RA 7941 the Party list Act (1995)

BANAT V. COMELEC G.R. No. 179271, April 21, 2009

FACTS:

Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency (BANAT)filed before the National Board of
Canvassers(NBC) a petition to proclaim the full number of party list representatives provided by the
Constitution. However, the recommendation of the head of the legal group of COMELEC’s national board
of canvassers to declare the petition moot and academic was approved by the COMELEC en banc. BANAT filed
for petition for certiorari and mandamus assailing the resolution of COMELEC to their petition to proclaim the
full number of party list representatives provided by the Constitution. The COMELEC, sitting as the NBC,
promulgated a resolution proclaiming thirteen (13) parties as winners in the party-list elections in May 2007.
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 formula. Bayan Muna, Abono, and Advocacy for Teacher Empowerment Through Action,
Cooperation and Harmony Towards Educational Reforms (A Teacher) asked the COMELEC, acting as NBC, to
reconsider its decision to use the Veterans formula. COMELEC denied the consideration. Bayan Muna, Abono,
and A Teacher filed for certiorari with mandamus and prohibition assailing the resolution of the COMELEC in its
decision to use the Veterans formula.

ISSUES:

Whether or not the twenty percent allocation for party-list representatives in Section5(2), Article VI of the
Constitution mandatory or merely a ceiling

Whether or not the three-seat limit in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 is constitutional

Whether or not the two percent threshold prescribed in Section 11(b) of RA 7941 to qualify for one seat is
constitutional

How shall the party-list representatives be allocated?

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?

RULING:

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.

Yes, it is constitutional. 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.

The second clause of Section 11(b) of R. A. 7941 “ those garnering more than two percent (2%) of the votes
shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes” is unconstitutional. The two
percent threshold only in relation to the distribution of the additional seats presents an unwarranted obstacle
to the full implementation of Section 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution and prevents the attainment of "the
broadest possible representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the House of Representatives."
In determining the allocation of seats for party-list representatives under Section 11 of R.A. No. 7941, the
following procedure shall be observed:1. The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the
highest to the lowest based on the number of votes they garnered during the elections.2. The parties,
organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two percent (2%) of the total votes cast for the party-list
system shall be entitled to one guaranteed seateach.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.

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. Also, in defining a "party" that participates in
party-list elections as either "a political party or a sectoral party," R.A. No. 7941 also clearly intended that
major political parties will participate in the party-list elections. Excluding the major political parties in party-list
elections is manifestly against the Constitution, the intent of the Constitutional Commission, and R.A. No.
7941. However, by the vote of 8-7, theCourt decided to continue the ruling in Veterans disallowing major
political parties from participating in the party-list elections, directly or indirectly.