VETERANS FEDERATION PARTY,
ALYANSANG BAYANIHAN NG MGA
MAGSASAKA, MANGGAGAWANG
BUKID AT MANGINGISDA, ADHIKAIN
AT KILUSAN NG ORDINARYONG TAO
PARA SA LUPA, PABAHAY AT
KAUNLARAN, and LUZON FARMERS
PARTY, petitioners, vs. COMMISSION
ON ELECTIONS, PAG-ASA, SENIOR
CITIZENS, AKAP AKSYON, PINATUBO,
NUPA, PRP, AMIN, PAG-ASA,
MAHARLIKA, OCW-UNIFIL, PCCI,
AMMA-KATIPUNAN, KAMPIL,
BANTAY-BAYAN, AFW, ANG LAKAS
OCW, WOMEN-POWER, INC.,
FEJODAP, CUP, VETERANS CARE, 4L,
AWATU, PMP, ATUCP, NCWP, ALU,
BIGAS, COPRA, GREEN,
ANAKBAYAN, ARBA, MINFA, AYOS,
ALL COOP, PDP-LABAN, KATIPUNAN,
ONEWAY PRINT, AABANTE KA
PILIPINAS -- All Being Party-List
Parties/Organizations -- and Hon.
MANUEL B. VILLAR, JR. in His Capacity
as Speaker of the House of
Representatives, respondents. [G.R. No.
136781. October 6, 2000]
**SIDENOTE:
To determine the winners in a Philippine-
style party-list election, the Constitution
and Republic Act (RA) No. 7941 mandate
at least four inviolable parameters. 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.
***
RA 7941 March 3, 1995
the State shall "promote proportional
representation in the election of
representatives to the House of
Representatives through a party-list
system of registered national, regional
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 formulation and 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.
ISSUES:
1. Whether the Twenty Percent
Constitutional Allocation Is
Mandatory?
H: No
R: In the exercise of its
constitutional prerogative,
Congress enacted RA 7941. As
said earlier, Congress declared
therein a policy to promote
"proportional representation" in
the election of party-list
representatives in order to enable
Filipinos belonging to the
marginalized and
underrepresented sectors to
contribute legislation that would
benefit them. It however deemed
it necessary to require parties,
organizations and coalitions
participating in the system to
𝑁𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑠
obtain at least two percent of the
total votes cast for the party-list
system in order to be entitled to a
party-list seat. Those garnering
more than this percentage could
have "additional seats in
proportion to their total number of
votes. Furthermore, no winning
party, organization or coalition can
have more than three seats in the
House of Representatives. Thus
the relevant portion of Section
11(b) of the law provides:
(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.
**Note: Indeed, the function of the
Supreme Court, as well as of all
judicial and quasi-judicial agencies,
is to apply the law as we find it, not
to reinvent or second-guess it.
Unless declared unconstitutional,
ineffective, insufficient or otherwise
void by the proper tribunal, a statute
remains a valid command of
sovereignty that must be respected
and obeyed at all times. This is the
essence of the rule of law.
SIDENOTE:
Formula:
𝑥. 20
. 80 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑠
=number of partylist
any increase in the number of
district representatives, as may be
provided by law, will necessarily
result in a corresponding increase
in the number of party-list seats.
To illustrate, considering that
there were 208 district
representatives to be elected
during the 1998 national elections,
the number of party-list seats
would be 52, computed as follows:
208
𝑥. 20 = 52
0.80
2. Are the two percent threshold
requirement and the three-seat
limit provided in Section 11 (b) of
RA 7941 constitutional?
For the two percent threshold, the
SC ruled:
Consistent not only with the intent
of the framers of the Constitution
and the law, but with the very
essence of "representation."
Under a republican or
representative state, all
government authority emanates
from the people, but is exercised
by representatives chosen by
them. But to have meaningful
representation, the elected
persons must have the mandate
of a sufficient number of people.
Otherwise, in a legislature that
features the party-list system, the
result might be the proliferation of
small groups which are incapable
of contributing significant
legislation, and which might even
pose a threat to the stability of
Congress. Thus, even legislative
districts are apportioned
according to "the number of their
respective inhabitants, and on the
basis of a uniform and progressive
ratio" to ensure meaningful local
representation.
**Note: When the law is clear, the
function of courts is simple
application, not interpretation or
circumvention.
For the three seat limit, SC ruled
that: Consistent with the
Constitutional Commission's
pronouncements, Congress set
the seat-limit to three (3) for each
qualified party, organization or
coalition. "Qualified" means
having hurdled the two percent
vote threshold. Such three-seat
limit ensures the entry of various
interest-representations into the
legislature; thus, no single group,
no matter how large its
membership, would dominate the
party-list seats, if not the entire
House.
3. If the answer to Issue 2 is in the
affirmative, how should the
additional seats of a qualified
party be determined?
OPTIONS:
1. One Additional Seat Per Two
Percent Increment
Scenario: a party that wins at
least six percent of the total
votes cast will be entitled to
three seats another party that
gets four percent will be
entitled to two seats; and one
that gets two percent will be
entitled to one seat only. This
proposal has the advantage of
simplicity and ease of
comprehension.
Problem: when the parties get
very lop-sided votes -- for
example, when Party A
receives 20 percent of the total
votes cast; Party B, 10
percent; and Party C, 6
percent. Under the method just
described, Party A would be
entitled to 10 seats; Party B, to
5 seats and Party C, to 3 seats.
End Result: proportional
representation will be
contravened and the law
rendered nugatory by this
suggested solution
2. Niemeyer Formula
Scenario: the number of
additional seats to which a
 qualified party would be
entitled is determined by
multiplying the remaining
number of seats to be
allocated by the total number
of votes obtained by that party
and dividing the product by the
total number of votes garnered
by all the qualified parties. The
integer portion of the resulting
product will be the number of
additional seats that the party
concerned is entitled to
Problem: Section 11 of RA
7941 sets a limit of three (3)
seats for each party, those
obtaining more than the limit
will have to give up their
excess seats. Under our
present set of facts, the
thirteen qualified parties will
each be entitled to three seats,
resulting in an overall total of
39.
End Result: violate the
principle of "proportional
representation," a basic tenet
of our party-list system.
**NOTE: Just as one cannot
grow Washington apples in the
Philippines or Guimaras
mangoes in the Arctic because
of fundamental environmental
differences, neither can the
Niemeyer formula be
transplanted in toto here
because of essential variances
between the two party-list
models.
3. Legal and Logical Formula
for the Philippines
Step One. There is no dispute
among the petitioners, the
public and the private
respondents, as well as the
members of this Court, that the
initial step is to rank all the
participating parties,
organizations and coalitions
from the highest to the lowest
based on the number of votes
they each received. Then the
ratio for each party is
computed by dividing its votes
by the total votes cast for all
the parties participating in the
system. All parties with at least
two percent of the total votes
are guaranteed one seat each.
Only these parties shall be
considered in the computation
of additional seats. The party
receiving the highest number
of votes shall thenceforth be
referred to as the first party.
Step Two. The next step is to
determine the number of seats
the first party is entitled to, in
order to be able to compute
that for the other parties. Since
the distribution is based on
proportional representation,
the number of seats to be
allotted to the other parties
cannot possibly exceed that to
which the first party is entitled
by virtue of its obtaining the
most number of votes.
**NOTE: Guingona Jr. v.
Gonzales that a fractional
membership cannot be
converted into a whole
membership of one when it
would, in effect, deprive
another party's fractional
 membership. It would be a
violation of the constitutional
mandate of proportional
representation. We said
further that "no party can claim
more than what it is entitled to
x x x.
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:
Formula for Determining Additional
Seats for the First Party
# 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 1𝑠𝑡 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑦
𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚
= proportion of votes of first party
relative to total votes for party – list
system
ECONOMY, ENVIRONMENT AND
PEACE; CHAMBER OF REAL ESTATE
BUILDERS ASSOCIATION; SPORTS &
HEALTH ADVANCEMENT
FOUNDATION, INC.; ANG LAKAS NG
OVERSEAS CONTRACT WORKERS
(OCW); BAGONG BAYANI
ORGANIZATION and others under
"Organizations/Coalitions" of Omnibus
Resolution No. 3785; PARTIDO NG
MASANG PILIPINO; LAKAS NUCD-
UMDP; NATIONALIST PEOPLE'S
COALITION; LABAN NG
DEMOKRATIKONG PILIPINO; AKSYON
DEMOKRATIKO; PDP-LABAN;
LIBERAL PARTY; NACIONALISTA
PARTY; ANG BUHAY HAYAANG
YUMABONG; and others under "Political
Parties" of Omnibus Resolution No.
3785. respondents. G.R. No. 147589,
June 26, 2001
IN QUESTION: Omnibus Resolution No.
3785 – approved the participation of 154
organizations and parties, including
those herein impleaded, in the 2001
party-list elections

Formula for Additional Seats of Other CONTENTION: disqualification of private

Qualified Parties
Additional Seat for Concerned Party
# 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐴𝐵𝐴 𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑡
# 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐴𝑃𝐸𝐶 (1𝑠𝑡 𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑦)
respondents, arguing mainly that the
party-list system was intended to benefit
the marginalized and underrepresented;
not the mainstream political parties, the
non-marginalized or overrepresented.

ANG BAGONG BAYANI-OFW LABOR Party – list system – mechanism of

PARTY (under the acronym OFW), proportional representation in the
represented herein by its secretary- election of representatives to the House
general, MOHAMMAD OMAR of Representatives from national,
FAJARDO, petitioner, vs. ANG regional, and sectoral parties or
BAGONG BAYANI-OFW LABOR organizations or coalitions thereof
PARTY GO! GO! PHILIPPINES; THE registered with the Commission on
TRUE MARCOS LOYALIST Elections.
ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES;
PHILIPPINE LOCAL AUTONOMY;
CITIZENS MOVEMENT FOR JUSTICE,
ISSUES:
1. Whether or not recourse under
Rule 65 is proper under the
premises. More specifically, is
there no other plain, speedy or
adequate remedy in the ordinary
course of law?
H: Proper
R: The Court also notes that
Petitioner Bayan Muna had filed
before the Comelec a Petition for
Cancellation of Registration and
Nomination against some of
herein respondents.[22] The
Comelec, however, did not act on
that Petition. In view of the
pendency of the elections,
Petitioner Bayan Muna sought
succor from this Court, for there
was no other adequate recourse
at the time. Subsequent events
have proven the urgency of
petitioners action; to this date, the
Comelec has not yet formally
resolved the Petition before it. But
a resolution may just be a
formality because the Comelec,
through the Office of the Solicitor
General, has made its position on
the matter quite clear.
In any event, this case presents
an exception to the rule that
certiorari shall lie only in the
absence of any other plain,
speedy and adequate remedy.[23]
It has been held that certiorari is
available, notwithstanding the
presence of other remedies,
where the issue raised is one
purely of law, where public interest
is involved, and in case of
urgency.[24] Indeed, the instant
case is indubitably imbued with
public interest and with extreme
urgency, for it potentially involves
the composition of 20 percent of
the House of Representatives.
2. Whether or not political parties
may participate in the party-list
elections?
H: May participate
R: Section 5, Article VI of the
Constitution provides that
members of the House of
Representatives may be elected
through a party-list system of
registered national, regional, and
sectoral parties or organizations
Sections 7 and 8, Article IX (C) of
the Constitution
Sec. 7. No votes cast in favor of a
political party, organization, or
coalition shall be valid, except for
those registered under the party-
list system as provided in this
Constitution.
Sec. 8. Political parties, or
organizations or coalitions
registered under the party-list
system, shall not be represented
in the voters' registration boards,
boards of election inspectors,
boards of canvassers, or other
similar bodies. However, they
shall be entitled to appoint poll
watchers in accordance with law
Commissioner Monsod stated that
the purpose of the party-list
provision was to open up the
system, in order to give a chance
to parties that consistently place
third or fourth in congressional
district elections to win a seat in
Congress
 Section 2 of RA 7941 also
provides for a party-list system of
registered national, regional and
sectoral parties or organizations
or coalitions thereof, x x x. Section
3 expressly states that a party is
either a political party or a sectoral
party or a coalition of parties.
Political party – 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.
3. Whether or not the party-list
system is exclusive to
marginalized and
underrepresented sectors and
organizations?
H: No
R: The intent of the Constitution is
clear: to give genuine power to the
people, not only by giving more
law to those who have less in life,
but more so by enabling them to
become veritable lawmakers
themselves. Consistent with this
intent, the policy of the
implementing law, we repeat, is
likewise clear: to enable Filipino
citizens belonging to marginalized
and underrepresented sectors,
organizations and parties, x x x, to
become members of the House of
Representatives. Where the
language of the law is clear, it
must be applied according to its
express terms.
SEC. 5. Registration. -- Any
organized group of persons may
register as a party, organization or
coalition for purposes of the party-
list system by filing with the
COMELEC not later than ninety
(90) days before the election a
petition verified by its president or
secretary stating its desire to
participate in the party-list system
as a national, regional or sectoral
party or organization or a coalition
of such parties or organizations,
attaching thereto its constitution,
by-laws, platform or program of
government, list of officers,
coalition agreement and other
relevant information as the
COMELEC may require:
Provided, that the sector shall
include labor, peasant, fisherfolk,
urban poor, indigenous cultural
communities, elderly,
handicapped, women, youth,
veterans, overseas workers, and
professionals.
**NOTE: The foregoing provision
on the party-list system is not self-
executory. It is, in fact,
interspersed with phrases like in
accordance with law or as may be
provided by law; it was thus up to
Congress to sculpt in granite the
lofty objective of the Constitution.
Hence, RA 7941 was enacted. It
laid out the statutory policy in this
wise:
SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. --
The State shall promote
proportional representation in the
election of representatives to the
House of Representatives through
a party-list system of registered
national, regional 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 formulation and
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.
4. Whether or not the Comelec
committed grave abuse of
discretion in promulgating
Omnibus Resolution No. 3785?
H: Yes
R: From its assailed Omnibus
Resolution, it is manifest that the
Comelec failed to appreciate fully
the clear policy of the law and the
Constitution. On the contrary, it
seems to have ignored the facet of
the party-list system discussed
above. The OSG as its counsel
admitted before the Court that any
group, even the non-marginalized
and overrepresented, could field
candidates in the party-list
elections.
**NOTE:
Guidelines for Screening Party-List
Participants
1. The political party, sector,
organization or coalition must
represent the marginalized and
underrepresented groups
identified in Section 5 of RA 7941.
2. While even major political parties
are expressly allowed by RA 7941
and the Constitution to participate
in the party-list system, they must
comply with the declared statutory
policy of enabling Filipino citizens
belonging to marginalized and
underrepresented sectors x x x to
be elected to the House of
Representatives.
3. In view of the objections directed
against the registration of Ang
Buhay Hayaang Yumabong,
which is allegedly a religious
group, the Court notes the
express constitutional provision
that the religious sector may not
be represented in the party-list
system.
4. A party or an organization must
not be disqualified under Section
6 of RA 7941, which enumerates
the grounds for disqualification as
follows:
(1) It is a religious sect or
denomination, organization or
association organized for religious
purposes;
(2) It advocates violence or
unlawful means to seek its goal;
(3) It is a foreign party or
organization;
(4) It is receiving support from any
foreign government, foreign
political party, foundation,
organization, whether directly or
through any of its officers or
members or indirectly through
 third parties for partisan election
purposes;
(5) It violates or fails to comply
with laws, rules or regulations
relating to elections;
(6) It declares untruthful
statements in its petition;
(7) It has ceased to exist for at
least one (1) year; or
(8) It fails to participate in the last
two (2) preceding elections or fails
to obtain at least two per centum
(2%) of the votes cast under the
party-list system in the two (2)
preceding elections for the
constituency in which it has
registered.
5. The party or organization must not
be an adjunct of, or a project
organized or an entity funded or
assisted by, the government
6. The party must not only comply
with the requirements of the law;
its nominees must likewise do so.
Section 9 of RA 7941 reads as
follows:
SEC. 9. 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 election, able to read
and write, a 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 in
office until the expiration of his
term.
7. Not only the candidate party or
organization must represent
marginalized and
underrepresented sectors; so also
must its nominees. To repeat,
under Section 2 of RA 7941, the
nominees must be Filipino citizens
who belong to marginalized and
underrepresented sectors,
organizations and parties. Surely,
the interests of the youth cannot
be fully represented by a retiree;
neither can those of the urban
poor or the working class, by an
industrialist. To allow otherwise is
to betray the State policy to give
genuine representation to the
marginalized and
underrepresented.
8. As previously discussed, while
lacking a well-defined political
constituency, the nominee must
likewise be able to contribute to
the formulation and enactment of
appropriate legislation that will
benefit the nation as a whole.
Senator Jose Lina explained
during the bicameral committee
proceedings that the nominee of a
party, national or regional, is not
going to represent a particular
district x x x.
SOCIAL JUSTICE SOCIETY (SJS),
petitioner vs. DANGEROUS DRUGS
BOARD and PHILIPPINE DRUG
ENFORCEMENT AGENCY (PDEA),
respondents G.R. No. 157870
November 3, 2008
IN QUESTION: SEC. 36. Authorized
Drug Testing Authorized drug testing
shall be done by any government
forensic laboratories or by any of the drug
testing laboratories accredited and
monitored by the DOH to safeguard the
quality of the test results. x x x The drug
testing shall employ, among others, two
(2) testing methods, the screening test
which will determine the positive result as
well as the type of drug used and the
confirmatory test which will confirm a
positive screening test. x x x The
following shall be subjected to undergo
drug testing:
xxxx
(c) Students of secondary and tertiary
schools.Students of secondary and
tertiary schools shall, pursuant to the
related rules and regulations as
contained in the schools student
handbook and with notice to the parents,
undergo a random drug testing x x x;
(d) Officers and employees of public and
private offices.Officers and employees of
public and private offices, whether
domestic or overseas, shall be subjected
to undergo a random drug test as
contained in the companys work rules
and regulations, x x x for purposes of
reducing the risk in the workplace. Any
officer or employee found positive for use
of dangerous drugs shall be dealt with
administratively which shall be a ground
for suspension or termination, subject to
the provisions of Article 282 of the Labor
Code and pertinent provisions of the Civil
Service Law;
xxxx
(f) All persons charged before the
prosecutors office with a criminal offense
having an imposable penalty of
imprisonment of not less than six (6)
years and one (1) day shall undergo a
mandatory drug test;
CONTENTION: In its Petition for
Prohibition under Rule 65, petitioner
Social Justice Society (SJS), a registered
political party, seeks to prohibit the
Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) and the
Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency
(PDEA) from enforcing paragraphs (c),
(d), (f), and (g) of Sec. 36 of RA 9165 on
the ground that they are constitutionally
infirm. For one, the provisions constitute
undue delegation of legislative power
when they give unbridled discretion to
schools and employers to determine the
manner of drug testing. For another, the
provisions trench in the equal protection
clause inasmuch as they can be used to
harass a student or an employee
deemed undesirable. And for a third, a
person’s constitutional right against
unreasonable searches is also breached
by said provisions.