Proclamation of Any Winner Therein, Until Further Orders of The Court

En Banc
ANG BAGONG BAYANI-OFW LABOR PARTY (under the acronym OFW), represented herein by its
secretary-general, MOHAMMAD OMAR FAJARDO, petitioner
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, et al
GR No. 147589 June 26, 2001
Panganiban, J.
Topic:
Article VI, Section 5. Composition of the House of Representatives
Facts:
On April 10, 2001, Akbayan Citizens Action Party filed before the COMELEC a Petition praying that
"the names of [some of herein respondents] be deleted from the 'Certified List of Political
Parties/Sectoral Parties/Organizations/Coalitions Participating in the Party List System for the May
14, 2001 Elections' and that said certified list be accordingly amended." It also asked, as an
alternative, that the votes cast for the said respondents not be counted or canvassed, and that
the latter's nominees not be proclaimed. On April 11, 2001, Bayan Muna and Bayan Muna-Youth also
filed a Petition for Cancellation of Registration and Nomination against some of herein respondents.
On April 18, 2001, the COMELEC required the respondents in the two disqualification cases to file
Comments within three days from notice. It also set the date for hearing on April 26, 2001, but
subsequently reset it to May 3, 2001. During the hearing, however, Commissioner Ralph C. Lantion
merely directed the parties to submit their respective memoranda.
Meanwhile, dissatisfied with the pace of the COMELEC, Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party
filed a Petition before this Court on April 16, 2001. This Petition, docketed as GR No. 147589,
assailed COMELEC Omnibus Resolution No. 3785. In its Resolution dated April 17, 2001, the Court
directed respondents to comment on the Petition within a non-extendible period of five days from
notice.
On April 17, 2001, Petitioner Bayan Muna also filed before this Court a Petition, docketed as GR
No. 147613, also challenging COMELEC Omnibus Resolution No. 3785. In its Resolution dated May
9, 2001, the Court ordered the consolidation of the two Petitions before it; directed respondents
named in the second Petition to file their respective Comments on or before noon of May 15, 2001;
and called the parties to an Oral Argument on May 17, 2001. It added that the COMELEC may
proceed with the counting and canvassing of votes cast for the party-list elections, but barred the
proclamation of any winner therein, until further orders of the Court.
Issue:
1. Whether or not political parties may participate in the party-list election?
2. Whether or not, the party-list system is exclusive to “marginalized and under-represented
sectors and organizations”?
Held:
1. Yes.
Legal Basis:
Political parties, even the major ones, may participate in the party-list elections. Under the
Constitution and RA 7941, private respondents cannot be disqualified from the party-list
elections, merely on the ground that they are political parties.
Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution provides that members of the House of
Representatives may "be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional,
and sectoral parties or organizations. "Furthermore, under Sections 7 and 8, Article IX (C) of
the Constitution, political parties may be registered under the party-list system. For its part,
Section 2of RA 7941 also provides for "a party-list system of registered national, regional and
sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof, x x x." Section 3 expressly states that a
"party" is "either a political party or a sectoral party or a coalition of parties."
2. No.
Legal Basis:
That political parties may participate in the party-list elections does not mean, however, that
any political party -- or any organization or group for that matter -- may do so. The requisite
character of these parties or organizations must be consistent with the purpose of the party-list
system, as laid down in the Constitution and RA7941. Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution.
The provision on the party-list system is not self - executory. It is, in fact, interspersed with
phrases like "in accordance with law" or "as may be provided by law"; it was thus up to
Congress to sculpt in granite the lofty objective of the Constitution. Hence, RA 7941 was
enacted.
Conclusion:
WHEREFORE, this case is REMANDED to the COMELEC, which is hereby DIRECTED to
immediately conduct summary evidentiary hearings on the qualifications of the party-list
participants in the light of the guidelines enunciated in this Decision. Considering the extreme
urgency of determining the winners in the last party-list elections, the COMELEC is directed to begin
its hearings for the parties and organizations that appear to have garnered such number of votes as
to qualify for seats in the House of Representatives. The COMELEC is further DIRECTED to submit
to this Court its compliance report within 30 days from notice hereof.
The Resolution of this Court dated May 9, 2001, directing the COMELEC "to refrain from
proclaiming any winner" during the last party-list election, shall remain in force until after the
COMELEC itself will have complied and reported its compliance with the foregoing disposition.
This Decision is immediately executory upon the Commission on Elections' receipt thereof. No
pronouncement as to costs. SO ORDERED.

Proclamation of Any Winner Therein, Until Further Orders of The Court

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Proclamation of Any Winner Therein, Until Further Orders of The Court

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Proclamation of Any Winner Therein, Until Further Orders of The Court

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

En Banc

GR No. 147589 June 26, 2001

Article VI, Section 5. Composition of the House of Representatives

You might also like