The Spirit, the Court, and the

Mayhem: Analyzing the Legal

Development of Qualification for
Party-List Registration in the
Philippines

A research proposal in the field of Law prepared by Jerome

Napoleon T. Gonzales as partial requirement in the subject of
Legal Research section 1E under Atty. Rochelle Dakanay-Galano
submitted on Saturday, October 3, 2015.

1 THE PROBLEM
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Republic Act 7941 was enacted on March 3, 1995. Known as
the Party-List System Act, this law enabled interest groups to
propose legislation as never seen before in history; that of mixedmember proportional representation as allocated to civil society
groups. However, recent events seem to have overturned such
notion. In 2013, the Supreme Court decided upon a case
involving the Party-List system; from an opportunity for
marginalized sectors to have equal representation in legislation
to, as how print media has reported it, a free-for-all kinds of
groups (Romero 2013) (Aning 2013).
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
This sensationalist reporting, then, leads us to the question;
Are the recent court rulings consistent with the legislative intent
of the Party-List System Act? Before reaching an answer for this,
the following questions must first be discussed; (1) what was the
legislative intent in creating the Party-List System Act? (2) How
did the rulings of the Supreme Court affect the qualifications for
parties in participating for party-list elections?
1.3 DEFINITION

OF

TERMS

Though subject terms of this research may seem to be moot

and academic, this definition of terms is relevant as there is a
need to clarify such in order to have a clear and consistent
understanding of the terms used as their similarities may cause
misrepresentation and confusion regarding the subject.
1.3.1
Party
The term party is used variedly for this study. It may refer to
a political party, sectoral party, or a coalition of parties (Par. (b)
Sec. 3, R.A. 7941). The term may also be defined at times as a
group or organization, regardless of its political or civic
foundation, aspiring to qualify as a party-list
1.3.2Party-list
In contrast to a party, the term will be used for a party,
group, or organization registered under the Commission on
Elections (COMELEC) and able to participate in the Party-list
elections.
1.3.3
Party-list system
Paragraph (a) Section 3 of Republic Act 7941 is used for
defining the party-list system. It is;
a mechanism of proportional representation in the
election of representatives to the House of
Representatives from national, regional and
2

sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions

thereof registered with the Commission on
Elections (COMELEC)
1.3.4Political Parties
Definition for a political party used in this study will be from
Paragraph (c) Section 3 of Republic Act 7941;
A political party refers to an organized group of
citizens advocating an ideology or platform,
principles and policies for the general conduct of
government and which, as the most immediate
means of securing their adoption, regularly
nominates and supports certain of its leaders and
members as candidates for public office
1.3.5
Sectoral Party
A Sectoral Party for this research would refer to groups that
belong to the sectors enumerated on Section 5 of R.A. 7941
specifically; labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous
cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth,
veterans, overseas workers, and professionals.
1.3.6
Sectoral Groups or Organizations
This, in contrast to a sectoral party, refers to groups that do
not fall under the definition of a sectoral party but aspire to be a
Party-list.
1.4 RELEVANCE

AND

OBJECTIVES

It has been more than two decades since the enactment of

R.A. 7941. Since then, several works have discussed the issue of
marginal representation as it relates to their respective fields
(Wurfel 1997) (Tangkia and Habaradas 2001) (Rodriguez and
Velasco 1998) (Rocamora 1997) and majority of which come to
the conclusion that the party-list system has failed its purpose.
Thus, it becomes imperative to inquire from a legal perspective
whether or this law is wanting in achieving its intent.
Consequently, this research would aim to determine if there
is a parallelism between the findings of studies in other
disciplines and in the study of law; if none then it aims to
examine the reason for reaching a different conclusion.
Furthermore, the literature in the study of election law,
specifically regarding marginal representation, is very limited.
This endeavor hopefully would contribute in the expansion of the
sub-discipline. Lastly, it is relevant as a Filipino student of law to
introspect on the laws that bind the body politic to which I
belong.
1.5 RESEARCH SCOPE

Marginal representation as reviewed from a legal

perspective, admittedly, would initially be construed as related to
other fields of study in social sciences and the humanities. It may
be associated with sociological, political, economic, historical,
and philosophical theories and concepts. Thus is the need to
elucidate and to regulate the parameters of this research.
To be precise, provisions in R.A. 7941 on qualifications for
party-list inclusion is the primary concern for this research as
related to recent Jurisprudence regarding the matter. All other
aspects including but are not limited to the manner of elections,
the procedural provisions, the composition of the legislative, the
results of the elections, so long as it does not directly pertain to
or involve the parameters of qualification, is not a concern of this
research.

2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEWS
The party-list system, as was previously stated, is a political
concept of democratic representation exclusively espoused in the
Philippine legal system; there is no other electoral system in the
world that provides such representation for social interest
groups (Libunao and Abelardo 1998). Thus, only a few works
espouse and expound on the matter.
David Wurfel (1997) in his work analyzed the development
of democratic marginal representation and impact of R.A. 7941
on the matter. Tracing the origins of the concept from a previous
system of appointments during the Marcos administration, he
notes that sectoral groups were mobilized in having legislative
representation. But cited the failure of the following in
contributing to the failure of the party-list system; first, the
Constitutional Commission to recognize the party-list system not
as a functional representation but as a means to represent
underrepresented marginal sectors. Next, the erroneous
institutional implementation of R.A. 7941 by misinformed
officials in the Commission on Elections. Lastly, the elite capture
of the legislative disabled the law from bringing about change.
Though Wurfels insights on the aims of R.A.7941 are invaluable,
the political perspective from where his framework was derives
illustrates a fundamental difference with what this proposed
study aims to do. Institutional dynamics and politics are excluded
outliers as the primal concern in developing the conceptual
framework is the legal perspective.
On the other hand, Tangkia and Habaradas (2001) in their
work followed the legal development of the party-list system as a
whole from its constitutional inception up to the first legal
contentions it faced in 1998. The study to be conducted aims to
emulate its concentration on the legal study of R.A. 7941,
however this would differ from their work on several aspects.
4

First, the authors examined the Party-List System Act in its

entirety whereas the research to be conducted is particular to
certain provisions of the Act regarding the qualifications of
organizations. Also, the timeframe with which the study to be
conducted supersedes the one of the former. In a way, the new
research would partially update their work by more than a
decade.
Lastly, Bernas (2009) in his commentaries on the 1987
Philippine Constitution presented an authoritative history on the
matter of sectoral representation and party-list representatives.
He also included commentaries on Jurisprudences regarding
R.A.7981 up until the 2000s. The proposed research bears
strong similarities with the commentaries of Bernas. However,
more recent events regarding the issue at hand demand that it
be reexamined. Further, as the same with the work of Tangkia
and Habaradas, Bernas explained the party-list system in a much
broader sense as compared to the particularistic approach
espoused by the proposal.
2.2 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Literature regarding the matter, though limited, is enough to
infer that there is a probable deviation with the legal
implementation of the Party-List System Act from its legislative
intent. Then, in the light of established discourse regarding the
matter, this framework is proposed; rulings of the Supreme Court
on the matter, though consistent with the rules on statutory
construction, affected the actual implementation of the act
deviating it from the original legislative intent. Paraphrasing the
old adage; the letter that killeth prevailed over the spirit that
giveth life.

3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 DATA
With the framework for research already established, the
following data will be collected and analyzed for this
research;
3.1.1ARTICLE VI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
For this, only the provisions of the article regarding
qualifications of parties to successfully register as a party-list
shall be analyzed for this research.
3.1.2REPUBLIC ACT 7941
The whole act itself encompasses subjects beyond the scope
of the research. However, one must interpret the act as a whole
in order to determine its legislative intent. The legislative history
of the act will be included in the relevant data to be gathered.

3.1.3VETERANS FREEDOM PARTY VS. COMELEC

3.1.4BARANGAY
ASSOCIATION
FOR
NATIONAL
ADVANCEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY (BANAT) VS.
COMELEC
Though these cases have already been under the scope of
previous research, they shall serve as examples as to how the
legislative intent was upheld in their rulings.
3.1.5ATONG PAGLAUM V. COMELEC
Admittedly, this recent jurisprudence is an integral part of
the research. The rulings in this case would be compared to the
preceding rulings.
3.2 METHOD

FOR

ANALYSIS

Initially,
the
constitutional
provision
on
marginal
representation will be analyzed. Once the intention of the
provision is clear, the Party-List System Act would be scrutinized
in order to reveal the means employed to realize this provision.
After which, the Veterans and Banat cases will be examined
separately and subsequently integrated in comparison to the act
so as to show how these cases clarified the provisions in the Act.
Finally, the case of Atong Paglaum would be analyzed. Its ruling
shall also be in comparison to the act in order to answer the
questions posited in this research.

4 REFERENCES
Aning, Jerome. 2013. "Supreme Court rules party-list not only for
marginalized." Philippine Daily Inquirer. April 6. Accessed
September 26, 2015.
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/385839/supreme-court-rulesparty-list-not-only-for-marginalized.
Bernas, Joaquin G. 2009. The 1987 Constitution of the Republic
of the Philippines: A Commentary. Manila: Rex Book Store.
Libunao, Edward G, and Tet N Abelardo. 1998. "Only in the
Philippines: The Quirks of Our Party-List System." Political
Brief, September.
Rocamora, Joel. 1997. "The Party-List Elections: Making the Best
of a Bad Deal." Conjuncture.
Rodriguez, Agustin Martin G, and Djorina Velasco. 1998.
Democracy Rising? The Trials and Triumph of the 1998
Party-List Elections. Institute of Political Governance.
Tangkia, Fritzie Palma, and Ma Araceli Basco Habaradas. 2001.
Party-List System: The Philippine Experience. Literature
Review, Quezon City: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.
Wurfel, David. 1997. "The Party List System: Sectoral or
National? Success or Failure?" Kasarinlan: A Philippine
Quarterly of Third World Studies (University of the
Philippines) 19-30.