452 Phil. 899
PANGANIBAN, J.:
"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."[2]
"x x x [I]mmediately 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.Comelec's First Partial
"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."[3]
It also recommended the disqualification of the following party-list participants for their failure to pass the guidelines:
- BAYAN MUNA (BAYAN MUNA)
- AKBAYAN! CITIZENS ACTION PARTY (AKBAYAN!)
- LUZON FARMERS PARTY (BUTIL)
- ANAK MINDANAO (AMIN)
- ALYANSANG BAYANIHAN NG MGA MAGSASAKA, MANGGAGAWANG BUKID AT MANGINGISDA (ABA)
- PARTIDO NG MANGGAGAWA (PM)
- SANLAKAS
In response to this Report, the Court issued its August 14, 2001 Resolution which partially lifted its May 9, 2001 Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). The Court did so to enable Comelec to proclaim Bayan Muna as the first "winner in the last party-list election, with the caveat that all proclamations should be made in accordance not only with the Decision of the Court in the instant case but also with Veterans Federation Party v. Comelec, GR Nos. 136781, 136786, and 136795, October 6, 2000, on how to determine and compute the winning parties and nominees in the party-list elections."
- GREEN PHILIPPINES FOUNDATION (GREEN PHIL)
- PARTIDO NG MASANG PILIPINO (PMP)
- ANG LAKAS NG BAGONG KOOPERATIBA (ALAB)
- PARTIDO NG MARALITANG PILIPINO - PINATUBO PARTY (PMP-PINATUBO)
- REBOLUSYONARYONG ALYANSANG MAKABANSA (RAM)
- BAYAN NG NAGTATAGUYOD NG DEMOKRATIKONG IDEOLOGIYA AT LAYUNIN, INC. (BANDILA)
- BAGONG BAYANI ORGANIZATION (BAGONG BAYANI)
- KABATAAN NG MASANG PILIPINO (KAMPIL)
- AARANGKADA ANG MGA HANDA ORAS-ORAS (AHOY)
- PHILIPPINE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (PMA)
- ALLIANCE TO ALLEVIATE THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL ORDER, INC. (AASENSO KA)
- PARTIDO DEMOKRATIKO SOSYALISTA NG PILIPINAS (PDSP)
- COOPERATIVE UNION OF THE PHILIPPINES (CUP)
- ATIN (FORMERLY ABANTE BISAYA)
- VOLUNTEERS AGAINST CRIME AND CORRUPTION (VACC)
- ASSOCIATION OF BUILDERS CONSULTANTS AND DESIGNERS, INC. (ABCD)
- LIBERAL PARTY (LP)
- CITIZEN'S DRUGWATCH FOUNDATION, INC. (DRUGWATCH)
- ALAY SA BAYAN PARA SA KALAYAAN AT DEMOKRASYA (ABAKADA)
- ASOSASYON NG MGA TAGA INSURANCE SA PILIPINAS, INC. (ATIP)
- ANG LAKAS NG OVERSEAS CONTRACT WORKERS (OCW)
- NATIONAL FEDERATION OF SUGAR PLANTERS (NFSP)
- KABALIKAT NG BAYAN PARTY (KABALIKAT)
- PARTIDO DEMOKRATIKONG PILIPINO LAKAS NG BAYAN (PDP-LABAN)
- BANTAY BAYAN FOUNDATION PARTY, INC. (BANTAY-BAYAN)
- ABANTE KILUSANG KOOPERATIBA SA GITNANG LUZON [AKK COALITION]
- GREEN PHILIPPINES (GREEN)
- PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF DETECTIVE AND PROTECTIVE AGENCY OPERATORS (PADPAO)
- ALLIANCE FOR GREATER ACHIEVEMENTS IN PEACE AND PROSPERITY (AGAP)
- ALYANSA NG KOOPERATIBANG PANGKABUHAYAN PARTY (ANGKOP)
- NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR DEMOCRACY (NAD)
- PEOPLE POWER PARTY (PEOPLE POWER)
- PHILIPPINE TECHNOLOGICAL COUNCIL (PTC)
- PHILIPPINE LOCAL AUTONOMY MOVEMENT, INC. (PLAM)
- PROFESSIONAL CRIMINOLOGIST ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (PCAP)
- CITIZENS MOVEMENT FOR JUSTICE, ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT, AND PEACE (JEEP)
"we accept Comelec's submission, per the OSG, that APEC and CIBAC have sufficiently met the 8-point guidelines of this Court and have garnered sufficient votes to entitle them to seats in Congress. Since these issues are factual in character, we are inclined to adopt the Commission's findings, absent any patent arbitrariness or abuse or negligence in its action. There is no substantial proof that CIBAC is merely an arm of JIL, or that APEC is an extension of PHILRECA. The OSG explained that these are separate entities with separate memberships. Although APEC's nominees are all professionals, its membership is composed not only of professionals but also of peasants, elderly, youth and women. Equally important, APEC addresses the issues of job creation, poverty alleviation and lack of electricity. Likewise, CIBAC is composed of the underrepresented and marginalized and is concerned with their welfare. CIBAC is particularly interested in the youth and professional sectors."[6]To summarize, after the Court had accepted and approved the First Partial Compliance Report and its amendments, the following nominees were validly proclaimed winners: BAYAN MUNA (Satur C. Ocampo, Crispin B. Beltran and Liza L. Maza), AKBAYAN (Loretta Ann P. Rosales), BUTIL (Benjamin A. Cruz), APEC (Ernesto C. Pablo) and CIBAC (Joel J. Villanueva).
In the same Compliance Report, the poll body classified the following party-list groups as unqualified:10. ABANSE! PINAY
11. ADHIKAIN AT KILUSAN NG ORDINARYONG TAO PARA SA LUPA, PABAHAY, AT HANAPBUHAY (AKO)
12. ALAGAD
13. SENIOR CITIZENS/ELDERY SECTORAL PARTY (ELDERLY)
14. ALL TRADE UNION CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES (ATUCP)
15. MARITIME PARTY (MARITIME)
16. ANG BAGONG BAYANI - OFW LABOR PARTY (OFW)
17. ANIBAN NG MGA MAGSASAKA, MANGINGISDA, AT MANGGAGAWA SA AGRIKULTURA - KATIPUNAN (AMMMA)
18. ALYANSA NG NAGKAKAISANG KABATAAN NG SAMBAYANAN PARA SA KAUNLARAN (ANAKBAYAN)
19. ALYANSA NG MGA MAY KAPANSANAN SA PILIPINAS (AKAP)
20. MINDANAO FEDERATION OF SMALL COCONUT FARMERS' ORGANIZATION, INC. (MSCFO)
21. WOMENPOWER, INC. (WPI)
22. AGGRUPATION AND ALLIANCE OF FARMERS AND FISHERFOLKS OF THE PHILIPPINES (AAAFPI)
23. ALL WORKERS ALLIANCE TRADE UNIONS (AWATU)
Comelec's Final Partial
- GREEN PHILIPPINES FOUNDATION (GREEN PHIL)
- PARTIDO NG MASANG PILIPINO (PMP)
- ANG LAKAS NG BAGONG KOOPERATIBA (ALAB)
- PARTIDO NG MARALITANG PILIPINO - PINATUBO PARTY (PMP-PINATUBO)
- REBOLUSYONARYONG ALYANSANG MAKABANSA (RAM)
- BAYAN NG NAGTATAGUYOD NG DEMOKRATIKONG IDEOLOGIYA AT LAYUNIN, INC. (BANDILA)
- BAGONG BAYANI ORGANIZATION (BAGONG BAYANI)
- KABATAAN NG MASANG PILIPINO (KAMPIL)
- AARANGKADA ANG MGA HANDA ORAS-ORAS (AHOY)
- PHILIPPINE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (PMA)
- ALLIANCE TO ALLEVIATE THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL ORDER, INC. (AASENSO KA)
- PARTIDO DEMOKRATIKO SOSYALISTA NG PILIPINAS (PDSP)
- COOPERATIVE UNION OF THE PHILIPPINES (CUP)
- ATIN (FORMERLY ABANTE BISAYA)
- VOLUNTEERS AGAINST CRIME AND CORRUPTION (VACC)
- ASSOCIATION OF BUILDERS CONSULTANTS AND DESIGNERS, INC. (ABCD)
- LIBERAL PARTY (LP)
- CITIZEN'S DRUGWATCH FOUNDATION, INC. (DRUGWATCH)
- ALAY SA BAYAN PARA SA KALAYAAN AT DEMOKRASYA (ABAKADA)
- ASOSASYON NG MGA TAGA INSURANCE SA PILIPINAS, INC. (ATIP)
- ANG LAKAS NG OVERSEAS CONTRACT WORKERS (OCW)
- NATIONAL FEDERATION OF SUGAR PLANTERS (NFSP)
- KABALIKAT NG BAYAN PARTY (KABALIKAT)
- PARTIDO DEMOKRATIKONG PILIPINO LAKAS NG BAYAN (PDP-LABAN)
- BANTAY BAYAN FOUNDATION PARTY, INC. (BANTAY-BAYAN)
- ABANTE KILUSANG KOOPERATIBA SA GITNANG LUZON [AKK COALITION]
- GREEN PHILIPPINES (GREEN)
- PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF DETECTIVE AND PROTECTIVE AGENCY OPERATORS (PADPAO)
- ALLIANCE FOR GREATER ACHIEVEMENTS IN PEACE AND PROSPERITY (AGAP)
- ALYANSA NG KOOPERATIBANG PANGKABUHAYAN PARTY (ANGKOP)
- NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR DEMOCRACY (NAD)
- PEOPLE POWER PARTY (PEOPLE POWER)
- PHILIPPINE TECHNOLOGICAL COUNCIL (PTC)
- PHILIPPINE LOCAL AUTONOMY MOVEMENT, INC. (PLAM)
- PROFESSIONAL CRIMINOLOGIST ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (PCAP)
- CITIZENS MOVEMENT FOR JUSTICE, ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT, AND PEACE (JEEP)
Further, the Comelec recommended the disqualification of the following party-list groups:24. NATIONAL CONFEDERATION OF TRICYCLE OPERATORS AND DRIVERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (NACTODAP)
25. NATIONAL FEDERATION OF SMALL COCONUT FARMERS ORGANIZATION, INC. (SCFO)
26. TRIBAL COMMUNITIES ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (TRICAP)
27. PILIPINONG MAY KAPANSANAN (PINOY MAY K)
28. VETERANS CARE AND WELFARE ORGANIZATION (VETERANS CARE)
29. UNION OF THE FILIPINO OVERSEAS WORKERS, INC. (OCW-UNIFIL)
30. DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE (DA)
31. PILIPINO WORKERS PARTY (PWP)
32. PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED PERSONS (PARP)
33. ALLIANCE OF RETIRED POSTAL EMPLOYEES AND SENIOR CITIZENS, INC. (ARPES)
34. AGRARIAN REFORM BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION, INC. (ARBA)
35. FEDERATION OF JEEPNEY OPERATORS AND DRIVERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (FEJODAP)
36. GABAY NG MANGGAGAWANG PILIPINO PARTY (GABAY-OFW)
37. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES OF SETTLERS (AASAHAN)
38. ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH SOLIDARITY (AYOS)
39. PARTY FOR OVERSEAS WORKERS AND EMPOWERMENT AND RE-INTEGRATION (POWER)
40. KILOS KABATAAN PILIPINO (KILOS)
41. KALOOB-KA ISANG LOOB PARA SA MARANGAL NA PANINIRAHAN (KALOOB)
42. ALYANSA NG MGA MAMAMAYAN AT MANDARAGAT SA LAWA NG LAGUNA, INC. (ALYANSA)
43. DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (DFP)
44. PARTIDO KATUTUBONG PILIPINO (KATUTUBO)
All these Compliance Reports have already been affirmed by this Court except that, in regard to the First Compliance Report, it agreed — as earlier stated — to add APEC and CIBAC to the list of qualified groups.AALAGAHAN ANG ATING KALIKASAN (ALAS) PHILIPPINE SOCIETY OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERS (PSAE) PARTIDO PARA SA DEMOKRATIKONG REPORMA (PDR) CONSUMERS UNION OF THE PHILIPPINES (CONSUMERS) CONFEDERATION OF NON-STOCK SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, INC. (CONSLA) PEOPLE'S PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE FOR PEACE AND GOOD GOVERNMENT TOWARDS ALLEVIATION OF POVERTY AND SOCIAL ADVANCEMENT (PAG-ASA) AHONBAYAN, INC. (AHONBAYAN) ANGAT SAMA-SAMA KAYA NATIN `TO FOUNDATION, INC. (KASAMA) A PEACEFUL ORGANIZATION LEADERSHIP, FRIENDSHIP, SERVICE MOVEMENT (APO) PHILIPPINE DENTAL ASSOCIATION (PDA) PUSYON (BISAYA) PILIPINO (PUSYON) SOCIAL JUSTICE SOCIETY (SJS) CITIZEN'S ANTI-CRIME ASSISTANCE GROUP, INC. (CAAG) ASA AT SAMAHAN NG KARANIWANG PILIPINO (ASAKAPIL) BUSINESSMEN AND ENTREPRENEURS ASSOCIATION, INC. (BEA) UNITED ARCHITECTS OF THE PHILIPPINES (UAP) ABAY PAMILYA FOUNDATION, INC. (ABAY PAMILYA) PEOPLE'S REFORM PARTY (PRP) COALITION FOR CONSUMER PROTECTION AND WELFARE (COALITION 349) RIZALIST PARTY (RP) NATIONAL URBAN POOR ASSEMBLY (NUPA) ALLIANCE FOR MERITOCRACY (AFM) BALIKATAN SA KABUHAYAN BUHAY COALITION (BSK) BANTAY DAGAT, INC. (BDI) CONFEDERATION OF HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR REFORMS IN GOVERNANCE AND ENVIRONMENT, INC. (HOMEOWNERS) PORT USERS CONFEDERATION, INC. (PUC) LABAN PARA SA KAPAYAPAAN, KATARUNGAN, AT KAUNLARAN (KKK) BONDING IDEALISM FOR NATIONAL HUMAN INITIATIVE (BINHI) KATIPUNAN NG MGA BANTAY BAYAN SA PILIPINAS (KABAYAN) FEDERATION OF SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF PHIL. VETERANS, INC. (LAHING VETERANO) PRIME MOVERS FOR PEACE AND PROGRESS (PRIMO) PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE OF CITIZENS FOR DEMOCRACY (PACD) COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS (CAP) TAPAT FOUNDATION, INC. (TAPAT) ALLIANCE FOR ALLEVIATION OF NATIONAL GOVERNANCE AND TRUST PARTY (AKA) ANG IPAGLABAN MO FOUNDATION (AIM) PHILIPPINE MINE SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT (PMSEA) BICOL SARO PARTY (BSP) AABANTE KA PILIPINAS PARTY (SAGIP BAYAN MOVEMENT) (APIL) PHILIPPINE PEOPLE'S PARLIAMENT (PPP-YOUTH) SPORTS AND HEALTH ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION, INC. (SHAF) KILUSAN TUNGO SA PAMBANSANG TANGKILIKAN, INC. (KATAPAT) CITIZENS' FOUNDATION FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRIMES AND INJUSTICES, INC. (CITIZEN) NACIONALISTA PARTY (NP) (Withdrew participation in the party-list election) SANDIGANG MARALITA (SM) ONEWAY PRINTING TECHNICAL FOUNDATION, INC. (ONEWAY PRINT) PHILIPPINE JURY MOVEMENT (JURY) ALTERNATIVE ACTION (AA) DEMOCRATIC WORKERS' PARTY (DWP) SECURITY UNITED LEAGUE NATIONWIDE GUARDS, INC. (SULONG) ORGANISASYONG KAUGNAYAN NASYONAL SA PAG-UNLAD (O.K. NAPU) PAMBANSANG SANGGUNIANG KATIPUNAN NG BARANGAY KAGAWAD SA PILIPINAS (KATIPUNAN) NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR COMMUNITY ORGANIZER (NCCO) NATIONWIDE ASSOCIATION OF CONSUMERS, INC. (NACI) LUZVIMINDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION, INC. (LEDFI) TINDOG PARA HAN KABUBUWASON HAN WARAYNON (TINDOG WARAY) FEDERATION OF LAND REFORM FARMERS OF THE PHILIPPINES (FLRF) KATRIBU MINDANAO, INC. (KATRIBU) DEMOKRATIKONG UGNAYAN TAPAT SA SAMBAYANAN (DUGTUNGAN) KATARUNGAN SA BAYAN TAGAPAGTANGGOL NG SAMBAYANAN (KABATAS) GO! GO! PHILIPPINES MOVEMENT PAMBANSANG SAMAHANG LINGKOD NG BAYAN, INC. (PASALBA) PHILIPPINE REFORMIST SOCIETY (PRS) GABAYBAYAN (GAD) ALUHAY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, INC. (ALUHAI) ORGANIZED SUPPORT FOR THE MOVEMENT TO ENHANCE THE NATIONAL AGENDA (OSMEA)M
1) Whether Labo v. Comelec,[15] Grego v. Comelec[16] and related cases should be deemed applicable to the determination of winners in party-list elections
2) Whether the votes cast for parties/organizations that were subsequently disqualified for having failed to meet the eight-point guideline contained in our June 26, 2001 Decision should be deducted from the "total votes cast for the party-list system" during the said elections
"Upon hearing the case for BUHAY, the Commission determined that, based upon BUHAY's declarations of intent in its constitution, upon its avowed platform of government — which both mirror the sentiments of the El Shaddai Movement — and upon the circumstances surrounding its relationship with the El Shaddai Movement, BUHAY is most probably merely an extension of the El Shaddai. In this light, it is very likely that the relationship between the leader of the El Shaddai, and the nominee of BUHAY is less a matter of serendipity than an attempt to circumvent the statutory prohibition against sects or denominations from participating in the party-list elections."[17]In the same Report, Comelec also stated that COCOFED did not deserve a seat in the House of Representatives, because it was allegedly an "adjunct of the government." Explained the Commission:
"COCOFED is a sectoral party representing the peasantry. It is a non-stock, non-profit organization of coconut farmers and producers, established in 1947. It has no religious affiliations. However, the records indicate that it is an adjunct of the government.On the other hand, in its Consolidated Reply dated October 15, 2001, the OSG — in representation of the poll agency — argued that the above findings of the Comelec in regard, inter alia, to BUHAY and COCOFED are "not supported by substantial evidence" and, thus, "should be modified accordingly." This opinion is buttressed by the OSG's Comment dated November 15, 2002.[19]
"COCOFED's Amended By-Laws specifically provides that:`The Chairman of the Philippine Coconut Authority or his duly authorized representative shall automatically be a member of the National Board.The Philippine Coconut Authority is an administrative agency of the government which receives support and funding from the national government. Thus, to have the Chairman of the Philippine Coconut Authority sit on the National Board of COCOFED clearly amounts to `participation of the government in the affairs of candidate' which, as this Court has said, would be `unfair to the other parties,' and `deleterious to the objectives of the law.'
"Furthermore, in the Articles of Incorporation of COCOFED, it declared, as one of its primary purposes, the obtaining of `possible technical and financial assistance for industry development from private or governmental sources.'"[18]
"SEC. 10. Manner of Voting. — Every voter shall be entitled to two (2) votes: the first vote is a vote for candidate for membership of the House of Representatives in his legislative district, and the second, a vote for the party, organization, or coalition he wants represented in the House of Representatives: Provided, That a vote cast for a party, sectoral organization, or coalition not entitled to be voted for shall not be counted: Provided, finally, That the first election under the party-list system shall be held in May 1998." (Emphasis supplied)The language of the law is clear; hence, there is room, not for interpretation, but merely for application.[28] Likewise, no recourse to extrinsic aids is warranted when the language of the law is plain and unambiguous.[29]
"SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. — The State shall promote proportional representation in the election of representation in the election of representatives to the House of Representatives through a party-list system of registered, national and sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof, which will enable Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and who lack well-defined political constituencies but who could contribute to the enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole, to become members of the House of Representatives. Towards this end, the State shall develop and guarantee a full, free and open party system in order to attain the broadest possible representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the House of Representatives by enhancing their chances to compete for and win seats in the legislature, and shall provide the simplest scheme possible."Need for Patience
"[T]he dismal result of the first election for party-list representatives should serve as a challenge to our sectoral parties and organizations. It should stir them to be more active and vigilant in their campaign for representation in the State's lawmaking body. It should also serve as a clarion call for innovation and creativity in adopting this novel system of popular democracy.We also take this opportunity to emphasize that the formulas devised in Veterans for computing the number of nominees that the party-list winners are entitled to cannot be disregarded by the concerned agencies of government, especially the Commission on Elections. These formulas ensure that the number of seats allocated to the winning party-list candidates conform to the principle of proportional representation mandated by the law.
"With adequate information and dissemination to the public and more active sectoral parties, we are confident our people will be more responsive to future party-list elections. Armed with patience, perseverance and perspicacity, our marginalized sectors, in time, will fulfill the Filipino dream of full representation in Congress under the aegis of the party-list system, Philippine style."[31]
The Winners and
Table No. 1[34] Rank Party-List Group Votes Cast Percentage to Total Votes Cast (%) 1BAYAN MUNA 1,708,253 26.19 2APEC 802,060 12.29 3AKBAYAN! 377,852 5.79 4BUTIL 330,282 5.06 5CIBAC 323,810 4.96 6BUHAY 290,760 4.46 7AMIN 252,051 3.86 8ABA 242,199 3.71 9COCOFED 229,165 3.51 10PM 216,823 3.32 11SANLAKAS 151,017 2.31 12ABANSE! PINAY 135,211 2.07 13AKO 126,012 1.93 14ALAGAD 117,161 1.80 15ELDERLY 106,496 1.63 16ATUCP 103,273 1.58 17MARITIME 98,946 1.52 18OFW 97,085 1.49 19AMMMA 65,735 1.01 20ANAKBAYAN 63,312 0.97 21AKAP 54,925 0.84 22MSCFO 49,914 0.76 23WPI 46,831 0.72 24AAAFPI 43,882 0.67 25AWATU 42,149 0.65 26NACTODAP 38,898 0.60 27SCFO 37,470 0.57 28TRICAP 35,807 0.55 29PINOY MAY K 32,151 0.49 30VETERANS CARE 31,694 0.49 31OCW-UNIFIL 29,400 0.45 32PWP 24,182 0.37 33DA 24,029 0.37 34PARP 23,297 0.36 35ARPES 22,497 0.34 36ARBA 22,345 0.34 37FEJODAP 21,335 0.33 38GABAY OFW 17,777 0.27 39AASAHAN 16,787 0.26 40AYOS 15,871 0.24 41POWER 13,050 0.20 42KILOS 11,170 0.17 43KALOOB 9,137 0.14 44ALYANSA 7,882 0.12 45KATUTUBO 6,602 0.10 46DFP 6,600 0.10Total 6,523,185
We shall now determine the number of nominees each winning party is entitled to, in accordance with the formula in Veterans. For purposes of determining the number of its nominees, BAYAN MUNA (the party that obtained the highest number of votes) is considered the first party. The applicable formula[35] is as follows:
Table No. 2 Rank Party-List Group Votes Cast Percentage to TotalVotes Cast (%) 1BAYAN MUNA 1,708,253 26.19 2APEC 802,060 12.29 3AKBAYAN! 377,852 5.79 4BUTIL 330,282 5.06 5CIBAC 323,810 4.96 6BUHAY 290,760 4.46 7AMIN 252,051 3.86 8ABA 242,199 3.71 9COCOFED 229,165 3.51 10PM 216,823 3.32 11SANLAKAS 151,017 2.31 12ABANSE! PINAY 135,211 2.07
Applying this formula, we arrive at 26.19 percent:
Number of votes of first party =Proportion of votes of first party relative to total votes for party-list system Total votes for party-list system
Having obtained 26.19 percent, BAYAN MUNA is entitled to three (3) seats. This finding is pursuant to our ruling in Veterans, the pertinent portions of which we reproduce as follows:
1,708,253 =26.19% 6,523,185
"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."As adverted to earlier, the issue of whether additional seats should be allocated to APEC, AKBAYAN, BUTIL and CIBAC will not be addressed in this Resolution; a separate Motion (with Supplemental Motion) challenging their entitlement thereto has been filed by BAYAN MUNA and is still pending completion as of this writing. Hence, we shall compute only the additional seat or seats to be allocated, if any, to the other qualified parties — BUHAY, AMIN, ABA, COCOFED, PM, SANLAKAS and ABANSE! PINAY.x x x x x x x x x
"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." [36]
Additional Seats | = | Votes Cast for Qualified Party | x | Allotted Seats for First Party |
Votes Cast for First Party | ||||
= | 290,760 | x | 3 | |
1,708,253 | ||||
= | 0.51 |
In sum, the above-named party-list winners, excluding those with a separate pending challenge, are entitled to the following congressional seats:
Table No. 3 Rank Party-List Votes Percentage(%) Additiona lSeats[38] 2APEC 802,060 12.29 n/c 3AKBAYAN! 377,852 5.79 n/c 4BUTIL 330,282 5.06 n/c 5CIBAC 323,810 4.96 n/c 6BUHAY 290,760 4.46 0.51 7AMIN 252,051 3.86 0.44 8ABA 242,199 3.71 0.42 9COCOFED 229,165 3.51 0.40 10PM 216,823 3.32 0.38 11SANLAKAS 151,017 2.31 0.26 12ABANSE! PINAY 135,211 2.07 0.24
1.BAYAN MUNA —three (3) seats [one qualifying and two additional seats] 2.BUHAY —one qualifying seat only 3.AMIN —one qualifying seat only 4.ABA —one qualifying seat only 5.COCOFED —one qualifying seat only 6.PM —one qualifying seat only 7.SANLAKAS —one qualifying seat only 8.ABANSE! PINAY —one qualifying seat only
IN THE FUTURE, the determination of the winners can truly be made much more expeditiously, now that there are precedents to guide all concerned, especially the Commission on Elections. For one thing, Comelec already has the herein base list of 46 qualified parties. For another, given the lessons and experiences in these proceedings, it can now more speedily, more carefully and more prudently pass upon the qualifications of new candidates. Such process can even be done in advance under such rules and regulations it may issue, consistent with the law and with our Decisions and Resolutions here and in Veterans, to pre-qualify participants well in advance of the elections.
- After the promulgation of our Decision on June 26, 2001, we directed Comelec to conduct a factual determination as to which of the various party-list candidates had passed the eight-point guideline we instituted in that Decision. Although we gave Comelec only 30 days to undertake the work, it was able to submit its Final Compliance Report only on September 27, 2001.
- Of the various parties and organizations[39] which Comelec allowed to participate in the 2001 party-list elections, it recommended — in its three Compliance Reports to the Court — 42 to be qualified. Later on, four more groups were added, for a total of 46.
- Next, we determined which of the 46 qualified parties garnered at least two percent of the total votes cast for the party-list system. To do so, we subtracted the votes obtained by the disqualified candidates from the "total votes cast." Those parties, organizations and coalitions that had obtained at least two percent of this balance were declared winners.
- After identifying the winners, we determined, by using the formulas mandated in Veterans v. Comelec, how many nominees each winning party was entitled to.
- The foregoing process would have been finished long ago and the winners proclaimed before the end of the year 2002, had Comelec been more resolute and exacting in the factual determinations contained in its Compliance Reports.
- In the interest of due process, the Court required Position Papers on the issue of whether the votes of disqualified candidates should be deducted from the "total votes cast" nationwide.
- The two rollos of these two consolidated cases contain about 14,000 pages, because almost all of the original party-list participants filed — some repeatedly — motions, pleas, position papers and so on, which all needed attention. Thus, the Court had to devote an enormous amount of time and effort poring over, understanding, and ruling upon these submissions.
- In the interest of speedy justice, this matter was deliberated upon; and this Resolution was discussed, finalized and promulgated by the Court within weeks after it had received the last Position Paper mentioned in item 6 above.
"(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 seats."[22] Supra.
"SEC. 6. Effect of Disqualification Case. — Any candidate who has been declared by final judgment to be disqualified shall not be voted for, and the votes cast for him shall not be counted. If for any reason a candidate is not declared by final judgment before an election to be disqualified and he is voted for and receives the winning number of votes in such election, the Court or Commission shall continue with the trial and hearing of the action, inquiry, or protest and, upon motion of the complainant or any intervenor, may during the pendency thereof order the suspension of the proclamation of such candidate whenever the evidence of his guilt is strong."[28] Sunga v. Comelec, 351 Phil. 310, 327, March 25, 1998.