homework help,online homework help,online tutors,online tutoring,research paper help,do my homework, https://www.homeworkping.com/

1. Get Homework/Assignment Done
Homeworkping.com
Homework Help
https://www.homeworkping.com/
Research Paper help
https://www.homeworkping.com/
Online Tutoring
https://www.homeworkping.com/
click here for freelancing tutoring sites
BARANGAY ASSOCIATION FOR G.R. No. 179271
NATIONAL ADVANCEMENT
AND TRANSPARENCY (BANAT),
Petitioner,
- versus -
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
(sitting as the National Board of
Canvassers),
Respondent.
ARTS BUSINESS AND SCIENCE

2. PROFESSIONALS,
Intervenor.
AANGAT TAYO,
Intervenor.
COALITION OF ASSOCIATIONS
OF SENIOR CITIZENS IN THE
PHILIPPINES, INC. (SENIOR
CITIZENS),
Intervenor.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
BAYAN MUNA, ADVOCACY FOR G.R. No. 179295
TEACHER EMPOWERMENT
THROUGH ACTION, COOPERATION Present:
AND HARMONY TOWARDS
EDUCATIONAL REFORMS, INC., PUNO, C.J.,
and ABONO, QUISUMBING,
Petitioners, YNARES-SANTIAGO,
CARPIO,
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ,
CORONA,
- versus - CARPIO MORALES,
TINGA,
CHICO-NAZARIO,
VELASCO, JR.,
NACHURA,
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO,
BRION,
PERALTA, and
BERSAMIN, JJ.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Promulgated:
Respondent.
_______________________
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

3. D E C I S I O N
CARPIO, J.:
The Case
Petitioner in G.R. No. 179271 — Barangay Association for National Advancement and
Transparency (BANAT) — in a petition for certiorari and mandamus,[1] assails the
Resolution[2] promulgated on 3 August 2007 by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) in
NBC No. 07-041 (PL). The COMELEC’s resolution in NBC No. 07-041 (PL) approved the
recommendation of Atty. Alioden D. Dalaig, Head of the National Board of Canvassers (NBC)
Legal Group, to deny the petition of BANAT for being moot. BANAT filed before the
COMELEC En Banc, acting as NBC, a Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-List
Representatives Provided by the Constitution.
The following are intervenors in G.R. No. 179271: Arts Business and Science
Professionals (ABS), AangatTayo (AT), and Coalition of Associations of Senior Citizens in the
Philippines, Inc. (Senior Citizens).
Petitioners in G.R. No. 179295 — Bayan Muna, Abono, and Advocacy for Teacher
Empowerment Through Action, Cooperation and Harmony Towards Educational Reforms (A
Teacher) — in a petition for certiorari with mandamus and prohibition,[3] assails NBC
Resolution No. 07-60[4] promulgated on 9 July 2007. NBC No. 07-60 made a partial
proclamation of parties, organizations and coalitions that obtained at least two percent of the
total votes cast under the Party-List System. The COMELEC announced that, upon completion
of the canvass of the party-list results, it would determine the total number of seats of each
winning party, organization, or coalition in accordance with Veterans Federation Party v.
COMELEC[5] (Veterans).
Estrella DL Santos, in her capacity as President and First Nominee of the Veterans
Freedom Party, filed a motion to intervene in both G.R. Nos. 179271 and 179295.
The Facts
The 14 May 2007 elections included the elections for the party-list representatives. The
COMELEC counted 15,950,900 votes cast for 93 parties under the Party-List System.[6]
On 27 June 2002, BANAT filed a Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-List
Representatives Provided by the Constitution, docketed as NBC No. 07-041 (PL) before the
NBC. BANAT filed its petition because “[t]he Chairman and the Members of the

4. [COMELEC] have recently been quoted in the national papers that the [COMELEC] is duty
bound to and shall implement the Veterans ruling, that is, would apply the Panganiban formula
in allocating party-list seats.”[7] There were no intervenors in BANAT’s petition before the
NBC. BANAT filed a memorandum on 19 July 2007.
On 9 July 2007, the COMELEC, sitting as the NBC, promulgated NBC Resolution No.
07-60. NBC Resolution No. 07-60 proclaimed thirteen (13) parties as winners in the party-list
elections, namely: BuhayHayaanYumabong (BUHAY), Bayan Muna, Citizens’ Battle Against
Corruption (CIBAC), Gabriela’s Women Party (Gabriela), Association of Philippine Electric
Cooperatives (APEC), A Teacher, Akbayan! Citizen’s Action Party (AKBAYAN), Alagad,
Luzon Farmers Party (BUTIL), Cooperative-Natco Network Party (COOP-NATCCO),
AnakPawis, Alliance of Rural Concerns (ARC), and Abono. We quote NBC Resolution No.
07-60 in its entirety below:
WHEREAS, the Commission on Elections sitting en banc as National Board of
Canvassers, thru its Sub-Committee for Party-List, as of 03 July 2007, had officially canvassed,
in open and public proceedings, a total of fifteen million two hundred eighty three thousand
six hundred fifty-nine (15,283,659) votes under the Party-List System of Representation, in
connection with the National and Local Elections conducted last 14 May 2007;
WHEREAS, the study conducted by the Legal and Tabulation Groups of the National
Board of Canvassers reveals that the projected/maximum total party-list votes cannot go any
higher thansixteen million seven hundred twenty three thousand one hundred twenty-one
(16,723,121) votes given the following statistical data:
Projected/Maximum Party-List Votes for May 2007 Elections
i. Total party-list votes already canvassed/tabulated 15,283,659
ii. Total party-list votes remaining uncanvassed/
untabulated (i.e. canvass deferred) 1,337,032
iii. Maximum party-list votes (based on 100%
outcome) from areas not yet submitted for canvass
(Bogo, Cebu; Bais City; Pantar, Lanao del Norte; and
Pagalungan, Maguindanao) 102,430
Maximum Total Party-List Votes 16,723,121
WHEREAS, Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7941 (Party-List System Act) provides in
part:
The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two percent
(2%) of the total votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one seat
each: provided, that those garnering more than two percent (2%) of the votes shall
be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes: provided,

5. finally, that each party, organization, or coalition shall be entitled to not more than
three (3) seats.
WHEREAS, for the 2007 Elections, based on the above projected total of party-list votes,
the presumptive two percent (2%) threshold can be pegged at three hundred thirty four
thousand four hundred sixty-two (334,462) votes;
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court, in Citizen’s Battle Against Corruption (CIBAC) versus
COMELEC, reiterated its ruling in Veterans Federation Party versus COMELEC adopting a
formula for the additional seats of each party, organization or coalition receving more than the
required two percent (2%) votes, stating that the same shall be determined only after all party-list
ballots have been completely canvassed;
WHEREAS, the parties, organizations, and coalitions that have thus far garnered at
least three hundred thirty four thousand four hundred sixty-two (334,462) votes are as
follows:
RANK PARTY/ORGANIZATION/
COALITION
VOTES
RECEIVED
1 BUHAY 1,163,218
2 BAYAN MUNA 972,730
3 CIBAC 760,260
4 GABRIELA 610,451
5 APEC 538,971
6 A TEACHER 476,036
7 AKBAYAN 470,872
8 ALAGAD 423,076
9 BUTIL 405,052
10 COOP-NATCO 390,029
11 BATAS 386,361
12 ANAK PAWIS 376,036
13 ARC 338,194
14 ABONO 337,046
WHEREAS, except for BagongAlyansangTagapagtaguyod ng AdhikaingSambayanan
(BATAS), against which an URGENT PETITION FOR CANCELLATION/REMOVAL OF
REGISTRATION AND DISQUALIFICATION OF PARTY-LIST NOMINEE (With Prayer for the
Issuance of Restraining Order) has been filed before the Commission, docketed as SPC No. 07-
250, all the parties, organizations and coalitions included in the aforementioned list are therefore
entitled to at least one seat under the party-list system of representation in the meantime.

6. NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the powers vested in it by the Constitution, the
Omnibus Election Code, Executive Order No. 144, Republic Act Nos. 6646, 7166, 7941, and
other election laws, the Commission on Elections, sitting en banc as the National Board of
Canvassers, hereby RESOLVES to PARTIALLY PROCLAIM, subject to certain conditions set
forth below, the following parties, organizations and coalitions participating under the Party-List
System:
1 BuhayHayaanYumabong BUHAY
2 Bayan Muna BAYAN MUNA
3 Citizens Battle Against Corruption CIBAC
4 Gabriela Women’s Party GABRIELA
5 Association of Philippine Electric
Cooperatives
APEC
6 Advocacy for Teacher Empowerment
Through Action, Cooperation and Harmony
Towards Educational Reforms, Inc.
A TEACHER
7 Akbayan! Citizen’s Action Party AKBAYAN
8 Alagad ALAGAD
9 Luzon Farmers Party BUTIL
10 Cooperative-Natco Network Party COOP-NATCCO
11 AnakPawis ANAKPAWIS
12 Alliance of Rural Concerns ARC
13 Abono ABONO
This is without prejudice to the proclamation of other parties, organizations, or coalitions
which may later on be established to have obtained at least two percent (2%) of the total actual
votes cast under the Party-List System.
The total number of seats of each winning party, organization or coalition shall be
determined pursuant to Veterans Federation Party versus COMELEC formula upon completion
of the canvass of the party-list results.
The proclamation of BagongAlyansangTagapagtaguyod ng AdhikaingSambayanan
(BATAS) is hereby deferred until final resolution of SPC No. 07-250, in order not to render the
proceedings therein moot and academic.
Finally, all proclamation of the nominees of concerned parties, organizations and
coalitions with pending disputes shall likewise be held in abeyance until final resolution of their
respective cases.

7. Let the Clerk of the Commission implement this Resolution, furnishing a copy thereof to
the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Philippines.
SO ORDERED.[8] (Emphasis in the original)
Pursuant to NBC Resolution No. 07-60, the COMELEC, acting as NBC, promulgated
NBC Resolution No. 07-72, which declared the additional seats allocated to the appropriate
parties. We quote from the COMELEC’s interpretation of the Veterans formula as found in
NBC Resolution No. 07-72:
WHEREAS, on July 9, 2007, the Commission on Elections sitting en banc as the
National Board of Canvassers proclaimed thirteen (13) qualified parties, organization[s] and
coalitions based on the presumptive two percent (2%) threshold of 334,462 votes from the
projected maximum total number of party-list votes of 16,723,121, and were thus given one (1)
guaranteed party-list seat each;
WHEREAS, per Report of the Tabulation Group and Supervisory Committee of the
National Board of Canvassers, the projected maximum total party-list votes, as of July 11, 2007,
based on the votes actually canvassed, votes canvassed but not included in Report No. 29, votes
received but uncanvassed, and maximum votes expected for Pantar, Lanao del Norte, is
16,261,369; and that the projected maximum total votes for the thirteen (13) qualified parties,
organizations and coalition[s] are as follows:
Party-List Projected total number of votes
1 BUHAY 1,178,747
2 BAYAN MUNA 977,476
3 CIBAC 755,964
4 GABRIELA 621,718
5 APEC 622,489
6 A TEACHER 492,369
7 AKBAYAN 462,674
8 ALAGAD 423,190
9 BUTIL 409,298
10 COOP-NATCO 412,920
11 ANAKPAWIS 370,165
12 ARC 375,846
13 ABONO 340,151

8. WHEREAS, based on the above Report, BuhayHayaanYumabong (Buhay) obtained the
highest number of votes among the thirteen (13) qualified parties, organizations and coalitions,
making it the “first party” in accordance with Veterans Federation Party versus COMELEC,
reiterated in Citizen’s Battle Against Corruption (CIBAC) versus COMELEC;
WHEREAS, qualified parties, organizations and coalitions participating under the party-
list system of representation that have obtained one guaranteed (1) seat may be entitled to an
additional seat or seats based on the formula prescribed by the Supreme Court in Veterans;
WHEREAS, in determining the additional seats for the “first party”, the correct formula
as expressed in Veterans, is:
Number of votes of first party Proportion of votes of first
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = party relative to total votes for
Total votes for party-list system party-list system
wherein the proportion of votes received by the first party (without rounding off) shall entitle it
to additional seats:
Proportion of votes received
by the first party
Additional seats
Equal to or at least 6% Two (2) additional seats
Equal to or greater than 4% but less than 6% One (1) additional seat
Less than 4% No additional seat
WHEREAS, applying the above formula, Buhay obtained the following percentage:
1,178,747
- - - - - - - - = 0.07248 or 7.2%
16,261,369
which entitles it to two (2) additional seats.
WHEREAS, in determining the additional seats for the other qualified parties,
organizations and coalitions, the correct formula as expressed in Veterans and reiterated
in CIBAC is, as follows:
No. of votes of
concerned party No. of additional
Additional seats for = ------------------- x seats allocated to
a concerned party No. of votes of first party
first party
WHEREAS, applying the above formula, the results are as follows:
Party List Percentage Additional Seat

9. BAYAN MUNA 1.65 1
CIBAC 1.28 1
GABRIELA 1.05 1
APEC 1.05 1
A TEACHER 0.83 0
AKBAYAN 0.78 0
ALAGAD 0.71 0
BUTIL 0.69 0
COOP-NATCO 0.69 0
ANAKPAWIS 0.62 0
ARC 0.63 0
ABONO 0.57 0
NOW THEREFORE, by virtue of the powers vested in it by the Constitution, Omnibus
Election Code, Executive Order No. 144, Republic Act Nos. 6646, 7166, 7941 and other
elections laws, the Commission on Elections en banc sitting as the National Board of
Canvassers, hereby RESOLVED, as it hereby RESOLVES, to proclaim the following parties,
organizations or coalitions as entitled to additional seats, to wit:
Party List Additional Seats
BUHAY 2
BAYAN MUNA 1
CIBAC 1
GABRIELA 1
APEC 1
This is without prejudice to the proclamation of other parties, organizations or coalitions
which may later on be established to have obtained at least two per cent (2%) of the total votes
cast under the party-list system to entitle them to one (1) guaranteed seat, or to the appropriate
percentage of votes to entitle them to one (1) additional seat.
Finally, all proclamation of the nominees of concerned parties, organizations and
coalitions with pending disputes shall likewise be held in abeyance until final resolution of their
respective cases.
Let the National Board of Canvassers Secretariat implement this Resolution, furnishing a
copy hereof to the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Philippines.

10. SO ORDERED.[9]
Acting on BANAT’s petition, the NBC promulgated NBC Resolution No. 07-88 on 3
August 2007, which reads as follows:
This pertains to the Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-List Representatives
Provided by the Constitution filed by the Barangay Association for National Advancement and
Transparency (BANAT).
Acting on the foregoing Petition of the Barangay Association for National Advancement
and Transparency (BANAT) party-list, Atty. Alioden D. Dalaig, Head, National Board of
Canvassers Legal Group submitted his comments/observations and recommendation thereon
[NBC 07-041 (PL)], which reads:
COMMENTS / OBSERVATIONS:
Petitioner Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency
(BANAT), in its Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-List
Representatives Provided by the Constitution prayed for the following reliefs, to
wit:
1. That the full number -- twenty percent (20%) -- of Party-List
representatives as mandated by Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution shall be
proclaimed.
2. Paragraph (b), Section 11 of RA 7941 which prescribes the 2% threshold
votes, should be harmonized with Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution and
with Section 12 of the same RA 7941 in that it should be applicable only to the
first party-list representative seats to be allotted on the basis of their initial/first
ranking.
3. The 3-seat limit prescribed by RA 7941 shall be applied; and
4. Initially, all party-list groups shall be given the number of seats
corresponding to every 2% of the votes they received and the additional seats shall
be allocated in accordance with Section 12 of RA 7941, that is, in proportion to
the percentage of votes obtained by each party-list group in relation to the total
nationwide votes cast in the party-list election, after deducting the corresponding
votes of those which were allotted seats under the 2% threshold rule. In fine, the
formula/procedure prescribed in the “ALLOCATION OF PARTY-LIST SEATS,
ANNEX “A” of COMELEC RESOLUTION 2847 dated 25 June 1996, shall be
used for [the] purpose of determining how many seats shall be proclaimed, which
party-list groups are entitled to representative seats and how many of their
nominees shall seat [sic].
5. In the alternative, to declare as unconstitutional Section 11 of Republic
Act No. 7941 and that the procedure in allocating seats for party-list
representative prescribed by Section 12 of RA 7941 shall be followed.

11. RECOMMENDATION:
The petition of BANAT is now moot and academic.
The Commission En Banc in NBC Resolution No. 07-60 promulgated July 9,
2007 re “In the Matter of the Canvass of Votes and Partial Proclamation of the
Parties, Organizations and Coalitions Participating Under the Party-List System
During the May 14, 2007 National and Local Elections” resolved among others
that the total number of seats of each winning party, organization or coalition
shall be determined pursuant to the Veterans Federation
Party versus COMELEC formula upon completion of the canvass of the party-list
results.”
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the National Board of Canvassers RESOLVED, as
it hereby RESOLVES, to approve and adopt the recommendation of Atty. Alioden D. Dalaig,
Head, NBC Legal Group, to DENY the herein petition of BANAT for being moot and
academic.
Let the Supervisory Committee implement this resolution.
SO ORDERED.[10]
BANAT filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus assailing the ruling in NBC
Resolution No. 07-88. BANAT did not file a motion for reconsideration of NBC Resolution
No. 07-88.
On 9 July 2007, Bayan Muna, Abono, and A Teacher asked the COMELEC, acting as
NBC, to reconsider its decision to use the Veterans formula as stated in its NBC Resolution No.
07-60 because the Veterans formula is violative of the Constitution and of Republic Act No.
7941 (R.A. No. 7941). On the same day, the COMELEC denied reconsideration during the
proceedings of the NBC.[11]
Aside from the thirteen party-list organizations proclaimed on 9 July 2007, the
COMELEC proclaimed three other party-list organizations as qualified parties entitled to one
guaranteed seat under the Party-List System: Agricultural Sector Alliance of the Philippines,
Inc. (AGAP),[12] Anak Mindanao (AMIN),[13] and An Waray.[14] Per the certification[15] by
COMELEC, the following party-list organizations have been proclaimed as of 19 May 2008:
Party-List No. of Seat(s)
1.1 Buhay 3
1.2 Bayan Muna 2
1.3 CIBAC 2

12. 1.4 Gabriela 2
1.5 APEC 2
1.6 A Teacher 1
1.7 Akbayan 1
1.8 Alagad 1
1.9 Butil 1
1.10 Coop-Natco [sic] 1
1.11 AnakPawis 1
1.12 ARC 1
1.13 Abono 1
1.14 AGAP 1
1.15 AMIN 1
The proclamation of BagongAlyansangTagapagtaguyod ng AdhikaingSambayanan (BATAS),
against which an Urgent Petition for Cancellation/Removal of Registration and Disqualification
of Party-list Nominee (with Prayer for the Issuance of Restraining Order) has been filed before
the COMELEC, was deferred pending final resolution of SPC No. 07-250.
Issues
BANAT brought the following issues before this Court:
1. Is the twenty percent allocation for party-list representatives provided in Section
5(2), Article VI of the Constitution mandatory or is it merely a ceiling?
2. Is the three-seat limit provided in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 constitutional?
3. Is the two percent threshold and “qualifier” votes prescribed by the same Section
11(b) of RA 7941 constitutional?
4. How shall the party-list representatives be allocated?[16]
Bayan Muna, A Teacher, and Abono, on the other hand, raised the following issues in
their petition:
I. Respondent Commission on Elections, acting as National Board of Canvassers,
committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it

13. promulgated NBC Resolution No. 07-60 to implement the First-Party Rule in the allocation
of seats to qualified party-list organizations as said rule:
A. Violates the constitutional principle of proportional representation.
B. Violates the provisions of RA 7941 particularly:
1. The 2-4-6 Formula used by the First Party Rule
in allocating additional seats for the “First Party” violates the
principle of proportional representation under RA 7941.
2. The use of two formulas in the allocation
of additional seats, one for the “First Party” and another
for the qualifying parties, violates Section 11(b) of RA 7941.
3. The proportional relationships under the First Party Rule
are different from those required under RA 7941;
C. Violates the “Four Inviolable Parameters” of the Philippine party-list
system as provided for under the same case of Veterans Federation Party, et al. v.
COMELEC.
II. Presuming that the Commission on Elections did not commit grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it implemented the First-Party Rule
in the allocation of seats to qualified party-list organizations, the same being merely
in consonance with the ruling in Veterans Federations Party, et al.
v. COMELEC, the instant Petition is a justiciable case as the issues involved herein are
constitutional in nature, involving the correct interpretation and implementation of RA
7941, and are of transcendental importance to our nation.[17]
Considering the allegations in the petitions and the comments of the parties in these
cases, we defined the following issues in our advisory for the oral arguments set on 22 April
2008:
1. Is the twenty percent allocation for party-list representatives in Section 5(2), Article
VI of the Constitution mandatory or merely a ceiling?
2. Is the three-seat limit in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 constitutional?
3. Is the two percent threshold prescribed in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 to qualify for
one seat constitutional?
4. How shall the party-list representative seats be allocated?
5. Does the Constitution prohibit the major political parties from participating in the
party-list elections? If not, can the major political parties be barred from participating in the
party-list elections?[18]

14. The Ruling of the Court
The petitions have partial merit. We maintain that a Philippine-style party-list election
has at least four inviolable parameters as clearly stated in Veterans. For easy reference, these
are:
First, the twenty percent allocation — the combined number of all party-list congressmen
shall not exceed twenty percent of the total membership of the House of Representatives,
including those elected under the party list;
Second, the two percent threshold — only those parties garnering a minimum of two
percent of the total valid votes cast for the party-list system are “qualified” to have a seat in the
House of Representatives;
Third, the three-seat limit — each qualified party, regardless of the number of votes it
actually obtained, is entitled to a maximum of three seats; that is, one “qualifying” and two
additional seats;
Fourth, proportional representation— the additional seats which a qualified party is
entitled to shall be computed “in proportion to their total number of votes.”[19]
However, because the formula in Veterans has flaws in its mathematical interpretation of the
term “proportional representation,” this Court is compelled to revisit the formula for the
allocation of additional seats to party-list organizations.
Number of Party-List Representatives:
The Formula Mandated by the Constitution
Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution provides:
Section 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two
hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from legislative
districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila 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 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 party-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.

15. The first paragraph of Section 11 of R.A. No. 7941 reads:
Section 11. Number of Party-List Representatives. — The party-list representatives shall
constitute twenty per centum (20%) of the total number of the members of the House of
Representatives including those under the party-list.
x xx
Section 5(1), Article VI of the Constitution states that the “House of Representatives shall
be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by
law.” The House of Representatives shall be composed of district representatives and party-list
representatives. The Constitution allows the legislature to modify the number of the members
of the House of Representatives.
Section 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution, on the other hand, states the ratio of party-list
representatives to the total number of representatives. We compute the number of seats
available to party-list representatives from the number of legislative districts. On this point, we
do not deviate from the first formula in Veterans, thus:
Number of seats available
to legislative districts x .20 =
Number of seats available to
party-list representatives
.80
This formula allows for the corresponding increase in the number of seats available for party-
list representatives whenever a legislative district is created by law. Since the 14thCongress of
the Philippines has 220 district representatives, there are 55 seats available to party-list
representatives.
220 x .20 = 55
.80
After prescribing the ratio of the number of party-list representatives to the total number
of representatives, the Constitution left the manner of allocating the seats available to
party-list representatives to the wisdom of the legislature.
Allocation of Seats for Party-List Representatives:
The Statutory Limits Presented by the Two Percent Threshold
and the Three-Seat Cap

16. All parties agree on the formula to determine the maximum number of seats reserved
under the Party-List System, as well as on the formula to determine the guaranteed seats to
party-list candidates garnering at least two-percent of the total party-list votes. However, there
are numerous interpretations of the provisions of R.A. No. 7941 on the allocation
of “additional seats” under the Party-List System. Veterans produced the First Party
Rule,[20] and Justice Vicente V. Mendoza’s dissent in Veterans presented Germany’s Niemeyer
formula[21] as an alternative.
The Constitution left to Congress the determination of the manner of allocating the seats
for party-list representatives. Congress enacted R.A. No. 7941, paragraphs (a) and (b) of
Section 11 and Section 12 of which provide:
Section 11. Number of Party-List Representatives. — x xx
In determining the allocation of seats for the second vote,[22] the following procedure
shall be observed:
(a) The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the highest to the lowest
based on the number of votes they garnered during the elections.
(b) The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two percent (2%) of the total
votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one seat each: Provided, That those
garnering more than two percent (2%) of the votes shall be entitled to additional seats in
proportion to their total number of votes: Provided, finally, That each party, organization, or
coalition shall be entitled to not more than three (3) seats.
Section 12. Procedure in Allocating Seats for Party-List Representatives. — The
COMELEC shall tally all the votes for the parties, organizations, or coalitions on a nationwide
basis, rank them according to the number of votes received and allocate party-list representatives
proportionately according to the percentage of votes obtained by each party, organization, or
coalition as against the total nationwide votes cast for the party-list system. (Emphasis supplied)
In G.R. No. 179271, BANAT presents two interpretations through three formulas to
allocate party-list representative seats.
The first interpretation allegedly harmonizes the provisions of Section 11(b) on the 2%
requirement with Section 12 of R.A. No. 7941. BANAT described this procedure as follows:
(a) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty percent (20%) of the total Members
of the House of Representatives including those from the party-list groups as prescribed by
Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution, Section 11 (1st par.) of RA 7941 and Comelec
Resolution No. 2847 dated 25 June 1996. Since there are 220 District Representatives in the

17. 14th Congress, there shall be 55 Party-List Representatives. All seats shall have to be
proclaimed.
(b) All party-list groups shall initially be allotted one (1) seat for every two per centum (2%)
of the total party-list votes they obtained; provided, that no party-list groups shall have more than
three (3) seats (Section 11, RA 7941).
(c) The remaining seats shall, after deducting the seats obtained by the party-list groups
under the immediately preceding paragraph and after deducting from their total the votes
corresponding to those seats, the remaining seats shall be allotted proportionately to all the party-
list groups which have not secured the maximum three (3) seats under the 2% threshold rule, in
accordance with Section 12 of RA 7941.[23]
Forty-four (44) party-list seats will be awarded under BANAT’s first interpretation.
The second interpretation presented by BANAT assumes that the 2% vote requirement is
declared unconstitutional, and apportions the seats for party-list representatives by following
Section 12 of R.A. No. 7941. BANAT states that the COMELEC:
(a) shall tally all the votes for the parties, organizations, or coalitions on a nationwide
basis;
(b) rank them according to the number of votes received; and,
(c) allocate party-list representatives proportionately according to the percentage of votes
obtained by each party, organization or coalition as against the total nationwide votes cast
for the party-list system.[24]
BANAT used two formulas to obtain the same results: one is based on the proportional
percentage of the votes received by each party as against the total nationwide party-list votes,
and the other is “by making the votes of a party-list with a median percentage of votes as the
divisor in computing the allocation of seats.”[25] Thirty-four (34) party-list seats will be
awarded under BANAT’s second interpretation.
In G.R. No. 179295, Bayan Muna, Abono, and A Teacher criticize both the COMELEC’s
original 2-4-6 formula and the Veterans formula for systematically preventing all the party-list
seats from being filled up. They claim that both formulas do not factor in the total number of
seats alloted for the entire Party-List System. Bayan Muna, Abono, and A Teacher reject the
three-seat cap, but accept the 2% threshold. After determining the qualified parties, a second
percentage is generated by dividing the votes of a qualified party by the total votes of all
qualified parties only. The number of seats allocated to a qualified party is computed by
multiplying the total party-list seats available with the second percentage. There will be a first
round of seat allocation, limited to using the whole integers as the equivalent of the number of
seats allocated to the concerned party-list. After all the qualified parties are given their seats, a
second round of seat allocation is conducted. The fractions, or remainders, from the whole

18. integers are ranked from highest to lowest and the remaining seats on the basis of this ranking
are allocated until all the seats are filled up.[26]
We examine what R.A. No. 7941 prescribes to allocate seats for party-list representatives.
Section 11(a) of R.A. No. 7941 prescribes the ranking of the participating parties from
the highest to the lowest based on the number of votes they garnered during the elections.
Table 1. Ranking of the participating parties from the highest to the lowest based on the number
of votes garnered during the elections.[27]
Rank Party
Votes
Garnered
Rank Party
Votes
Garnered
1 BUHAY 1,169,234 48 KALAHI 88,868
2 BAYAN
MUNA
979,039 49 APOI 79,386
3 CIBAC 755,686 50 BP 78,541
4 GABRIELA 621,171 51 AHONBAYAN 78,424
5 APEC 619,657 52 BIGKIS 77,327
6 A TEACHER 490,379 53 PMAP 75,200
7 AKBAYAN 466,112 54 AKAPIN 74,686
8 ALAGAD 423,149 55 PBA 71,544
9 COOP-
NATCCO
409,883 56 GRECON 62,220
10 BUTIL 409,160 57 BTM 60,993
11 BATAS 385,810 58 A SMILE 58,717
12 ARC 374,288 59 NELFFI 57,872
13 ANAKPAWIS 370,261 60 AKSA 57,012
14 ABONO 339,990 61 BAGO 55,846
15 AMIN 338,185 62 BANDILA 54,751
16 AGAP 328,724 63 AHON 54,522
17 AN WARAY 321,503 64 ASAHAN MO 51,722

19. 18 YACAP 310,889 65 AGBIAG! 50,837
19 FPJPM 300,923 66 SPI 50,478
20 UNI-MAD 245,382 67 BAHANDI 46,612
21 ABS 235,086 68 ADD 45,624
22 KAKUSA 228,999 69 AMANG 43,062
23 KABATAAN 228,637 70 ABAY PARAK 42,282
24 ABA-AKO 218,818 71 BABAE KA 36,512
25 ALIF 217,822 72 SB 34,835
26 SENIOR
CITIZENS
213,058 73 ASAP 34,098
27 AT 197,872 74 PEP 33,938
28 VFP 196,266 75 ABA
ILONGGO
33,903
29 ANAD 188,521 76 VENDORS 33,691
30 BANAT 177,028 77 ADD-TRIBAL 32,896
31 ANG
KASANGGA
170,531 78 ALMANA 32,255
32 BANTAY 169,801 79 AANGAT KA
PILIPINO
29,130
33 ABAKADA 166,747 80 AAPS 26,271
34 1-UTAK 164,980 81 HAPI 25,781
35 TUCP 162,647 82 AAWAS 22,946
36 COCOFED 155,920 83 SM 20,744
37 AGHAM 146,032 84 AG 16,916
38 ANAK 141,817 85 AGING PINOY 16,729
39 ABANSE!
PINAY
130,356 86 APO 16,421
40 PM 119,054 87 BIYAYANG
BUKID
16,241
41 AVE 110,769 88 ATS 14,161
42 SUARA 110,732 89 UMDJ 9,445
43 ASSALAM 110,440 90 BUKLOD 8,915

20. FILIPINA
44 DIWA 107,021 91 LYPAD 8,471
45 ANC 99,636 92 AA-KASOSYO 8,406
46 SANLAKAS 97,375 93 KASAPI 6,221
47 ABC 90,058 TOTAL 15,950,900
The first clause of Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941 states that “parties, organizations, and
coalitions receiving at least two percent (2%) of the total votes cast for the party-list system
shall be entitled to one seat each.” This clause guarantees a seat to the two-percenters. In Table
2 below, we use the first 20 party-list candidates for illustration purposes. The percentage of
votes garnered by each party is arrived at by dividing the number of votes garnered by each
party by 15,950,900, the total number of votes cast for all party-list candidates.
Table 2. The first 20 party-list candidates and their respective percentage of votes garnered over
the total votes for the party-list.[28]
Rank Party
Votes
Garnered
Votes Garnered
over Total
Votes for Party-
List, in %
Guaranteed
Seat
1 BUHAY 1,169,234 7.33% 1
2 BAYAN MUNA 979,039 6.14% 1
3 CIBAC 755,686 4.74% 1
4 GABRIELA 621,171 3.89% 1
5 APEC 619,657 3.88% 1
6 A TEACHER 490,379 3.07% 1
7 AKBAYAN 466,112 2.92% 1
8 ALAGAD 423,149 2.65% 1
9 COOP-NATCCO 409,883 2.57% 1
10 BUTIL 409,160 2.57% 1
11 BATAS[29] 385,810 2.42% 1
12 ARC 374,288 2.35% 1
13 ANAKPAWIS 370,261 2.32% 1

21. 14 ABONO 339,990 2.13% 1
15 AMIN 338,185 2.12% 1
16 AGAP 328,724 2.06% 1
17 AN WARAY 321,503 2.02% 1
Total 17
18 YACAP 310,889 1.95% 0
19 FPJPM 300,923 1.89% 0
20 UNI-MAD 245,382 1.54% 0
From Table 2 above, we see that only 17 party-list candidates received at least 2% from
the total number of votes cast for party-list candidates. The 17 qualified party-list candidates, or
the two-percenters, are the party-list candidates that are “entitled to one seat each,” or the
guaranteed seat. In this first round of seat allocation, we distributed 17 guaranteed seats.
The second clause of Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941 provides that “those garnering
more than two percent (2%) of the votes shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to
their total number of votes.” This is where petitioners’ and intervenors’ problem with the
formula in Veterans lies. Veterans interprets the clause “in proportion to their total number of
votes” to be in proportion to the votes of the first party. This interpretation is contrary to the
express language of R.A. No. 7941.
We rule that, in computing the allocation of additional seats, the continued operation of
the two percent threshold for the distribution of the additional seats as found in the second
clause of Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941 is unconstitutional. This Court finds that the two
percent threshold makes it mathematically impossible to achieve the maximum number of
available party list seats when the number of available party list seats exceeds 50. The
continued operation of the two percent threshold in the distribution of the additional seats
frustrates the attainment of the permissive ceiling that 20% of the members of the House of
Representatives shall consist of party-list representatives.
To illustrate: There are 55 available party-list seats. Suppose there are 50 million votes
cast for the 100 participants in the party list elections. A party that has two percent of the
votes cast, or one million votes, gets a guaranteed seat. Let us further assume that the first 50
parties all 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 available 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 get two percent of the votes

22. for every party, it is always impossible for the number of occupied party-list seats to exceed 50
seats as long as the two percent threshold is present.
We therefore strike down the two percent threshold only in relation to the
distribution of the additional seats as found in the second clause of Section 11(b) of R.A.
No. 7941. The two percent threshold presents an unwarranted obstacle to the full
implementation of Section5(2), Article VI of the Constitution and prevents the attainment
of “the broadestpossible representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the House
of Representatives.”[30]
In determining the allocation of seats for party-list representatives under Section 11 of
R.A. No. 7941, the following procedure shall be observed:
1. The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the highest to the lowest
based on the number of votes they garnered during the elections.
2. The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two percent (2%) of the total
votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one guaranteed seat each.
3. Those garnering sufficient number of votes, according to the ranking in paragraph 1,
shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes until all the
additional seats are allocated.
4. Each party, organization, or coalition shall be entitled to not more than three (3) seats.
In computing the additional seats, the guaranteed seats shall no longer be included
because they have already been allocated, at one seat each, to every two-percenter. Thus, the
remaining available seats for allocation as “additional seats” are the maximum seats reserved
under the Party List System less the guaranteed seats. Fractional seats are disregarded in the
absence of a provision in R.A. No. 7941 allowing for a rounding off of fractional seats.
In declaring the two percent threshold unconstitutional, we do not limit our allocation of
additional seats in Table 3 below to the two-percenters. The percentage of votes garnered by
each party-list candidate is arrived at by dividing the number of votes garnered by each party by
15,950,900, the total number of votes cast for party-list candidates. There are two steps in the
second round of seat allocation. First, the percentage is multiplied by the remaining available
seats, 38, which is the difference between the 55 maximum seats reserved under the Party-List
System and the 17 guaranteed seats of the two-percenters. The whole integer of the product of
the percentage and of the remaining available seats corresponds to a party’s share in the
remaining available seats. Second, we assign one party-list seat to each of the parties next in

23. rank until all available seats are completely distributed. We distributed all of the remaining 38
seats in the second round of seat allocation. Finally, we apply the three-seat cap to determine
the number of seats each qualified party-list candidate is entitled. Thus:
Table 3. Distribution of Available Party-List Seats
Rank Party
Votes
Garnered
Votes
Garnered
over
Total Votes
for Party
List, in %
(A)
Guaranteed
Seat
(First Round)
(B)
Additional
Seats
(Second
Round)
(C)
(B) plus
(C), in
whole
integers
(D)
Applying
the three
seat cap
(E)
1 BUHAY 1,169,234 7.33% 1 2.79 3 N.A.
2 BAYAN
MUNA
979,039 6.14% 1 2.33 3 N.A.
3 CIBAC 755,686 4.74% 1 1.80 2 N.A.
4 GABRIELA 621,171 3.89% 1 1.48 2 N.A.
5 APEC 619,657 3.88% 1 1.48 2 N.A.
6 A Teacher 490,379 3.07% 1 1.17 2 N.A.
7 AKBAYAN 466,112 2.92% 1 1.11 2 N.A.
8 ALAGAD 423,149 2.65% 1 1.01 2 N.A.
9[31] COOP-
NATCCO
409,883 2.57% 1 1 2 N.A.
10 BUTIL 409,160 2.57% 1 1 2 N.A.
11 BATAS 385,810 2.42% 1 1 2 N.A.

24. 12 ARC 374,288 2.35% 1 1 2 N.A.
13 ANAKPAWIS 370,261 2.32% 1 1 2 N.A.
14 ABONO 339,990 2.13% 1 1 2 N.A.
15 AMIN 338,185 2.12% 1 1 2 N.A.
16 AGAP 328,724 2.06% 1 1 2 N.A.
17 AN WARAY 321,503 2.02% 1 1 2 N.A.
18 YACAP 310,889 1.95% 0 1 1 N.A.
19 FPJPM 300,923 1.89% 0 1 1 N.A.
20 UNI-MAD 245,382 1.54% 0 1 1 N.A.
21 ABS 235,086 1.47% 0 1 1 N.A.
22 KAKUSA 228,999 1.44% 0 1 1 N.A.
23 KABATAAN 228,637 1.43% 0 1 1 N.A.
24 ABA-AKO 218,818 1.37% 0 1 1 N.A.
25 ALIF 217,822 1.37% 0 1 1 N.A.
26 SENIOR
CITIZENS
213,058 1.34% 0 1 1 N.A.
27 AT 197,872 1.24% 0 1 1 N.A.
28 VFP 196,266 1.23% 0 1 1 N.A.
29 ANAD 188,521 1.18% 0 1 1 N.A.
30 BANAT 177,028 1.11% 0 1 1 N.A.
31 ANG
KASANGGA
170,531 1.07% 0 1 1 N.A.
32 BANTAY 169,801 1.06% 0 1 1 N.A.
33 ABAKADA 166,747 1.05% 0 1 1 N.A.
34 1-UTAK 164,980 1.03% 0 1 1 N.A.
35 TUCP 162,647 1.02% 0 1 1 N.A.
36 COCOFED 155,920 0.98% 0 1 1 N.A.
Total 17 55
Applying the procedure of seat allocation as illustrated in Table 3 above, there are 55
party-list representatives from the 36 winning party-list organizations. All 55 available party-

25. list seats are filled. The additional seats allocated to the parties with sufficient number of votes
for one whole seat, in no case to exceed a total of three seats for each party, are shown in
column (D).
Participation of Major Political Parties in Party-List Elections
The Constitutional Commission adopted a multi-party system that allowed all political
parties to participate in the party-list elections. The deliberations of the Constitutional
Commission clearly bear this out, thus:
MR. MONSOD. Madam President, I just want to say that we suggested or proposed the
party list system because we wanted to open up the political system to a pluralistic society
through a multiparty system. x xx We are for opening up the system, and we would like
very much for the sectors to be there. That is why one of the ways to do that is to put a
ceiling on the number of representatives from any single party that can sit within the 50
allocated under the party list system. x xx.
x xx
MR. MONSOD. Madam President, the candidacy for the 198 seats is not limited to
political parties. My question is this: Are we going to classify for example Christian Democrats
and Social Democrats as political parties? Can they run under the party list concept or must they
be under the district legislation side of it only?
MR. VILLACORTA. In reply to that query, I think these parties that the Commissioner
mentioned can field candidates for the Senate as well as for the House of
Representatives. Likewise, they can also field sectoral candidates for the 20 percent or 30
percent, whichever is adopted, of the seats that we are allocating under the party list
system.
MR. MONSOD. In other words, the Christian Democrats can field district candidates
and can also participate in the party list system?
MR. VILLACORTA. Why not? When they come to the party list system, they will
be fielding only sectoral candidates.
MR. MONSOD. May I be clarified on that? Can UNIDO participate in the party list
system?
MR. VILLACORTA. Yes, why not? For as long as they field candidates who come
from the different marginalized sectors that we shall designate in this Constitution.
MR. MONSOD. Suppose Senator Tañada wants to run under BAYAN group and says
that he represents the farmers, would he qualify?
MR. VILLACORTA. No, Senator Tañada would not qualify.
MR. MONSOD. But UNIDO can field candidates under the party list system and say
Juan dela Cruz is a farmer. Who would pass on whether he is a farmer or not?

26. MR. TADEO. Kay Commissioner Monsod, gusto kolamanglinawinito. Political
parties, particularly minority political parties, are not prohibited to participate in the party
list election if they can prove that they are also organized along sectoral lines.
MR. MONSOD. What the Commissioner is saying is that all political parties can
participate because it is precisely the contention of political parties that they represent the broad
base of citizens and that all sectors are represented in them. Would the Commissioner agree?
MR. TADEO. Angpuntolamangnamin, pagpinayaganmoang UNIDO naisang political
party, it will dominate the party list at mawawalangsaysay din yung sector. Lalamuninmismo ng
political partiesang party list system. Gusto kolamangbigyan ng diinang “reserve.” Hindi ito
reserve seat sa marginalized sectors. Kung titingnannatinitong 198 seats, reserved din itosa
political parties.
MR. MONSOD. Hindi po reserved iyonkasi anybody can run there. But my question to
Commissioner Villacorta and probably also to Commissioner Tadeo is that under this system,
would UNIDO be banned from running under the party list system?
MR. VILLACORTA. No, as I said, UNIDO may field sectoral candidates. On that
condition alone, UNIDO may be allowed to register for the party list system.
MR. MONSOD. May I inquire from Commissioner Tadeo if he shares that answer?
MR. TADEO. The same.
MR. VILLACORTA. Puwedepoang UNIDO, perosasectoral lines.
x xxx
MR. OPLE. x xx In my opinion, this will also create the stimulus for political parties
and mass organizations to seek common ground. For example, we have the PDP-Laban and the
UNIDO. I see no reason why they should not be able to make common goals with mass
organizations so that the very leadership of these parties can be transformed through the
participation of mass organizations. And if this is true of the administration parties, this will be
true of others like the Partido ng Bayan which is now being formed. There is no question that
they will be attractive to many mass organizations. In the opposition parties to which we belong,
there will be a stimulus for us to contact mass organizations so that with their participation, the
policies of such parties can be radically transformed because this amendment will create
conditions that will challenge both the mass organizations and the political parties to come
together. And the party list system is certainly available, although it is open to all the parties. It
is understood that the parties will enter in the roll of the COMELEC the names of representatives
of mass organizations affiliated with them. So that we may, in time, develop this excellent
system that they have in Europe where labor organizations and cooperatives, for example,
distribute themselves either in the Social Democratic Party and the Christian Democratic Party in
Germany, and their very presence there has a transforming effect upon the philosophies and the
leadership of those parties.
It is also a fact well known to all that in the United States, the AFL-CIO always vote with
the Democratic Party. But the businessmen, most of them, always vote with the Republican
Party, meaning that there is no reason at all why political parties and mass organizations should
not combine, reenforce, influence and interact with each other so that the very objectives that we

27. set in this Constitution for sectoral representation are achieved in a wider, more lasting, and more
institutionalized way. Therefore, I support this [Monsod-Villacorta] amendment. It installs
sectoral representation as a constitutional gift, but at the same time, it challenges the sector to
rise to the majesty of being elected representatives later on through a party list system; and even
beyond that, to become actual political parties capable of contesting political power in the wider
constitutional arena for major political parties.
x xx [32] (Emphasis supplied)
R.A. No. 7941 provided the details for the concepts put forward by the Constitutional
Commission. Section 3 of R.A. No. 7941 reads:
Definition of Terms. (a) The party-list system is a mechanism of proportional
representation in the election of representatives to the House of Representatives from national,
regional and sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof registered with the
Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Component parties or organizations of a coalition may
participate independently provided the coalition of which they form part does not participate in
the party-list system.
(b) A party means either a political party or a sectoral party or a coalition of parties.
(c) 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.
It is a national party when its constituency is spread over the geographical territory of at
least a majority of the regions. It is a regional party when its constituency is spread over the
geographical territory of at least a majority of the cities and provinces comprising the region.
(d) A sectoral party refers to an organized group of citizens belonging to any of the
sectors enumerated in Section 5 hereof whose principal advocacy pertains to the special interests
and concerns of their sector,
(e) A sectoral organization refers to a group of citizens or a coalition of groups of citizens
who share similar physical attributes or characteristics, employment, interests or concerns.
(f) A coalition refers to an aggrupation of duly registered national, regional, sectoral
parties or organizations for political and/or election purposes.
Congress, in enacting R.A. No. 7941, put the three-seat cap to prevent any party from
dominating the party-list elections.
Neither the Constitution nor R.A. No. 7941 prohibits major political parties from
participating in the party-list system. On the contrary, the framers of the Constitution clearly
intended the major political parties to participate in party-list elections through their sectoral
wings. In fact, the members of the Constitutional Commission voted down, 19-22, any
permanent sectoral seats, and in the alternative the reservation of the party-list system to the
sectoral groups.[33] In defining a “party” that participates in party-list elections as either “a

28. political party or a sectoral party,” R.A. No. 7941 also clearly intended that major political
parties will participate in the party-list elections. Excluding the major political parties in party-
list elections is manifestly against the Constitution, the intent of the Constitutional Commission,
and R.A. No. 7941. This Court cannot engage in socio-political engineering and judicially
legislate the exclusion of major political parties from the party-list elections in patent violation
of the Constitution and the law.
Read together, R.A. No. 7941 and the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission
state that major political parties are allowed to establish, or form coalitions with, sectoral
organizations for electoral or political purposes. There should not be a problem if, for example,
the Liberal Party participates in the party-list election through the Kabataang Liberal ng
Pilipinas (KALIPI), its sectoral youth wing. The other major political parties can thus
organize, or affiliate with, their chosen sector or sectors. To further illustrate, the Nacionalista
Party can establish a fisherfolk wing to participate in the party-list election, and this
fisherfolk wing can field its fisherfolk nominees. Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino (KAMPI)
can do the same for the urban poor.
The qualifications of party-list nominees are prescribed in Section 9 of R.A. No. 7941:
Qualifications of Party-List Nominees. — 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 of not less than one (1) year immediately preceding the day of the
elections, 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 the election.
In case of a nominee 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 (30) during his term shall be allowed to continue until the
expiration of his term.
Under Section 9 of R.A. No. 7941, it is not necessary that the party-list organization’s nominee
“wallow in poverty, destitution and infirmity”[34] as there is no financial status required in the
law. It is enough that the nominee of the sectoral party/organization/coalition belongs to the
marginalized and underrepresented sectors,[35] that is, if the nominee represents the fisherfolk,
he or she must be a fisherfolk, or if the nominee represents the senior citizens, he or she must be
a senior citizen.
Neither the Constitution nor R.A. No. 7941 mandates the filling-up of the entire 20%
allocation of party-list representatives found in the Constitution. The Constitution, in paragraph
1, Section 5 of Article VI, left the determination of the number of the members of the House of

29. Representatives to Congress: “The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more
than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, x xx.” The 20% allocation
of party-list representatives is merely a ceiling; party-list representatives cannot be more than
20% of the members of the House of Representatives. However, we cannot allow the continued
existence of a provision in the law which will systematically prevent the constitutionally
allocated 20% party-list representatives from being filled. The three-seat cap, as a limitation to
the number of seats that a qualified party-list organization may occupy, remains a valid
statutory device that prevents any party from dominating the party-list elections. Seats for
party-list representatives shall thus be allocated in accordance with the procedure used in Table
3 above.
However, by a vote of 8-7, the Court decided to continue the ruling
in Veterans disallowing major political parties from participating in the party-list elections,
directly or indirectly. Those who voted to continue disallowing major political parties from the
party-list elections joined Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno in his separate opinion. On the
formula to allocate party-list seats, the Court is unanimous in concurring with this ponencia.
WHEREFORE, we PARTIALLY GRANT the petition. We SET ASIDE the
Resolution of the COMELEC dated 3 August 2007 in NBC No. 07-041 (PL) as well as the
Resolution dated 9 July 2007 in NBC No. 07-60. We declare unconstitutional the two percent
threshold in the distribution of additional party-list seats. The allocation of additional seats
under the Party-List System shall be in accordance with the procedure used in Table 3 of this
Decision. Major political parties are disallowed from participating in party-list elections. This
Decision is immediately executory. No pronouncement as to costs.
SO ORDERED.