EN BANC

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

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

DECISION
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, assails the Resolution 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), Aangat Tayo (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, assails NBC Resolution No. 07-60 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 (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.
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 [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.” 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: Buhay Hayaan Yumabong
(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),
Anak Pawis, 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 than sixteen 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, 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/ VOTES

COALITION 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 Bagong Alyansang Tagapagtaguyod ng Adhikaing Sambayanan

(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.

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 Buhay Hayaan Yumabong BUHAY

2 Bayan Muna BAYAN MUNA

3 Citizens Battle Against Corruption CIBAC

 4 Gabriela Women’s Party GABRIELA

5 Association of Philippine Electric APEC

Cooperatives

6 Advocacy for Teacher Empowerment A TEACHER

Through Action, Cooperation and Harmony
Towards Educational Reforms, Inc.

7 Akbayan! Citizen’s Action Party AKBAYAN

8 Alagad ALAGAD

9 Luzon Farmers Party BUTIL

10 Cooperative-Natco Network Party COOP-NATCCO

11 Anak Pawis 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 Bagong Alyansang Tagapagtaguyod ng Adhikaing Sambayanan

(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.
 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. (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

WHEREAS, based on the above Report, Buhay Hayaan Yumabong (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 Additional seats

by the first party

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:

Additional seats for =
a concerned party
No. of votes of
concerned party No. of additional
------------------- x seats allocated to
No. of votes of first party
first party

WHEREAS, applying the above formula, the results are as follows:

Party List Percentage Additional Seat

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.

SO ORDERED.

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.

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.

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.

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), Anak Mindanao (AMIN), and An
Waray. Per the certification 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

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 Anak Pawis 1

1.12 ARC 1

1.13 Abono 1

1.14 AGAP 1
 1.15 AMIN 1

The proclamation of Bagong Alyansang Tagapagtaguyod ng Adhikaing

Sambayanan (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?

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
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.

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?
 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.”

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.

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.
xxx

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 Number of seats available to

to legislative districts x .20 = 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 14th Congress 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

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, and Justice Vicente V.
Mendoza’s dissent in Veterans presented Germany’s Niemeyer formula 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 x x

In determining the allocation of seats for the second vote, 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 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.
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.

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.” 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 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.
 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.

Votes Votes
Rank Party Rank Party
Garnered Garnered

1 BUHAY 1,169,234 48 KALAHI 88,868

2 BAYAN 979,039 49 APOI 79,386

MUNA

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- 409,883 56 GRECON 62,220

NATCCO

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

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 213,058 73 ASAP 34,098

CITIZENS

27 AT 197,872 74 PEP 33,938

28 VFP 196,266 75 ABA 33,903

ILONGGO

29 ANAD 188,521 76 VENDORS 33,691

30 BANAT 177,028 77 ADD-TRIBAL 32,896

31 ANG 170,531 78 ALMANA 32,255

KASANGGA
 32 BANTAY 169,801 79 AANGAT KA 29,130
PILIPINO

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! 130,356 86 APO 16,421

PINAY

40 PM 119,054 87 BIYAYANG 16,241

BUKID

41 AVE 110,769 88 ATS 14,161

42 SUARA 110,732 89 UMDJ 9,445

43 ASSALAM 110,440 90 BUKLOD 8,915

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.

Votes Garnered
Votes over Total Guaranteed
Rank Party
Garnered Votes for Party- Seat
List, in %

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 385,810 2.42% 1

12 ARC 374,288 2.35% 1

13 ANAKPAWIS 370,261 2.32% 1

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 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 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 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 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

Votes Addition ( B)
Guarantee plus Applyin
Garnere al g the
d Seat ( C), in
d over Seats three
whole
Total integer seat
Votes s cap
for
Votes Party
Rank Party
Garnered List, in
%
(First
Round) (Second
Round)

( A) ( B) ( E)
( C) ( D)

1 BUHAY 1,169,234 7.33% 1 2.79 3 N.A.

2 BAYAN 979,039 6.14% 1 2.33 3 N.A.

MUNA

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 COOP- 409,883 2.57% 1 1 2 N.A.

NATCCO

10 BUTIL 409,160 2.57% 1 1 2 N.A.

11 BATAS 385,810 2.42% 1 1 2 N.A.

12 ARC 374,288 2.35% 1 1 2 N.A.

13 ANAKPAWI 370,261 2.32% 1 1 2 N.A.

S

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 213,058 1.34% 0 1 1 N.A.
CITIZENS

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 170,531 1.07% 0 1 1 N.A.

KASANGGA

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-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 x x 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 x x.

xxx

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?

MR. TADEO. Kay Commissioner Monsod, gusto ko lamang linawin ito. 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. Ang punto lamang namin, pag pinayagan mo ang UNIDO na isang
political party, it will dominate the party list at mawawalang saysay din yung sector. Lalamunin
mismo ng political parties ang party list system. Gusto ko lamang bigyan ng diin ang “reserve.”
Hindi ito reserve seat sa marginalized sectors. Kung titingnan natin itong 198 seats, reserved din
ito sa political parties.

MR. MONSOD. Hindi po reserved iyon kasi 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. Puwede po ang UNIDO, pero sa sectoral lines.

xxxx

MR. OPLE. x x x 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
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 x x (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. 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. 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” 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, 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 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 x x.” 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.

ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice

WE CONCUR:

REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice

LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING CONSUELO YNARES-SANTIAGO

Associate Justice Associate Justice
 MA. ALICIA AUSTRIA- RENATO C. CORONA
MARTINEZ Associate Justice
Associate Justice

CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES DANTE O. TINGA

Associate Justice Associate Justice

MINITA V. CHICO-NAZARIO PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.

Associate Justice Associate Justice

ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO

Associate Justice Associate Justice

ARTURO D. BRION
Associate Justice
 DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice

LUCAS P. BERSAMIN
Associate Justice

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, I certify that the
conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case
was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.

REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
 Under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), pp. 86-87. Signed by Chairman Benjamin S. Abalos, Sr.,
Commissioners Resurreccion Z. Borra, Florentino A. Tuason, Jr., Romeo A. Brawner,
Rene V. Sarmiento, and Nicodemo T. Ferrer.
Under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179295), pp. 103-108. Signed by Chairman Benjamin S. Abalos, Sr.,
Commissioners Resurreccion Z. Borra, Florentino A. Tuason, Jr., Romeo A. Brawner, Rene
V. Sarmiento, and Nicodemo T. Ferrer.
396 Phil. 419 (2000).
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), pp. 969-986; rollo (G.R. No. 179295), pp. 798-815. Party-List
Canvass Report No. 32, as of 31 August 2007, 6:00 p.m.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), p. 70.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), pp. 88-92.
Id. at 150-153.
Id. at 86-87.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179295), p. 112.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), pp. 158-159. NBC Resolution No. 07-74, 24 July 2007.
Id. at 160-161. NBC Resolution No. 07-87, 3 August 2007.
NBC Resolution No. 07-97, 4 September 2007.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179295), pp. 816-817. This COMELEC certification should have included An
Waray, which was proclaimed on 4 September 2007 under NBC Resolution No. 07-97.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), p. 14.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179295), pp. 21-22.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), p. 553; rollo (G. R. No. 179295), p. 341.
Supra note 5 at 424.
Id. at 446-451. We quote below the discussion in Veterans explaining the First Party Rule:

Formula for Determining

Additional Seats for the First Party
 Now, how do we determine the number of seats the first party is entitled to?
The only basis given by the law is that a party receiving at least two percent of the total
votes shall be entitled to one seat. Proportionally, if the first party were to receive twice
the number of votes of the second party, it should be entitled to twice the latter’s number
of seats and so on. The formula, therefore, for computing the number of seats to which
the first party is entitled is as follows:

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

If the proportion of votes received by the first party without rounding it off is
equal to at least six percent of the total valid votes cast for all the party list groups, then
the first party shall be entitled to two additional seats or a total of three seats overall. If
the proportion of votes without a rounding off is equal to or greater than four percent, but
less than six percent, then the first party shall have one additional or a total of two seats.
And if the proportion is less than four percent, then the first party shall not be entitled to
any additional seat.

We adopted this six percent bench mark, because the first party is not always
entitled to the maximum number of additional seats. Likewise, it would prevent the
allotment of more than the total number of available seats, such as in an extreme case
wherein 18 or more parties tie for the highest rank and are thus entitled to three seats
each. In such scenario, the number of seats to which all the parties are entitled may
exceed the maximum number of party-list seats reserved in the House of Representatives.

xxx

Note that the above formula will be applicable only in determining the number
of additional seats the first party is entitled to. It cannot be used to determine the number
of additional seats of the other qualified parties. As explained earlier, the use of the same
formula for all would contravene the proportional representation parameter. For example,
a second party obtains six percent of the total number of votes cast. According to the
above formula, the said party would be entitled to two additional seats or a total of three
seats overall. However, if the first party received a significantly higher amount of votes
— say, twenty percent — to grant it the same number of seats as the second party would
violate the statutory mandate of proportional representation, since a party getting only six
percent of the votes will have an equal number of representatives as the one obtaining
twenty percent. The proper solution, therefore, is to grant the first party a total of three
seats; and the party receiving six percent, additional seats in proportion to those of the
first party.
 Formula for Additional
Seats of Other Qualified Parties

Step Three The next step is to solve for the number of additional seats that the
other qualified parties are entitled to, based on proportional representation. The formula
is encompassed by the following complex fraction:

No. of votes of
concerned party
------------------
Total no. of votes
Additional seats for party-list system No. of additional
for concerned = ----------------------- x seats allocated to
party No. of votes of the first party
first party
--------------
Total no. of votes
for party list system

In simplified form, it is written as follows:

No. of votes of
Additional seats concerned party
No. of additional
for concerned = ------------------ x seats allocated to
party No. of votes of the first party
first party

xxx

Incidentally, if the first party is not entitled to any additional seat, then the ratio
of the number of votes for the other party to that for the first one is multiplied by zero.
The end result would be zero additional seat for each of the other qualified parties as
well.
 The above formula does not give an exact mathematical representation of the
number of additional seats to be awarded since, in order to be entitled to one additional
seat, an exact whole number is necessary. In fact, most of the actual mathematical
proportions are not whole numbers and are not rounded off for the reasons explained
earlier. To repeat, rounding off may result in the awarding of a number of seats in excess
of that provided by the law. Furthermore, obtaining absolute proportional representation
is restricted by the three-seat-per-party limit to a maximum of two additional slots. An
increase in the maximum number of additional representatives a party may be entitled to
would result in a more accurate proportional representation. But the law itself has set the
limit: only two additional seats. Hence, we need to work within such extant parameter.
Id. at 475-481.
The second vote cast by a registered voter is for the party-list candidates as provided in
Section 10 of R.A. No. 7941.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), p. 47.
Id. at 48.
Id. at 1076.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179295), pp. 66-81.
Rollo (G.R. No. 179271), pp. 969-974; rollo (G.R. No. 179295), pp. 798-803. Party-List
Canvass Report No. 32, as of 31 August 2007, 6:00 p.m.
Id.
Proclamation deferred by COMELEC.
Section 2, R.A. No. 7941.
The product of the percentage and the remaining available seats of all parties ranked nine and
below is less than one.
II RECORD, CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION 256-257 (25 July 1986), 568 (1 August
1986).
Id. at 584 (1 August 1986). Dissenting opinion of Justice Jose C. Vitug in Ang Bagong
Bayani- OFW Labor Party v. COMELEC, 412 Phil. 308, 350 (2001).
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v. COMELEC, 412 Phil. 308, 336 (2001).
Section 2, R.A. No. 7941.