 22 to 26, found that 69 percent of Filipinos have not
heard or read about the party-list system. Only 31 percent of the public knows about the
representation system.
The survey asked 1,800 adults aged 18 and above the question: “Have you heard or read
anything about the party-list system?”
This reason, among a number of reasons, gave a stronger conviction to the researcher
that this study is very much relevant to society at present. The upcoming 2010 elections would
surely captivate everyone, but in the same manner, before the election proper, the researcher,
though he is still ineligible to vote, wants to at least extend his support to every Filipinos who
seek for clean and truthful elections. And that this support could be materialized through this
little study about the Philippine Party-List System. He wishes to inform and educate everyone
about this kind of system that this study may be a good source of evaluation for a single precious
vote.
40 | P a g e
CHAPTER 3
Methodology
Introduction
The researcher gathered the data necessary to fulfill and answer the questions posed in
the first chapter of the study. The first part dealt with several literatures, legal bases in particular,
which enabled the researcher to meet his objectives. He had also used various articles which are
relevant to the topic of his study. The second part on the other hand was based on the bills and
resolutions submitted by representatives coming from the Party-List System. These bills and
resolutions were submitted until December 15, 2009 and were manually sorted and computed.
Hence, the researcher limited his study to non-multi-sectoral party-lists.
Research Design
The researcher employed the Descriptive-Evaluative to focus on the topic of his study.
He used existing books, documents, and articles that are related to his topic. The researcher, due
to time constraints, did not have to chance to interview party-list representatives. But in order to
compensate, he utilized the used of Archival Research to gather information and relate them to
his study. Most of the literatures the researcher had read came from legal documents, party-list
agenda, prescribed laws and legitimate books.
Procedures
The researcher first read books related to his topic. He also searched for legal documents,
cases in particular, that would coincide with his study. He used a lot of resources varying from
the ranges of legitimate books to existing articles from reliable internet sources. He then used
41 | P a g e
tables in presenting the data he gathered for him to clearly present his ideas. The first part of his
study was mostly taken from different written literatures in which some were printed as books
and some were posted in the internet. He then analyzed the bills and resolutions submitted by
party-list representatives and presented them in a numerical table.
Research Instrument
The researcher used the Archival Research in which he used books that pertain to the
subject matter. The researcher greatly relied on legal documents like Ang Bagong Bayani vs.
COMELEC, BANAT vs. COMELEC, Veterans’ vs COMELEC and others. He then took the
measures submitted by party-list representatives from a legitimate internet open source. Lastly,
he sorted and computed everything to meet his objectives.
42 | P a g e
CHAPTER 4
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
Introduction
This chapter presents data that were collected through research. The researcher had used
tables in presenting the data that were gathered. Data in this chapter were manually reviewed and
computed in order for the researcher to meet the objectives of his study. He identified the
measures which may be in form of resolutions and bills that a party-list representative had
submitted. Admittedly, the bills passed by representatives in this chapter were well crafted and
were in fact very much useful, material and necessary, but for the purposes of this study, the
researcher focused only on the bills of sectoral application and not on the bills of local and
national application. He then assessed these measures and determined its relevance to the sectors
they ought to represent. Tables in this chapter will be limited only to non-multi-sectoral parties.
The functions of a representative whether district or party-list are the legislative, the
constituencies’ concern and the projects. In terms of legislation, the same includes, committee
meetings, committee deliberations, attendance in plenary sessions, plenary participation in
debates and even privilege speeches to which every members of Congress can in a way inject
their ideas or even their sectoral concerns and advocacies. However, for purposes of this study,
the researcher focused on the bills and resolutions submitted by the party list representative as he
believes that these bills and resolutions are good manifestations of their duty in fulfillment of
their legislative functions specially that party-list representatives were elected not on their
personal capacities but instead because of their parties’ platform and advocacies. Therefore, in
43 | P a g e
one way or another, these bills and resolutions are good yardstick to perhaps measure their
effectivity as a party-list representative.
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: 1-UTAK

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Vigor MA. D. Mendoza
SECTOR: Transport
APPLICATION TOTAL BILLS AND

LOCAL NATIONAL SECTORAL RESOLUTION
Bills Authored O 1 5 6
Bills Co-Authored 1 5 2 8
Resolutions Authored 0 2 7 9
Resolutions Co-Authored 1 5 7 9
Table 1of 1-UTAK Party-list
1-UTAK is a party-list that seeks to represent the transportation sectors of the Philippines
in general. It is literally 1-United Transportation Koalitions. Vigor MA. D. Mendoza, a first
termer, is its representative. In the table it shows that of the most of the bills he was engaged
during the 14th Congress were in relevance to the transportation sector. Furthermore, he
principally authored 5 bills and 7 resolutions in favor of his sector. His concern to his sector is
quite noticeable. Most of the sectoral concerns he addressed were traffic schemes, ticketing
system and illegal activities of kolorum drivers. He also had amended oil regulating measures
and safety precautions for the motorists.
44 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: A Teacher

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Mariano U. Piamonte
SECTOR: Teachers

Table 2.1 of A Teacher Party-list
The Advocacy for Teacher Empowerment Through Action, Cooperation, and Harmony
Towards Educational Reforms or A TEACHER Party-list claims in their leadership agenda “to
promote the development and welfare of both the teaching and non-teaching personnel. Among
its legislative agenda are reviewing existing educational laws and sponsoring and supporting bills
that will provide incentives and benefits to teaching and non-teaching personnel, assisting poor
but deserving students, and providing government assistance to private schools. (Newsbreak.com
Party-List Profile)” The party’s representative is Cong. Mariano U. Piamonte who, during the study,
is on his first term as a legislator.
Regrettably, in spite of the party’s advocacy of “sponsoring and supporting bills”, it is
very evident that Rep. Piamonte had been lately very much into sponsoring bills not of sectoral
application but more of bills of national application. He had co-authored 15 bills of local
application, 32 bills of national application and co-authored only 10 bills for his sector. In
45 | P a g e
addition to, Rep. Piamonte had not initiated any bills as principal author and thus defeated his
party’s aim of “sponsoring and supporting bills that will provide incentives and benefits to
teaching and non-teaching personnel”.
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: A Teacher

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Ulpiano Sarmiento III
SECTOR: Teachers

Bills Authored 0 1 2 3
Table 2.2 of A TeacherParty-list
On the same boat with Rep. Mariano, Cong. Ulpiano Sarmiento is the second
representative of the A TEACHER Party-list. He principally authored 1 bill of national
application and 2 bills of sectoral application. He also had co-authored 1 bill of local application
and 2 bills of national application. Other than these, he also sponsored 2 resolutions for his sector
as well as 2 resolutions which are in national scope.
46 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ABA-AKO

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Leonardo Montemayor
SECTOR: Farmers/Urban Poor

Table 3 of ABA-AKO Party-list
ABA-AKO (Alyansang Bayanihan Ng Mga Magsasaka,Manggagawang-Bukid At
Mangingisda) is a party-list representing the farmers and the urban poor. It says in its party
agenda that it “is an alliance of farmers, fisher folk, urban poor, and supporters of the traditional
natural Filipino family.” Leonardo Montemayor, the party’s representative, states his profession
as a farmers’ organization leader. He is a three time Congressman and former Secretary of
Department of Agrarian Reform. Most of the bills he had been engaged during the study were of
sectoral concerns. Although he had only authored 2 bills for his sectors, his active participation
in co-authoring bills that will appeal his sector is greatly seen. He has also co-authored 6 bills
and personally sponsored 7 resolutions of sectoral application.
47 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ABAKADA GURO

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Jonathan Dela Cruz
SECTOR: Teaching Sector

Table 4 of ABAKADA Party-list
Abakada-Guro is a party list organizations for teachers with Congressman Dela Cruz as
its representative. In terms of legislative functions, it appears that no single bill was filed both as
author and co-author for his sector that will directly benefit the teachers or the teaching
profession. It also appears that more bills of national concern (11) instead were filed.
48 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ABONO

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Robert Raymund M. Estrella
SECTOR: Regional

Table 5.1 of ABONO Party-list
ABONO party-list represents the farmers of the agricultural sector. It is a regional party
from Northern Luzon. Robert Raymund M. Estrella is the ABONO party-list representative. It is
his first term as member of Congress. He is an agriculturist by profession and also belongs to the
political clan of Estrellas in Pangasinan. He principally authored 2 sectoral concerns namely:
“An Act Granting Farmers and Fishermen a Discount on Petroleum Products and for Other
Purposes” and “An Act Renaming the National Irrigation Administration to “National Irrigation
and Drainage Administration”, Amending Republic Act No. 3601, An Act Creating the National
Irrigation Administration, and for other Purposes”. It is very alarming that compared to the 55
resolutions he had co-authored of National Application he only had submitted 6 co-authored
resolutions of Sectoral Application. Furthermore, out of the 2 bills he had principally authored
only 1 may be find useful enough to at least physically affect the livelihood of the farmers. For
his latter bill was an only act of renaming an institution and indeed was nothing much.
49 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ABONO

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Francisco Emmanuel Ortega
SECTOR: Regional

Table 5.2 of ABONO Party-list
Another representative of ABONO Party-list is Francisco Emmanuel Ortega. He is a
businessman of profession and is a first termer as a legislator. He also came from another
political family of Ortegas in La Union. On table 5.2 of ABONO Party-list, it is clearly seen that
Hon. Francisco Emmanuel Ortega has not yet principally authored any bills of sectoral concerns.
To add, he has not been engaged to any resolutions for sectoral concerns, principally authored or
co-authored, other than being co-authors of 2 bills for the agenda of his party. The researcher had
even found out that these 2 bills he had co-authored were bills Hon. Robert Raymund M. Estrella
had previously principally authored who also belongs to the same party Hon. Francisco
Emmanuel Ortega represents. By social obligations as a party member, it is just proper to support
a fellow comrade or party member who seeks to pass a measure and that this support could be
materialized by at least being a co-author of a bill. This situation could be clearly seen in the case
of Hon. Francisco Emmanuel Ortega as presented in the above table.
50 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ABS

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Catalina Leonen-Pizaro
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 6 of ABS Party-list
ABS is an advocacy group of Arts Business and Science Professionals, a first termer in
the House and represented by Congresswoman Pizaro a businesswoman and wife of Court of
Appeals Justice Pizaro. But unfortunately, Congresswoman Pizaro, despite its advocacy for arts,
business and science, has not filed any single bill regarding their advocacy except for those that
she co-authored, and with no surprise, like most of the party list, the bills and resolutions filed
were mostly of national concern.
51 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: AGAP

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Nicanor Briones
SECTOR: Agricultural

Table 7.1 of AGAP Party-list
AGAP Party-list is a party representing the agricultural sector. According to their party
agenda, the AGAP Party-list seeks to “uphold the welfare of farmers through appropriate
legislation, strong advocacies and resource generation. (Agappartylist.multiply.com, AGAP
Mission Statement) ” One of its representative is Hon. Nicanor Briones who is on his first term
as a legislator. Rep. Briones is an accountant by profession and also a businessman. Noticeably,
in the above table, the number of bills, resolutions he had authored or co-authored for national
application is much greater than that of sectoral concern. For bills he had authored, 3 are of
national application while only 2 are of sectoral concern. For the bills he had co-authored 22 bills
are again of national application while only 4 are of sectoral application. Lastly, for the
resolutions he had co-authored 5 are of local application, 14 are of national application, and none
for sectoral application.
52 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: AGAP

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Ceasar Cobrador
SECTOR: Agricultural

Table 7.2 of AGAP Party-list
Rep. Caesar Cobrador is a businessman by profession. As a businessman, “he also holds
positions with various companies: president/vice chairman, Unified Trading and Industrial
Services, Inc.; director/treasurer, All Around Services and Merchandising Corp.;
president/director for training, Unified Security and Training Academy; vice chairman/director ,
Unibond Credit Corp.; director, Rainbow Insurance and Brokerage Corp.; director, Unified
Medical Clinic; consultant, Chancellor Security and Services Corp. and Audacious Security and
Services Corp.” (Cassio, 2008)
However, despite his milestones in business, in terms of legislation, Rep. Cobrador has
not filed any bills or resolutions, not even one attending to the national, local or sectoral concern.
53 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ALAGAD

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Rodante Marcoleta
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 8.1 of Alagad Party-list
ALAGAD Party-list from its official website states that it has its mission of “improving
and enhancing the quality of life of the Filipino urban poor through population management and
responsible parenthood.” And “strengthening and upliftment of the state of the Filipino family by
nourishing positive family values that mould the social dimension of the country.” And with its
renowned mission, ALAGAD had yet to file a proposed bill to address its advocacy, though a
single bill was already earlier co-authored. This is also true with the case of the resolutions, Rep.
Rodante Marcoleta has not yet filed any resolutions in relation to its advocacy except for a single
resolution co-authored but for the purpose of national application.
Hon. Marcoleta is a two termer Congressman who became prominent after indorsing the
“bogus” complaint for impeachment against President Arroyo.
54 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ALAGAD

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Diogenes Osabel
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 8.2 of Alagad Party-list
Like his party mate mentioned above, Hon. Diogenes Osabel, a two time Congressman
representing ALAGAD Party-list, also fell short from the researcher’s expectation. The above
table shows that he only filed a single bill as co-author which directly attends to the party’s
advocacy. Nothing more seems to be of interest for his party other than this single co-authored
bill. To add, the co-authored bill was concerning the suspension of loans for the victims hit by
typhoon Ondoy. And significantly, typhoon Ondoy had just hit Philippines a few months ago and
perhaps, the researcher had thought that if this typhoon didn’t occur, then there could have been
“zero visibility” to the measures submitted by Hon. Diogenes Osabel addressing his party’s
advocacy.
55 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ALIF

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Acmad Tomawis
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 9 of ALIF Party-list
Ang Laban ng Indiginong Filipino Party List (ALIF) by the name itself is supposedly a
sector for indigenous Filipinos, however, with its present representative Hon. Tomawis, the party
is more of a regional organization based in Mindanao. So far, ALIF has not filed any sectoral bill
and instead just co-authored a bill which is of national significance. While some representatives,
have a very few numbers of measures submitted, some just didn’t. And unarguably, Hon.
Tomawis, is just one of them.
ALIF is also a first termer in Congress while Cong. Tomawis was then a nominee of the
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino Party which was disqualified by a Supreme Court Decision.
Cong. Tomawis was also a former member of the Regional Legislative Assembly in Central
Mindanao during the Marcos time. His family owns a transportation business known as the
Tomawis Transport, the biggest Muslim owned transport business in Mindanao. Also worth
56 | P a g e
mentioning is the fact that last years’ nominee of the party were practically of common surnames
namely:
1. Hon. Acmad M. Tomawis

2. Aissah M. Tomawis
3. Raima Macalandong T. Cali
4. Jamela M. Tomawis
5. Gamal M. Tomawis
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: AMIN

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Mujiv Hataman
SECTOR: Regional Organization

Table 10.1of AMIN Party-list
AMIN is on its third term in Congress with Cong. Hataman being a member of 12th, 13 th
and 14th Congress. Cong. Hataman hails from the Hataman political family in Sulo. Cong.
Hataman authored 8 sectoral bills out of the 9 bills he filed and also co-authored 10 bills for
sectoral application. The bills are mostly for the concern of the Muslim areas in Mindanao.
Although, there is really a great participation shown by AMIN Rep. Hataman in bills of national
57 | P a g e
application, it is still very noticeable that he tries to compensate to his sector by setting due
measures to it whether by resolution or a bill.
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: AMIN

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Ariel Hernandez
SECTOR: Regional Organization

Table 10.2 of AMIN Party-list
Anak ng Mindanao (AMIN) Rep. Ariel Hernandez, although a new member of Congress,
had already filed 2 bills that are of sectoral concern with 1 bill as co-author generally addressing
Mindanao development. He has not authored or co-authored any resolutions whether it may be
of local, national, and sectoral application. Cong. Ariel C. Hernandez is a peace and
development worker in Mindanao and is the former Executive Director of Balay Mindanaw
Foundation, Inc. (BMFI).
58 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: AN-WARAY

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Neil Benedict Montejo
SECTOR: Regional

Table 11.1 of An-Waray Party-list
In the An-Waray Party-list party agenda, it stated that it is “party-list organization that
envisions a just progressive and peaceful society characterized by its principles of
‘katilingban’[sense of community], ‘kahimyang [peace] and ‘kauswagan’ [progress] through the
adoption of the community-based and peace oriented development agenda.” (Anwaray.com, An-
Waray Party-list Agenda) The party’s name has its ethnic roots from Eastern Visayas, but it
clamed that its purpose is “national in scope and character”. But despite these seemingly flawless
words, the researcher was dismayed that such flowery words contradict their actions. In the data
gathered by the researcher, he found out that only 1 bill as measure was submitted by Hon. Neil
Benedict Montejo concerning its sector and that this bill was principally authored by his co-
party-representative. Hon. Florencio Noel. Montejo also came from the political family of the
Montejos in Leyte.
59 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: AN-WARAY

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Florencio Noel
SECTOR: Regional

Table 11.2 of An-Waray Party-list
In the study, An-Waray Party-list was considered as a regional sector mainly because its
representation is greatly coming from the Visayas region. Hon. Florencio Noel is one of the An-
Waray Party’s representatives. He is already on his second term as a party representative. But
despite his almost 6 years of service in his sector, it very notable that most of the concerns he
addressed are of national application which can be clearly seen in the table as he co-authored 25
bills and 12 resolutions which in no doubt is far greater from the total sum of 10 measures
including bills and resolutions, authored or co-authored, he addressed for his sector. The problem
of submitting more bills for national application than that of sectoral application for party-list
representatives seems to be an always concurring event which is again very evident in the table
presented. Rep. Noel is the husband of the incumbent representative of Malabon City – Navotas,
Representative Josephine Lacson-Noel.
60 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ANAD

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Pastor Alcover, Jr.
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 12 of ANAD Party-list
The Alliance for Nationalism and Democracy (ANAD), is an advocacy group against
Communism. Congressman Alcober is a first termer and a rebel returnee. Although he failed to
file any proposed bill as principal author in line with its advocacy, Congressman Alcober
principally sponsored 8 resolutions mostly aimed at investigating the supposed atrocities of the
New Peoples Army, the armed wing of the Communist party of the Philippines,.
61 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: Ang Kasangga

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Ma. Lourdes T. Arroyo
SECTOR: Micro-Entrepreneurs

Table 13 of Ang Kasangga Party-list
Ang Kasangga Party-list is currently represented by Hon. Ma. Lourdes Arroyo, the sister
of first gentleman Miguel “Mike” Arroyo. Ang Kasangga seeks to represent the Micro-
Entrepreneurs. According to their party agenda, “Ang Kasangga sa Kaunlaran, Inc. ay samahan
ng mga MICRO-ENTREPRENEURS o maliit na namumhunan mula sa iba’t ibang sector tulad
ng transportasyon, market vendors, may kapansanan, magsaska, kabataan propesyonal,
kababaihan, maliit na negosyante, at iba pa.” (Newsphilippines.com, Party-list Profile:Kasangga)
But despite this party’s claim of being in representation to the micro-entrepreneurs, it is very
disturbing that out of 8 measures, consisting of bills and resolutions authored or co-authored,
only one bill is directly in address to the micro-entrepreneurs and that this is “Barangay Micro
Entrepreneurs Business Enterprises Act of 2002” and no other more. All the other measures that
were submitted are already of national or local application.
62 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: APEC

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Ernesto Pablo
SECTOR: Electric Cooperatives

Table 14.1 of APEC Party-list
APEC (Association of Philippine Electric Cooperatives) Party-list represents the electric
cooperatives in the Philippines. The party has two seats in Congress. Hon. Ernesto Pablo is one
of the representatives. He had principally authored 3 bills of sectoral application and these are:
“An Act Condoning the Penalties of Camarines Norte Electric Cooperative Inc.”, “An Act to
Amend the Cooperative Code of the Philippines” and “An Act Amending Sections 6 and 7 of
Republic Act No. 9337”. He had also-co-authored 6 bills of sectoral application. But 38 of these
bills he had co-authored are already of national application making it a lot greater than the
combined number (15) of sectoral application of resolutions and bills he had authored and co-
authored.
63 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: APEC

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Edgar Valdez
SECTOR: Electric Cooperatives

Table 14.2 of APEC Party-list
Congressman Edgar Valdez is on his third term as Congressman representing his party-
list APEC. As a third termer, he already had authored 3 bills for his sector these are namely: “An
Act Condoning the Interest of the Paid Fuel Compensating Charge/Incremental Cost Charge of
Zamboanga Del Norte Electric Cooperative”, “An Act to Restore the Tax Exemption of Electric
Cooperatives created under P.D. 269”, “An Act to Amending Republic Act Numbered 7941
known as the Party-List System Act” and another “Act Condoning the interest of the Fuel
Compensating Cost Charge” .
Despite of these sectoral bills, Cong. Valdez had been mostly engaged in co-authoring
bills of national application. He had co-authored 60 bills of national scope and only 5 bills of
sectoral scope. He also had co-authored 3 resolutions of local application and 10 resolutions of
national application.
64 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ARC

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Narciso D. Santiago III
SECTOR: Agrarian

Table 15.1 of ARC Party-list
Alliance for Rural Concerns or ARC is a first termer in Congress. ARC has its roots from
the Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries who are the CARP Beneficiaries which is the area-based and
clientele of the party. Cong. Santiago is the representative of the party and is the son of Sen.
Merriam Defensor-Santiago. Cong. Santiago had authored 1 bill of local application, 586 bills of
national application, and 12 bills of sectoral application. He also had co-authored 177 bills of
national application and 4 bills of sectoral application adding to his large number of bills he had
submitted.
But despite this seemingly large number of bills and resolutions, sad to say, only “a little”
of those bills were in relevance to the cry of his sector. He only had 12 sectoral bills authored
against a 586 bills authored for national application. A great difference from the number of bills
could be concluded.
65 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: ARC

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Oscar D. Francisco
SECTOR: Agrarian

Table 15.2 of ARC Party-list
Cong. Oscar D. Francisco, another representative of ARC Party-list, had not authored any
bills of sectoral application. It can be inferred from the table above that he is contended in just
being co-authors of bills and resolutions for his sector. He just have co-authored 2 bills of
national application, 2 bills of sectoral application and 1 bill of local application. The same goes
with the resolutions in which he co-authored 4 bills of national application and 1 bill of sectoral
application.
66 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: AT
NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Daryl Grace J. Abayon
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 16 of AT Party-list
AT (Angat Tayo) Party List is a first termer in Congress, though it has no specific sector
being represented AT party-list nominee is the wife of former Northern Samar Congressman
Harlin C. Abayon. AT Party-list can be traced back from its organizers led by Teddie Elson
Rivera, an official of the state-owned Philippine International Trading Corporation Pharma.
Going to its legislative record AT Rep. Daryl Grace Abajon has so far no bill filed as
principal author and instead co-authored 18 bills to which mostly are of national application. She
has also no resolution authored or co-authored which pertains to her sectoral concern.
67 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: BANAT

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Salvador Britanico
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 17 of Banat Party-list
While a first termer party list in Congress BANAT (Barangay Association for National
Advancement and Transparency) Rep. Salvador Britanico is not new in politics. Cong. Bitanico
was a former Assemblyman both in the Interim and Regular Batasan Pambansa. He was also a
former councilor, delegate to 1973 Constitutional Convention and Deputy Minister of Education.
His experience however, does not speak well of his legislative achievements as sectoral
representative having authored only 2 bills for his party’s advocacy. Cong. Britanico did not
engage himself much in proposing bills and resolutions for his party. Other than the earlier
mentioned 2 sectoral bills he had authored, no resolutions, authored or co-authored appeals
anymore to his sector. The same goes with the bills he had co-authored, 2 are of local
application, 1 for national application but 0 for sectoral application.
68 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: BANTAY

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Jovito S. Palparan
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 18 of Banay Party-list
BANTAY Partylist is practically an anti-communist advocacy group serving their its first
term in Congress. Bantay Party-list from its official website has the following missions and
goals:
1. Security of people’s life and wealth45.
2. Insurgency free Philippines45.
3. Stable democratic institutions45.
4. Social empowerment of marginalized people45.
5. Strong Bantay Party-list.
Cong. Paplaparan is the Bantay Party-list representative in Congress, a military man
commissioned in the Armed Forces of the Philippines with his first assignment in Mindanao. His
stint in the 14th Congress saw him however proposing a bill by way of co-authorship of 3 bills
for national application and 1 bill for local application with none both authored and co-authored
for his party’s advocacy. Again, Cong. Palparan may be considered as one of “zero visibility”
69 | P a g e
Congressmen fighting for their sectoral concerns or advocacy with not even one measure
submitted to House for the benefit of his party.
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: BUHAY

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Rene Velarde
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 19.1 of Buhay Party-list
Buhay Party-list from its official website states that it “acknowledges the sanctity and
value of human life as the most fundamental element of society and recognizes the rights of
individuals disadvantaged by age, sickness and disability” it also “believes that every child has
the right to be born, the right to live” The party professes “to protect and support the unborn, the
sick, the disabled and others not capable of protecting themselves alone, through observance of
their basic right to live” In the 14th Congress the Buhay Party-list is the biggest party-list
organization in terms of votes garnered during the last election having gain 3 seats is Congress.
Cong. Velarde is one of the 3 representatives of Buhay Party-list in Congress. He is on
his third term as Congressman. He is the son of El Shadai leader Mike Velarde and is the riches
70 | P a g e
party-list lawmaker in Congress with an asset of no less than Php 30 million. As a Congressman,
he authored 12 bills in which 2 concerns his party’s advocacy and 10 are of national application,
again a far cry from the expectation that the party’s advocacy should be primordial in his
legislative task, though their party was against the Reproductive Health Bill.

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Irwin C. Tieng
SECTOR: Advocacy

The son of Solar Sports TV owner Wilson Tieng, Cong. Irwin Tieng is also a party-list
representative of BUHAY Party List. As a Congressman, he authored 13 bills with 3 bills
reflective of the party’s advocacy and the rest are of national application. As a co author of 81
bills 77 of which are of national applications while only 4 are of the party’s advocacy. The same
is also true for the resolutions both for authored and co-authored where in which not even one
resolution is in respect to their advocacy was ever introduced. Like Cong. Velarde, he is also
against the Reproductive Health Bill.
71 | P a g e

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Ma. Carrisa O. Coscolluella
SECTOR: Advocacy

A first termer Congresswoman and a businesswoman, Cong. Coscolluela, besides her
multitude of local and national bills filed, failed to at least participate in authoring or co-
authoring any bills or resolutions for her party’s concern. She is another manifestation of party-
list representatives who are in “zero-visibility” in setting measures for her sectoral concern.
72 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: BUTIL

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Leonila V. Chavez
SECTOR: Farmers

BUTIL Party-list is a farmers’ party originally comprising of 13 farmers organization.
This party form part of the a party-list to win during the first elections for the Party-List System.
The party’s name was then running under the name Luzon Farmers Party. As a farmers party, its
representative is Leonila Chavez who has a long record in farmers organization that gave way for
nomination. She is the author 4 sectoral bills and notably of which is the CARP Extension Bill
which was signed into law. She also authored 7 resolutions all geared towards the upliftment of
the farmers sector. She then co-authored 4 bills of local application, 63 bills of national
application and 12 bills of sectoral application. Although she had been engaged into a lot of co-
authorship for bills of national application, still, it very much noticeable that a number of the
measures she had been dealing with was for her sector’s concern. This January of 2010, Cong.
Leonila Chavez died
73 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: BUTIL

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Agapito Guanlao
SECTOR: Farmers

Also a farmer leader, Cong. Guanlao is a first termer in Congress. However, in his short
stint it appears that he has already co-authored 5 bills and 3 resolutions for his sector. Although
his case may be considered as somewhat “few in numbers” and was all only participation of co-
authoring bills and resolutions. Still the number of measures for his sector he had been engaged,
compared to the number of measures for national and local application he filed, speaks of his
concern to his party.
74 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: CIBAC

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Joel Villanueva
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 21.1 of CIBAC Party-list
CIBAC Party List claims to be an organization dedicated towards fighting graft and
corruption. Organized sometime in 1997 and has had its baptism during the impeachment
complaint filed against President Estrada. As a party list organization, CIBAC is already a
member of the 12 th 13th and now the 14th Congress.
CIBAC Party-list’s first representative is Cong. Joel Villanueva. He is the son of
Evangelist, now presidential candidate, Eddie Villanueva of the Jesus is Lord Church. Rep. Joel
is Villanueva a holder of a study certificate from Harvard University. He was the Chairman of
the Kristiyanong Kabataan para sa Bayan (KKB), a youth organization of the JIL Church. He is
also a member of the millionaires club in terms of assets and liabilities. As a Congressman, he
was the author of the proposed bill known as the “Whistle Blowers Act” which is one of his only
2 authored bills and 3 bills co-authored.
75 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: CIBAC

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Cinchona Cruz- Gonzales
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 21.2 of CIBAC Party-list
A lawyer by profession, Rep. Cinchona Cruz-Gonzales is a first termer in Congress. She
had already filed 9 bills which were of national application. She had co-authored 37 bills in
which 3 appeals to local concern. Notably however is that she failed to file as author of any bill
concerning her party’s advocacy except for one co-authorship. She also had authored 2
resolutions and co-authored 2 resolutions both for her party’s concern.
76 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: COOP-NATCCO

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Jose Ping-ay
SECTOR: Cooperative

Table 22.1 of COOP NATCCO Party-list
COOP-NATCCO Party List claims to be the biggest and strongest cooperatives
organization in the country. Coop-Natcco was among the original party list organization that won
a seat in Congress and now is on its third time with the last two terms in its consecutive. As a
cooperative based party list organization, Coop-Natcco adheres to “Economic Democratization
by promoting a member owned and member controlled cooperatives.”
The party’s first representative in Congress is Cong. Ping-ay who has been in the
cooperative movement for more than a decade. He was the a former Vice Mayor of Sta. Cruz,
Ilocos Sur and was a substitute for the vacancy in Congress with the death of Cong. Cua his co-
party representative.
As a legislator, Cong. Ping-ay already filed a total of 6 bills, one which he authored
concerning his sector and 3 bills co-authored which are of national application 1 for local
77 | P a g e
application and another 1 for his sectoral concern. Also during his tenure in the 14th Congress,
the bill authored by late Cong. Cua on the Philippine Cooperative Code was signed into law and
now remains to be one of the major accomplishments of the party.
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: COOP-NATCCO

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Cresente Paez
SECTOR: Cooperative

Table 22.2 of COOP NATCCO Party-list
Cong. Paez of Coop-Nattco Party-list is a two time Congressman having been a member
of the 11th and 14th Congress. He is an active cooperative leader having served the cooperative
sectors in various capacity both national and in the international community. As a member of the
14th congress, Cong. Paez had his following share in legislation by sponsoring 1 bill of sectoral
concern and 1 and 2 bills for local and national concern respectively.
78 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: KABATAAN

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Raymond Palatino
SECTOR: Youth

Table 23 of Kabataan Party-list
Kabataan Party-list claims to be the “the first and only youth party-list group in
Philippine Congress today” (Kabataanpartylist.com, About Kabataan) It started as an organized
youth group which was later on collaborated by other youth movements such as the National
Union of Students, College Editors Guild, the League of Filipino Students, Student Christian
Movement of the Philippines, Anakbayan and Kabataang Artisa para sa Tunay na Kalayaan.
Rep. Raymond Palatino is its torch bearer in the House of Representatives. The party, according
to their collective mission states that “it supports youth and student-led organizations working
for social, political, economic, cultural and environmental justice in the Philippines, and enjoins
youth from all walks of life to foster active participation in nation-building, good governance and
social change.47” With this mission, the party had been engaged to a number of measures. It is
noticeable that 40 bills co-authored by Rep. Raymond Palatino appeals to national concern.
Furthermore, he had also been a co-author of a number of 106 resolutions which again pertains
to national concern. But despite the party’s active participation to measures of national scope,
79 | P a g e
still the party representative Raymond Palatino compensates by not forgetting to set due
measures for the advocacy push by its sector. He had principally authored 4 bills and 8
resolutions for his party. To add, he also had been a collaborator to 5 bills and 13 resolutions by
being a co-author to these measures.
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: KAKUSA

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Ranulfo P. Canonigo
SECTOR: Jail Detainees

Table 24 of Kakusa Party-list
Kapatiran ng mga na Kulong na Walang Sala or KAKUSA Party-list seeks to represent
the jail detainees or the prisoners with Cong. Jalosjos as one of the organizers. As one of it’s
platforms stated from its official website, it aims to “take the lead in seeking redress in behalf of
those who are innocent but continue to languish in jails” and “to fight for the prisoners’ rights,
particularly the right to be heard and to economic pursuits.” But with this salutary platform, Rep.
Ranulfo Canonigo fell short of setting due measures for his party’s concern. There is also this
“zero visibility” in his actions taken during the time the study was conducted. He only had been
engaged to 1 resolution of local application and 3 resolutions of national application which are
80 | P a g e
both collaborated as co-authors. And sad to say, nothing anymore appeals to the concern of his
sector
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: Senior Citizens

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Godofredo Arquiza
SECTOR: Senior Citizens

Table 25 of Senior Citizens Party-list
Senior Citizens Party is in representation to elders of the society. Rep. Godofredo
Arquiza is its sole representative. Rep. Arquiza principally authored 4 bills out of his 5 bills in
line with his sectoral concern. The bills he had submitted ranges from the pensions received by
the elderly in the society to appropriations of government funds to them. But after these actions,
it is very visible in the table presented above that Rep. Arquiza no longer made any measures for
his party. Furthermore, he just engaged himself in bills of national application and local
application.
81 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: TUCP

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Raymond Democrito Mendoza
SECTOR: Labor

Table 26 of TUCP Party-list
Trade Union Congress of the Philippines or TUCP represents the labor sector of the
Philippines in general. Rep. Raymond Democrito Mendoza is the party-representative. Rep.
Mendoza is the husband of Rep. Emmylou Aliño-Mendoza, a third-term Congresswoman of the
first district of North Cotabato. Rep. Raymond Mendoza is the son of ALU-TUCP founder
Democrito T. Mendoza, a lawyer. He also had served as the president and vice president for
international affairs of ALU (Associated Labor Union) . He was also the assistant secretary of
the Department of Environment and Natural Resources from 2001 to 2205 and director of the
Philippine National Oil Company from 2008 to the present.
With this par-excellence profile, Rep. Mendoza had principally authored 3 bills of
sectoral application and 2 bills of national application. He also authored 1 resolution for national
application and 1 resolution for sectoral application. In spite of his “few” number of bills, most
of the bills Rep. Mendoza had submitted were directly in concern to his party.
82 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: Uni-MAD

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Teodoro Lim
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 27 of Uni-Mad Party-list
Uni-MAD Party-list is an advocacy group represented by Cong. Teodoro Lim. Cong. Lim
had principally authored 1 bill for his party’s sectoral concern and nothing more. He had been
engaged into co-authoring bills and resolutions for local and national application. But other than
this, no measures were clearly set for his sectoral concern. This party was the former MAD
(Mamamayan Ayaw sa Droga) Party with Richard Gomez as their first nominee. Consequently,
this party was disqualified as a government sponsored program.
83 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: Veterans’ Federation Party

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Estrella DL Santos
SECTOR: Veterans

Table 28 of Veterans’ Party-list
The Veterans’ Federation Party is in representation to the elderly or war veterans in
particular. Rep. Estrella DL. Santos is the party’s sole representative. With no doubt, Rep.
Estrella fell short of setting measures for her party. She only had the chance to address her sector
through co-authoring a single bill that in effect will appeal to her sector. Other than this, she had
participated more in bills of national and local application. She had co-authored 1 bill of local
application and 2 bills of national application. She also had co-authored a single resolution of
national application and nothing more.
84 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: YACAP

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Carol Jayne Lopez
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 29.1 of YACAP Party-list
Youth Against Corruption and Poverty or YACAP is an advocacy group for corruption.
The party mainly consists of new graduates and young urban professionals. This party aims “To
form a broad, national formation of crusaders and volunteers which will lead the fight against
poverty and all forms of corruption in society” and “To support all peaceful and meaningful
resolutions to political conflicts”. (Yacap.org, YACAP Mission) YACAP Party has 2
representatives in the House, Rep. Carol Jayne Lopez is one of them. Cong. Lopez, despite the
advocacy push by YACAP Party failed to utilize measures that will support her party’s concern.
She had only principally authored a single bill and single resolution that will directly affect her
party’s concern. Other than that, she invested 3 bills of local application and 16 bills of national
application as a co-author. But sad to say, out of 22 bills and resolutions, authored or co-
authored, only 2 bills submitted by Rep. Lopez are in direct relation to the advocacy push by her
party.
85 | P a g e
NAME OF PARTY-LIST: YACAP

NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: Haron Omar
SECTOR: Advocacy

Table 29.2 of YACAP Party-list
YACAP Party-list Rep. Haron Omar had not authored any bills or resolutions that will
address his party’s sectoral concern. He just have co-authored 1 bill of local application, 1 bill of
national application, and 1 bill of sectoral application. He also had co-authored 1 resolution of
national application. It is very noticeable that Rep. Haron Omar had not been engaging in setting
measures for his party’s sector. To add, the above table surmises that he does not actively
participate in passing bills or measures in the House whether it may be of national, local or even
sectoral concern.
86 | P a g e
Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J. said that “The party-list system, an innovation introduced by the
1987 Constitution in order to encourage the growth of a multi-party system is designed to give a
chance to marginalized sectors of society to elect their representatives to the Congress. A
scheme aimed at giving meaningful representation to the interests of sectors which are not
adequately attended to in normal deliberations, it is envisioned that system will encourage
interest in political affairs on the part of a large number of citizens who feel that they are
deprived of the opportunity to elect spokesmen of their own choosing under the present system.
It is expected to forestall resort to extra-parliamentary means by minority groups which
would wish to express their interests and influence governmental policies, since every
citizen is given a substantial representation. (emphasis supplied)
Despite the seemingly well versed words surrounding the aims of the Party-List System
Act of 1995, it is unarguable that this system is facing serious problems that perhaps may
pronounce its fall. The Party-List System is undergoing severe dilemmas of near cooptations of
party-lists to the influential few, unjust representations to the elite and a malign affair to the
closely related representatives. But what does it really take to overcome a salutary mission
declared by the agenda of this system? A callous heart. The researcher believes that a callous
heart forged in the spirit of unsound purpose brings nothing but a degrading kind of leadership.
So that according to Tangkia (2001) “The party-list system of representation, while
laudable in its intent, faces tough challenges ahead to make it truly effective and to achieve the
"broadest possible representation" of the marginalized sectors. The novelty of the concept,
coupled with a less than efficient COMELEC, resulted in a low voter turnout and lackluster party
87 | P a g e
performance in the first ever party-list elections. The strict interpretation and application of
its enabling law imposed additional burdens with which party-list representatives have to
contend in order to make their voices heard in the halls of Congress. (emphasis supplied)
The Philippine Party-List System is on the verge of controversies. These controversies
may sooner be the future problems it may face. During the course of the study, the researcher
had found out the Party-List System is used as a social ground for family reunion. Some party-
list nominees are closely related to other representatives. Some are even husband and wife in the
Congress. Furthermore, he found out that there are certain mis-accreditations of party-list that are
to join the party-list of elections so that this upcoming 2010 national elections a number of
organizations found potential in this system. But sad to say, most of them are not really in
representation of the marginalized and underrepresented. Some are mere advocacy groups or
pseudo party-lists. These parties do not have a clear sector to represent and are only advocates of
common purpose. But what is very alarming amidst these controversies is that the Philippine
Party-List System is used as a vehicle for back door entrance. The Party-List System becomes a
humbling option for former district representatives, former secretaries and former authorities
who found refuge in this kind of system that still, they remain in power. To its farthest extent, the
system becomes an opportunity for the elite and well founded few to have a good fall back in
case of future mishaps.
On the other hand the issue with regards to formulae used in the Party-List System
continues to be a stranger to everyone. The inconsistencies of these formulae may greatly
contribute to misunderstandings to the Filipino voters. In the study, it may be seen that almost
88 | P a g e
from time to time the formulae seem to change and adopt a new format. The Commission on
Elections should declare a standard procedure in computing for the winners of the party-list
elections.
89 | P a g e
CHAPTER 5
Summary, Conclusion and Recommendation
“I think that this is now the time to return the power to the people; let us have faith in
them. And by faith, I mean real and abiding faith, not just looking at the people as some kind of
mystical identity in whose name the eternal political in some of us have done themselves proud.
In other words, let the Filipinos chart their own histories.”
-Commissioner Felicitas S. Aquino

1986 Constitutional Commission
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
The intent is clear. The Philippine Party-List System was created in order to be the voice
of the marginalized and underrepresented sectors in the country. It was indeed an innovative way
of sharing democracy to the clamors of the less heard, less thought and less considered people.
But despite this salutary mission, the researcher should say that still, the Philippine Party-List
System is an ongoing experiment which has its due flaws and inconsistencies. And that these
errors should further be properly addressed.
Are the measures introduced by party-list representatives in accordance with the claims
of the sector they represent? As part of a legislative function of a representative, it is a
representative’s duty to file bills and resolutions that will address his constituencies’ concern.
While a few party-list representatives submit measures that will address their sectors, some just
don’t. Most of the non-multi-sectoral party-list representatives the researcher had studied do not
even set measures for their sectoral concern. Hence, they are in “zero visibility” in terms of their
legislative function for their sector or advocacy. Other than this case, the researcher had noticed
during the course of the study that party-list representatives invest less effort addressing their
90 | P a g e
sectoral concerns as compared to the effort they invest in creating measures of national
application. Although the actions to legislate are plenary, however, party-list representatives
have to understand that they are in the House of Representatives because they are supposed to be
the surrogates of their constituencies’ concern or party and not because of their individual
personalities. And so, the researcher concludes that not all the measures submitted by party-list
representatives are in accordance to the claims of their sector. Rather, only a small portion of
these measures appeal to their sectoral concern and mostly the measures they have submitted are
in national scope. The researcher had thought that perhaps the reason why more and more party-
list representatives engage themselves in bills and measures of national scope is because of their
scope in elections. It should be remembered that these party representatives are elected in a
nationwide basis. And so in order for these parties to gain name recognition in a nation wide
basis, they should also try to submit bills that are in national scope. The researcher does not find
anything wrong with this scenario, but problems arise when the priorities become lopsided. More
measures of national application are coming from party-list representatives. Instead of these
representatives setting more measures for sectoral concern, they tend to pay more attention into
measures of national scope which actually defeats the purpose of being in representation to the
marginalized and underrepresented.
What are the issues currently faced by the Philippine Party-List System? The Philippine
Party-List System has a long line of issues to attend. And the researcher thinks that without
delay, these issues should have an immediate solution.
a. The Backdoor Entrance – Unfortunately, the Philippine Party-List System has been
used as a backdoor entrance of traditional politicians and of rich overrepresented people.
91 | P a g e
The system had been blasphemed and mocked into a ground for social or family reunion.
The same case goes with party-list representatives who have been either a wife or
husband of another district representative making their case all in the family.
b. The Palace’s Cooptation of the Party-List System – There had been a lot of pseudo-
party-lists that are increasingly appearing in the Party-List System. Sad to say, during the
course of the study, the researcher found out that some of these party-lists were sent out
by the Palace so that when the Pres. Arroyo recedes her position either as an ordinary
citizen or as a representative from Pampanga, she would still be beyond the reach of law.
This is beside from the fact that a sitting president needs the support of Congress so as to
facilitate his/her legislative agenda or Congressional protection.
c. The Misrepresentation of the Party-list through their Nominees – While some party-
list indeed represent the marginalized yet in many instances in the course of the research,
the researcher had found out that some of the nominees of party-lists belong to the elite
few and not from the marginalized group. How could these nominees addressed their
sectoral concerns if in the first place they do not have a first hand experience of the
struggles and sufferings of being in the marginalized and underrepresented sector?
d. The COMELEC mis-accreditation of Party-lists – The Supreme Court through Chief
Justice Panganiban had the occasion to rule on the guidelines in party-list accreditations
as earlier discussed. However, the research conducted shows the errors and lapses by the
COMELEC in so far as accreditation as to who the real party-list is. Some parties are not
just in representation to a certain sector, they are just mere advocacy groups. Some of
them are the following
92 | P a g e
 BUHAY Party-list: whose advocacy is for the value of human life is certainly not a
sector but rather an advocacy.
 CIBAC Party-list: whose advocacy is to fight against corruption is more of an
advocacy rather than a sector for the marginalized.
 UNI-MAD, YACAP: whose advocacy is against illegal drugs and poverty but is
certainly common to all sectors even the rich and the marginalized. And many more
party-lists of similar nature.
e. The Inconsistency of the Formulae use in Declaring Party-List Winners – There had
been no standard formulae in determining winners of the Party-List System and that only
in 2008 was the formulae amended through Banat VS. COMELEC. The researcher had
thought that these inconsistencies could cause a lot of errors and perhaps
misunderstanding to the already uninformed and uneducated Filipino people about the
Party-List System and that this should immediately be remedied.
f. Lack of Education Campaign – in the 12 years of existence of the Party-List System, it
is very evident that only a few knows what the Party-List System is. This could have
been quite forgivable in the first inclusion of this system in the 1998 elections. But the
alarming number of the uninformed and uneducated Filipino constituents even until
February of 2010 should at least be taught of what this system seeks to uphold. A
massive education campaign should be launched several months before the elections so
that the Filipino constituents may have the time to scrutinize, deliberate and discern what
party-list should duly elected in the house of representatives
93 | P a g e
What is the system or basis of winning a legislative seat in the Party-List System? To
determine the number of seats for sectoral representatives, the formula in getting the quotient
is:
. . .
. .= × 0.2
0.8
FIRST ROUND: To get the first guaranteed seat, a sectoral party should at least get 2%
of the total votes cast for party-list election. The formula for the quotient is:
ℎ −
% ℎ =
ℎ ℎ
Right after this procedure, party-lists should be ranked from highest to lowest in
accordance to the percentage of votes the party had received. So that 1 seat is automatically
secured to party-lists receiving more than 0.02 or 2%.
1=1 % ℎ ≥ 0.02
SECOND ROUND: If the total number of seats awarded is less than the total number of
seat reserved for party list (S), the unassigned seat will be awarded in the second round of seat
allocation. The formula will be:
94 | P a g e
( . .− . 1)
×% ℎ
Note that R2 should appear as whole integer or 1, so that right after this step, the seats
awarded on the first round will be added to seats obtained in the second round to get the final
allocation of seats for the party-lists.
= 1+ 2
FINAL ALLOCATION (also known as the wild card): If the total number of seats
awarded after two rounds is still less than the total number of seats reserved for party list
organization, the remaining seats will be assigned to the party- list organizations next in rank at
one seat each whose R2 result is 0 until all available seats are completely distributed.
. =
( − 1
− 2)
95 | P a g e
Recommendations:
The Philippine Party-List System Law should be amended on the following issues:
a. Strengthening the Multi-Party System
b. The meaning of the “marginalized and underrepresented” sectors and the
process of selecting nominees should be clearly defined. Ambiguous
definitions should be properly attended.
c. The mechanics on registration of party-lists should be clearly defined in the
law and should not be left to the sound discretion of the COMELEC.
d. All Supreme Court decisions should be taken in consideration for these
decisions discuss the flaws and errors that once occurred in the Philippine
Party-List System.
e. The COMELEC should conduct educational campaign in so far as Party-List
System is concern.
96 | P a g e
Definition of Terms
2% Threshold/Qualifier – It is the standard given number by the law in which whenever a party
crosses this threshold guarantees the party a single seat for the house.
3 Seat Cap – a provision set in RA 7921 limiting the number of seats a party-list could obtain in
the Party-List System to only 3 seats.
14th Congress – is basically the 14th legislative body of the Philippines composed of
representatives coming from different jurisdictions or party-list sectors. This Congress runs from
May of 2007 until May of 2010.
Advocacy Party – These are parties which have no clear sectoral constituency and instead
advocate only reforms and concerns.
Bill – is the draft of a law submitted to a legislative body that undergoes a series of public
hearings and debates.
Bill or Resolution of Local Application – is a bill or resolution filed by a Congressman whose
effect or impact is limited to a local jurisdiction e.g. changing name of roads, creation of a an
office in a particular district, creation of schools, universities and colleges.
Bill or Resolution of National Application – is a bill or a resolution whose effect is national in
scope e.g. labor laws, penal laws, national budget.
Bill or Resolution of Sectoral Application – is a bill or resolution filed by a Congressman
whose effect or impact is sectoral in scope. E.g. Womens’ right for women sector, Magna Carta
for Students for the youth sector, Senior Citizen rights and privileges for the Senior Citizen
Sector.
Co-author- an act of a Congressman in joining as signatory in a bill or resolution prepared and
97 | P a g e
drafted by other Congressmen.
COMELEC – or the Commission on Elections is the commission initiated by the government
directly in charge of national elections in the country. It is also the commission that acts as
National Board of Canvassers and is responsible of proclaiming winners of the elections.
Coalition – an aggrupation of duly registered national, regional, sectoral parties or organizations
for political and/or election purposes (Party List System Act of 1995 Section 3)
Constituents – citizens who are represented by government officials they chose to vote.
En Banc - The meeting of all justices or judges that may form a quorum
Electorate – the body of qualified voters in a specific country
House of Representatives – the lower legislative house of the Congress of the Philippines, often
informally called as the Congress or House
Legislation – the act of making laws or enabling laws
Major Political Parties – these are the mainstream political parties who were banned from the
Party-list System such as Nacionalista Party, Liberal Party, Lakas-Kampi.
Measures – the bills, resolutions and legal actions submitted by representatives to the Congress
intended for the betterment of their constituents or sectors
Multi-Party System – the party system adopted by the country that enables any number of
party-lists to participate in the elections. It avoids domination of larger parties.
Multi-Sectoral Parties- These are parties that have a wide range of sectoral representation.
These parties may represent 2 or more sectors at the same time.
Nominee – a candidate of a party-list for a legislative seat
Non-multi-sectoral party-representatives – these are representatives who came from multi-
sectoral parties that have bills that encompass almost all sectors because of their being multi-
98 | P a g e
sectoral in nature.
Party-list – a coalition, group, or community with members that have the same advocacies,
beliefs and ideologies who belong to the marginalized and underrepresented
Party-list System - “a mechanism of proportional representation in the election of
representatives to the House of Representatives from marginalized or underrepresented national,
regional and sectoral parties, or organizations or coalitions thereof registered with the
Commission on Elections.” (Party List System Act of 1995 Section 3)
Petitioner – a person or group of persons who pleads the court for an immediate recovery of
right through justice
Party-list System Act of 1995 – or Republic Act 7941, this is the law provided by the House of
Representatives that gives the guidelines or requirements for Party-list System.
Political Machineries – these may pertain to groups of persons who are in direct in support of a
specific candidate. Or this may refer to the ways and means, assets and influences of the
candidate available to regulate the number of votes an electoral candidate may receive e.g.
money, authority.
Political Party – an organized group of qualified voters pursuing the same ideology, political
ideas and principles for the general conduct of the government which may be a national or
regional party (Party List System Act of 1995 Section 3)
Ponente - In legal terms, is the author of certain rules and guidelines.
Preamble - A preliminary introduction to a statute or constitution
Principal Author – an act of a Congressman concern in preparing and drafting his bill or
resolution which is submitted to Congress for legislative action
Regional Parties – These are parties organized intended to serve their region or several political
99 | P a g e
subdivisions.
Representative – am incumbent Congressman or Congresswoman
Resolution – an agreement between legislators that has not binding force of the law.
Status Quo - the existing state of things on any given order
Statute – an act passed by legislative body
Sectoral Parties – a group of qualified voters bound together by similar physical attributes or
characteristics, or by employment, interests or concerns. These are also parties which have a
clear sectoral constituency.
Supreme Court – the highest tribunal court in the Philippines
Trapos – a Filipino colloquial term referring to the traditional politicians
100 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Printed Book and Magazine References:

Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. 2005. A.V.B. Printing Press, Dapitan St.
Sampaloc Manila.
Remollino, Alexander Martin. Reviewing the Party-List Law and the 2004 Election.
Bulatlat, Vol. 8 No. 9 (2007)
Tipon, Dean Emmanuel Samonte. Winning by Knowing Your Election Laws Reloaded.
2006. Rex Printing Company, Inc.
Internet references and sources:
AGAP Multiply Website. AGAP Mission Statement. Retrieved February 7, 2010

retrieved from http://agappartylist.multiply.com
Ager Maila. Beltran dies still poorest congressman; Villar richest. Retrieved January 30,
2010, retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/
Alagad Official Website. Alagad Mission Statement. Retrieved February 4, 2010,

retrieved from http://www.alagad.org.ph/
Ang Bagong BAYANI OFW-Labor Party et al. VS. Commission on Elections et al. G.R.
No. 147589 dated June 21, 2001. Retrieved December 18, 2009, retrieved from
http://www.sc.judiciary.gov.ph
An Waray Official Website. An Waray Party-list Agenda. Retrieved February 4,

2010, retrieved from http://anwaray.com/
Asian Economic News. Rich become richer, poor become poorer in the Philippines.
Retrieved January 30, 2010, retrieved from http://findarticles.com/
Bantay Official Website. Objectives. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from

http://www.bantaypartylist.com/
Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency (BANAT) VS.

Commission on Elections G.R. No. 179271 dated April 21, 2007. Retrieved
December 18, 2009, retrieved from http://www.sc.judiciary.gov.ph
Bernas, Joaquin. The Intent of the 1986 Constitution Writers. 1995.
Buhay Official Website. Party Profile. Retrieved Febuary 4, 2010, retrieved from
http://buhaypartylist.com/
Cassio, Dona. An inspiration to fellow Capiceños: Cesar 'Toto' Cobrador. Retrieved

February 4, 2010, retrieved from http://www.thenewstoday.info/
101 | P a g e
Flores. Helen. Seven out of 10 Pinoys unaware of party-list system. Retrieved February
14, 2010, retrieved from http://www.gmanews.tv/
Tangkia, Fritzie Palma and Habaradas, Ma. Araceli Basco. Party-List System: The
Philippine Experience. 2001. Ateneo School of Government and Friedrich
Ebert Stiftung (FES), Philippine Office.
Kabataan Official Website. About Kabataan. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from
http://kabataanpartylist.com/
Kakusa Inc. Official Website. About us. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from
Lujan, Nero. Backdoor Entrance. Retrieved January 30, 2010, retrieved from
http://www.iloiloviews.com/
Newsbreak. Party-list Profile for a Teacher. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from
http://www.newsbreak.com.ph
News Philippines Website. Party-list Profile:Kasangga. Retrieved February 4, 2010,

retrieved from http://www.newsinphilippines.com/
RA 7941 or The Party-List System Act of 199.Retrieved December 18, 2009, retrieved
from http://www.chanrobles.com
Pangalangan, Raul C. The Party-list Experiment: Three Challenges to Reformers.

Retrieved February 14, 2010, retrieved from http://webx.up.edu.ph/
Reyes, Mary Ann Ll. Early Election Spending. Retrieved January 30, 2010, retrieved
from http://www.philstar.com/
Sabangan, Annie Ruth C. 4th Arroyo: A landed elite who will represent the Marginalized.
Retrieved February 14, 2010, retrieved from http://www.philstar.com.
Solidarity Philippines Australia Network. The Party List System in the Philippines.
Retrieved January 30, 2010, retrieved from http://cpcabrisbane.org/
Soliman M. Santos. The Philippine Tries the Party-list System. Retrieved December 18.
2009, retrieved from http://www. journals.upd.edu.ph
Tsao, Chip. The War at Home. Retrieved January 30, 2010, Retrieved from
http://www.philstar.com/
Veteran’s Federation et al. VS. Commission on Elections G.R. No 136781 dated on

October 6, 2000. Retrieved December 18, 2009, Retrieved from
http://www.sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
102 | P a g e
YACAP Official Website. YACAP Mission. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from
http://yacap.org/
Other references:
Office of the Secretary General/ Engineering Division / Public Relations Information

Department – House of Representatives
http://www.congress.gov.ph
http://www.comelec.gov.ph
http://www.merriam-webster.com
http://www.wikipedia.org
103 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Printed Book and Magazine References:
Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. 2005. A.V.B. Printing Press, Dapitan St.
Sampaloc Manila.
Remollino, Alexander Martin. Reviewing the Party-List Law and the 2004 Election.
Bulatlat, Vol. 8 No. 9 (2007)
Tipon, Dean Emmanuel Samonte. Winning by Knowing Your Election Laws Reloaded.
2006. Rex Printing Company, Inc.
Internet references and sources:
AGAP Multiply Website. AGAP Mission Statement. Retrieved February 7, 2010

retrieved from http://agappartylist.multiply.com
Ager Maila. Beltran dies still poorest congressman; Villar richest. Retrieved January 30,
2010, retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/
Alagad Official Website. Alagad Mission Statement. Retrieved February 4, 2010,

retrieved from http://www.alagad.org.ph/
Ang Bagong BAYANI OFW-Labor Party et al. VS. Commission on Elections et al. G.R.
No. 147589 dated June 21, 2001. Retrieved December 18, 2009, retrieved from
An Waray Official Website. An Waray Party-list Agenda. Retrieved February 4,

2010, retrieved from http://anwaray.com/
Asian Economic News. Rich become richer, poor become poorer in the Philippines.
Retrieved January 30, 2010, retrieved from http://findarticles.com/
Bantay Official Website. Objectives. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from

http://www.bantaypartylist.com/
Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency (BANAT) VS.

Commission on Elections G.R. No. 179271 dated April 21, 2007. Retrieved
December 18, 2009, retrieved from http://www.sc.judiciary.gov.ph
Bernas, Joaquin. The Intent of the 1986 Constitution Writers. 1995.

Buhay Official Website. Party Profile. Retrieved Febuary 4, 2010, retrieved from
http://buhaypartylist.com/
Cassio, Dona. An inspiration to fellow Capiceños: Cesar 'Toto' Cobrador. Retrieved

February 4, 2010, retrieved from http://www.thenewstoday.info/
Flores. Helen. Seven out of 10 Pinoys unaware of party-list system. Retrieved February
14, 2010, retrieved from http://www.gmanews.tv/
Tangkia, Fritzie Palma and Habaradas, Ma. Araceli Basco. Party-List System: The
Philippine Experience. 2001. Ateneo School of Government and Friedrich
Ebert Stiftung (FES), Philippine Office.
Kabataan Official Website. About Kabataan. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from
Kakusa Inc. Official Website. About us. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from
Lujan, Nero. Backdoor Entrance. Retrieved January 30, 2010, retrieved from
http://www.iloiloviews.com/
Newsbreak. Party-list Profile for a Teacher. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from
http://www.newsbreak.com.ph
News Philippines Website. Party-list Profile:Kasangga. Retrieved February 4, 2010,

retrieved from http://www.newsinphilippines.com/
RA 7941 or The Party-List System Act of 199.Retrieved December 18, 2009, retrieved
from http://www.chanrobles.com
Pangalangan, Raul C. The Party-list Experiment: Three Challenges to Reformers.

Retrieved February 14, 2010, retrieved from http://webx.up.edu.ph/
Reyes, Mary Ann Ll. Early Election Spending. Retrieved January 30, 2010, retrieved
from http://www.philstar.com/
Sabangan, Annie Ruth C. 4th Arroyo: A landed elite who will represent the Marginalized.
Retrieved February 14, 2010, retrieved from http://www.philstar.com.
Solidarity Philippines Australia Network. The Party List System in the Philippines.
Retrieved January 30, 2010, retrieved from http://cpcabrisbane.org/
Soliman M. Santos. The Philippine Tries the Party-list System. Retrieved December 18.
2009, retrieved from http://www. journals.upd.edu.ph
Tsao, Chip. The War at Home. Retrieved January 30, 2010, Retrieved from
http://www.philstar.com/
Veteran’s Federation et al. VS. Commission on Elections G.R. No 136781 dated on

October 6, 2000. Retrieved December 18, 2009, Retrieved from
http://www.sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
YACAP Official Website. YACAP Mission. Retrieved February 4, 2010, retrieved from
http://yacap.org/
Other references:
Office of the Secretary General/ Engineering Division / Public Relations Information

Department – House of Representatives
http://www.congress.gov.ph
http://www.comelec.gov.ph
http://www.merriam-webster.com
http://www.wikipedia.org

The Party-List System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Party-List System

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Party-List System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Generated by Foxit PDF Creator © Foxit Software

http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only.

Jose Maria B. Buenagua is a fourth year high school

During his third year, He was the Editor-in-Chief of the

As a fourth year seminarian, He was among the four pillars

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE

OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE MINOR SEMINARY

Seminarian Jose Maria Bosito Buenagua

Ms. Tanya Namit

Approved by the moderator with the grade of

Rev. Fr. Maxell Lowell C. Aranilla, Ph. D.

and hectic schedules.

To Ms. Tanya Namit who indefatigably had re-checked each chapters.

To Ms. Josephine Lacandazo-Malicdem who not even once had doubted.

who had invested time in reading and criticizing the paper.

during moments of despairs and failures in the computer laboratory.

faithfully” bear the researcher’s shortcomings.

Without you all, this wouldn’t be possible.

MARAMING, MARAMING SALAMAT PO!

This study is entirely dedicated to the Filipino constituents

CHAPTER 1 – THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND 1

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 7

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 8

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS 9

CHAPTER 2 – REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES 10

JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY 40

CHAPTER 4 - PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA 43

CHAPTER 5 – SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 90

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION 90

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 1

a just and humane society”.

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 2

which is very corrupt, and 10, which is very clean.

the Philippines is composed of. He longs for something better.

government reaches out to its people. The government implements

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 3

Representatives. (Lujan, 2009)

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 4

Party-List System is “a mechanism of proportional representation in the election of

representatives to the House of Representatives from marginalized or underrepresented national,

to malevolently gain control of authority in the House of Representatives.

This innovation of Party-List System was introduced in the constitution to further

extending their support.

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 5

Unarguably, the Party-List system is a timely response to the growing marginalized

legislative body and requests for an immediate aid.

introduced in the Philippines as President Ferdinand Marcos used to appoint sectoral

hopes for a better and more lucid political system.

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 6

In a country like Philippines, a single vote echoes a full expression of democracy. It is an

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 7

cooperatives including the billionaire Novaliches Development Cooperative or NOVADECI. He

transparent and progressive legislation.

Statement of the Problem

1. Are the measures introduced by non-multi-sectoral party-list representatives in

accordance with the claims of the sector they represent?

THE PHILIPPINE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN THE 14TH CONGRESS: A STUDY 8

Significance of the Study

accountability, leading to a more efficient government. Parties are strengthened, encouraging

the country’s development” (Solidarity Philippines Australia Network, 2003)