Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. Commission on Elections, G.R. Nos. 203766, 203818-19, 203922 & etc., April 2, 2013

Summary: COMELEC disqualified petitioners from participating in the May 13 elections,  by denying their new petitions for registration, or by canceling of their existing registration or accreditation as party-list organizations. Petitioners assailed the decision before the SC. SC reversed its ruling in Bagong Bayani and Banat, and remanded the petitions to the COMELEC to determine again the qualifications of these organizations but this time based on the parameters the SC laid down in this case. SC ruled that limiting the party-lists system to the marginalized and underrepresented sectors violates Sec 5, Art 6 the 1987 Constitution and RA 7941.

----------------------------------------

Ponente: CARPIO J.

Facts:

COMELEC issued resolutions that denied or canceled the party-list registrations or the accreditation of the ff 13 organizations: ASIN, Manila Teachers, ALA-EH, 1AAAP, AKIN, AAB, AI, ALONA, KALIKASAN, GUARDIAN, PPP and PBB. Either the

(1) the sectors they respectively represent are not considered marginalized and underrepresented or

(2) they failed to show that their members do belong to the marginalized.

Their names were not listed in the official ballot for the May 13 2013 elections.

COMELEC also issued resolutions that disqualified the ff 39 organizations from participating in the May 13 2013 party-list elections: AKB, Atong Paglaum, ARAL, ARC, UMIMAD, 1BRO-PGBI, 1GANAP/GUARDIANS, A BLESSED Party-List, 1-CARE, APEC, AT, ARARO, AGRI, AKMA-PTM, KAP, AKO-BAHAY, BANTAY, PACYAW, PASANG MASDA, KAKUSA, AG, ANAD, GREENFORCE, FIRM 24-K, ALIM, AAMA, SMART, ABP, BAYANI, AANI, A-IPRA, COCOFED, ABANG LINGKOD, ABROAD, BINHI, BUTIL, 1st KABAGIS, 1-UTAK, SENIOR CITIZENS.  The said organizations were not able to comply with requirements set in  RA 7941 (Party List System Act) and in Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v COMELEC.

These 52 organizations assailed these Resolutions issued by the COMELEC before the SC.

----------------------------------------

Issue 1 of 2: WON COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in disqualifying petitioners from participating in the May 13 elections, either by denial of their new petitions for registration under the party-list system, or by cancellation of their existing registration or accreditation as party-list organizations.

Held: No. 

Although Sec 5, Art 6 of the 1987 Constitution is clear in not limiting the party-list system to the so-called marginalized and underrepresented sectors of the society*,  COMELEC still cannot be said to have  committed gravel abuse of discretion when it issued the questioned resolutions as it just followed the guidelines laid down in the Bagong Bayani.

*The framers of the 1987 Constitution intended the party-list system to include both sectoral and non-sectoral parties. Proof for this:

(1) There were two main competing positions during the making of Art 6, Sec 5(2) of the 1987 Constitution: (a) 20% of the seats in Congress be reserved to marginalized and underrepresented sectors (advocated by Commisioner Villacorta)

(b) to open that seats to all sectoral and non-sectoral parties (advocated by Monsod).

The latter position won.

(2) When Sec 5(1) says there shall be "a party-list system of registered national, (COMMA) regional, (COMMA) and sectoral parties or organizations." They intended that the party-list group to be composed of 3 different groups, namely: (1) national parties or organizations; (2) regional parties or organizations; and (3) sectoral parties or organizations. National and regional parties or organizations are different from sectoral parties or organizations. National and regional parties or organizations need not be organized along sectoral lines and need not represent any particular sector.

(3) R.A. No. 7941 provides different definitions for a political and a sectoral party. It does not require national and regional parties or organizations to represent the "marginalized and underrepresented" sectors.

Sec 3(a) of R.A. No. 7941 defines a "party" as "either a political party or a sectoral party or a coalition of parties."

• Sec 3(c) of R.A. No. 7941 provides that a "political party refers to an organized group of citizens advocating an ideology or platform, principles and policies for the general conduct of government."

• Sec 3(d) of R.A. No. 7941 provides that a "sectoral party refers to an organized group of citizens belonging to any of the sectors enumerated in Section 5 hereof whose principal advocacy pertains to the special interest and concerns of their sector."

Sec 6 of R.A. No. 7941, which provides the grounds for the COMELEC to refuse or cancel the registration of parties or organizations,  does not mention non-representation of the marginalized and underrepresented as one of the grounds.

Issue 2 of 2: WON the criteria for participating in the party-list system laid down in the Ang Bagong Bayani and Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency(BANAT) v COMELEC should be applied by the COMELEC in the coming May 13 elections.

Held: No. 

It would not be in accord with the 1987 Constitution and R.A. No. 7941 to apply the criteria in Ang Bagong Bayani and BANAT in determining who are qualified to participate in the party-list elections.

Bagong Bayani limited the party-list to the marginalized and underrepresented groups, namely the labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, handicapped, veteran, overseas workers, and other similar sectors(FYI: these sectors were enumerated in Sec 5 of RA 7941).

Banat, on the other hand, officially excluded major political parties from participating in party-list elections.

----------------------------------------

Note: Justice Carpio also cleared the inconsistency between Sec 2, RA 7941 with its implementing provisions (discussed above).

Section 2. Declaration of Policy. — The State shall promote proportional representation in the election of representatives to the House of Representatives through a party-list system XXX to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and who lack well-defined political constituencies xxx to become members of the House of Representatives.  

Below was the explanation made by J. Carpio:

The phrase "marginalized and underrepresented" should refer only to the sectors in Section 5 that are, by their nature, economically "marginalized and underrepresented." These sectors are: labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, handicapped, veterans, overseas workers, and other similar sectors. For these sectors, a majority of the members of the sectoral party must belong to the "marginalized and underrepresented." The nominees of the sectoral party either must belong to the sector, or must have a track record of advocacy for the sector represented. Belonging to the "marginalized and underrepresented" sector does not mean one must "wallow in poverty, destitution or infirmity." It is sufficient that one, or his or her sector, is below the middle class. More specifically, the economically "marginalized and underrepresented" are those who fall in the low income group as classified by the National Statistical Coordination Board.

The recognition that national and regional parties, as well as sectoral parties of professionals, the elderly, women and the youth, need not be "marginalized and underrepresented" will allow small ideology-based and cause-oriented parties who lack "well-defined political constituencies" a chance to win seats in the House of Representatives. On the other hand, limiting to the "marginalized and underrepresented" the sectoral parties for labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, handicapped, veterans, overseas workers, and other sectors that by their nature are economically at the margins of society, will give the "marginalized and underrepresented" an opportunity to likewise win seats in the House of Representatives.

This interpretation will harmonize the 1987 Constitution and R.A. No. 7941 and will give rise to a multi-party system where those "marginalized and underrepresented," both in economic and ideological status, will have the opportunity to send their own members to the House of Representatives. This interpretation will also make the party-list system honest and transparent, eliminating the need for relatively well-off party-list representatives to masquerade as "wallowing in poverty, destitution and infirmity," even as they attend sessions in Congress riding in SUVs.

The major political parties are those that field candidates in the legislative district elections. Major political parties cannot participate in the party-list elections since they neither lack "well-defined political constituencies" nor represent "marginalized and underrepresented" sectors. Thus, the national or regional parties under the party-list system are necessarily those that do not belong to major political parties. This automatically reserves the national and regional parties under the party-list system to those who "lack well-defined political constituencies," giving them the opportunity to have members in the House of Representatives.

--------------------------------------

SERENO C.J. dissent

Social Justice is the heart of the Constitution. And Social justice calls for the humanization of laws and the equalization of social and economic forces by the State so that justice in its rational and objectively secular conception may at least be approximated.

Commissioner Tadeo explained that the reason for the party-list system is to redress the scenario where the rich dominate and control the legislature while the basic sectors are left out.

RA 7941 was enacted pursuant to the party-list provisions of the 1987 Constitution as a "social justice tool".

(1)"Marginalized and underrepresented" under Section 2 of RA 7941 qualifies national, regional and sectoral parties or organizations.

• to organize along sectoral lines and do not need to represent any "marginalized and underrepresented" in Section 2 of RA 7941 to qualify only sectoral parties or organizations, and not national and regional parties or organizations

• Sec 2 of RA 7941 states that the party-list system seeks to "enable Filipino citizens belonging to the marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties . . . to become members of the House of Representatives" On its face, it is apparent that "marginalized and underrepresented" qualifies "sectors", "organizations" and "parties".

• deliberations of the Constitutional Commission show that the party-list system is a countervailing means for the weaker segments of our society to overcome the preponderant advantages of the more entrenched and well-established political parties

Errors made in the majority decision:

1. thinking that when national and regional parties and organizations represent the marginalized and underrepresented, the national and regional parties and organizations become sectoral parties and organizations

• orgs can be treated similarly but that does not make them identical

2. thinking that because only 50% of the seats are allocated during the first three consecutive terms of Congress after the ratification of the 1987 Constitution to representatives from the labor, peasant, urban poor, etc., it necessarily follows that the other 50% would be allocated to representatives from sectors which are non-marginalized and underrepresented

• the latter 50% can very well include representatives from other non-enumerated sectors, or even national or regional parties and organizations, all of which can be "marginalized and underrepresented."

3. thinking that limiting it to the marginalized and underrepresented will exclude the ideology-based and cause-oriented parties.

• "marginalized and underrepresented" does not refer only to those "economically" marginalized.

4. the ponencia holds that failure of national and regional parties to represent the marginalized and underrepresented is not a ground for the COMELEC to refuse or cancel registration under Section 6 of RA 7941.

        Section 6 (5), the COMELEC may refuse or cancel if the party "violates or fails to comply with laws." Thus, before the premise can be correct, it must be first established that "marginalization and underrepresentation" is not a requirement of the law, which is exactly what is at issue here.

5. the ponencia makes too much of the fact that the requirement of "marginalization and underrepresentation" appears only once in RA 7941.

However, there is no need for this Court to define the phrase "marginalized and underrepresented," primarily because it already constitutes sufficient legislative standard to guide the COMELEC as an administrative agency in the exercise of its discretion to determine the qualification of a party-list group.

As long as the agency concerned will be able to promulgate rules and regulations to implement a given legislation and effectuate its policies, and that these regulations are germane to the objects and purposes of the law and not in contradiction to but in conformity with the standards prescribed by the law, then the standards may be deemed sufficient.

(2) National, regional and sectoral parties or organizations must both represent the "marginalized and underrepresented" and lack "well- defined political constituencies".

• Sec 2 of RA 7941 clearly makes the "lack of a "well-defined political constituency" as a requirement along with "marginalization and underrepresentation." They are cumulative requirements, not alternative.

• the ponencia appears to be operating under preconceived notions of what it means to be "marginalized and underrepresented" and to "lack a well-defined political constituency." The exact content of these legislative standards should be left to the COMELEC. They are ever evolving concepts, created to address social disparities, to be able to give life to the "social justice" policy of our Constitution.

An audio version of this digest is available at YouTube. Click this link to listen.