BY ATTY. JULIUS GREGORY B. DELGADO
WILL CONGRESS FINALLY PASS ANTI-DYNASTY LAW?
Section 26, Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides that “the State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.” As worded, this constitutional provision is not self-executing and needs an enabling law which will define a political dynasty. For decades if not century of Philippine politics, political dynasties have thrived all over the country. This prevents competent but relatively unknown personalities without resources from successfully vying for elective posts.
Ironically, last December 10, 2025, House Speaker Faustino G. Dy III and House Majority Floor Leader Ferdinand Alexander A. Marcos, both products of political dynasties in Isabela and Ilocos Norte, respectively, filed House Bill No. 6771 (AN ACT DEFINING AND PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND PERPETUATION OF POLITICAL DYNASTIES TO PROMOTE EQUITABLE POLITICAL PARTICIPATION) or the Anti-Political Dynasty Act.
The applicability of the proposed measure are elective positions which refer to: i) President, Vice-President, and Senator for national-level; ii) Member of the House of Representatives for district-level and party-list; iii) Governor, Vice-Governor, and Members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan for provincial-level; iv) City Mayor, City Vice-Mayor, and Members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod for the city-level; v) Municipal Mayor, Municipal Vice-Mayor, and Members of the Sangguniang Bayan for municipality-level; and vi) Punong Barangay and Members of the Sangguniang Barangay for barangay-level.
Section 5 of House Bill No. 6771 provides that any person with a political dynasty relationship shall not be allowed to hold and occupy public office in any of the following manner: 1) If a person is an incumbent or candidate for any elective national position, the spouse and the above relatives are prohibited to simultaneously hold any elective national position; 2) If a person is an incumbent or candidate for the position of Member of the House of Representatives (HOR), the spouse and the above relatives are prohibited to simultaneously hold the same position within the same legislative district; 3) If a person is an incumbent or candidate for any elective provincial position, the spouse and the above relatives are prohibited to simultaneously hold any elective position in the same provincial government; 4) If a person is an incumbent or candidate for any elective city or municipal office, the spouse and the above relatives are prohibited to simultaneously hold any elective position in the same city or municipal government; 5)if a person is an incumbent or candidate for any elective barangay office, the spouse and the above relatives are prohibited to simultaneously hold any position in the same barangay.
Reading from this proposal, it appears that for an incumbent national official, his or her spouse and relatives, which are up to fourth civil degree of consanguinity and affinity, may hold office or run for House of Representatives and provincial, city, municipal and barangay levels. Reading from this proposal what is prohibited is the spouse and/or relatives from holding office at the same level. The measure as filed still does not achieve the desired outcome which is equal access to opportunities to public office. Hopefully, there will be genuine public servants who will file further refined and sensible counterpart measures. After all, we were successful in the SK Reform Act when we prohibited SK as training ground to sons and daughters of politicians. Certified as urgent, we hope that Congress will finally pass the Anti-Dynasty Act even if many of its members are products of political dynasties the Constitution seeks to ban or end.