By: Atty. Gregorio B. Austral, CPA
Revisiting the Atong Paglaum, Inc. case
We may be complaining why the elites are now dominating the halls of the House of Representatives, purporting to represent the poor and the marginalized sectors of society. Let us revisit the landmark case of Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. COMELEC.
These consolidated cases involve 54 petitions filed by 52 party-list groups and organizations. These groups challenged the Commission on Elections’ (COMELEC) resolutions that disqualified them from participating in the 13 May 2013 party-list elections. The disqualifications stemmed from either the denial of their petitions for registration or the cancellation of their existing registration and accreditation. The COMELEC’s decisions were based on Republic Act No. 7941 (R.A. No. 7941) and COMELEC Resolution Nos. 9366 and 9531, which led approximately 280 groups to register for the said elections. The COMELEC used criteria from previous court decisions, specifically Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v. COMELEC (Ang Bagong Bayani) and Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency v. Commission on Elections (BANAT), to disqualify the petitioners.
The central issues before the Supreme Court were: (1) whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in disqualifying the petitioners from participating in the 13 May 2013 party-list elections; and (2) whether the criteria set in Ang Bagong Bayani and BANAT should be applied by the COMELEC in determining participation in the said elections.
The Supreme Court ruled that the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion because it was only following existing jurisprudence in disqualifying the petitioners. However, the Court also held that the criteria used by the COMELEC from Ang Bagong Bayani and BANAT were not in accord with the 1987 Constitution and R.A. No. 7941. The Court then adopted new parameters for the qualification of national, regional, and sectoral parties under the party-list system, thereby abandoning the rulings in the decisions applied by the COMELEC in disqualifying petitioners.
The Supreme Court outlined new parameters for participation in the party-list system:
- Three groups can participate: national, regional, and sectoral parties/organizations.
- National and regional parties do not need to organize along sectoral lines.
- Major political parties can participate through sectoral wings.
- Sectoral parties can be “marginalized and underrepresented” or lacking in “well-defined political constituencies.”
- A majority of members must belong to the sector represented, and nominees must either belong to the sector or have a track record of advocacy.
- Disqualification of some nominees does not disqualify the entire party if at least one nominee remains qualified.
(Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. Commission on Elections, G.R. Nos. 203766, 203818-19, 203922 & etc., (02 April 2013), 707 Phil 454-753)