FIRST PART

CHAPTER 1
BRIEF HISTORY OF PARLIAMENTARY
LAW & PROCEDURE
Great Britain, the United States of America, Canada, Japan
and the Philippines are among the many countries that have used
parliamentary procedure in transacting regular business in their
country. In fact, even in schools, among religious groups or any other
organization, they require the practice of parliamentary procedure
(although it may not be known to them) in order to discuss and
conduct a more organized meeting on any topic discussed and at
the same time be well-versed with the issue.
Parliamentary procedure is the code of rules for working together
in groups. It has evolved through centuries out of the experience of
individuals working together for a common purpose. It is logic and
common sense crystallized into rules of law (Alice F. Sturgis, 1953).
According to Antonio Orendain (1961), a noted Philippine author of
Parliamentary Law, "it is a product of parliamentary law which refers to
that body of generally accepted rules, precedents and practices commonly
employed to regulate the proceedings of deliberative assemblies
————
Introduction
Why Use Parliamentary Procedure?
Imagine a mecting attended by people of diverse and even contradictory
views and opinions. Members and officers want to talk at the same time.
The
presiding officer is receiving all sorts of suggestions, comments
and
recommendations, the number of which is more than what he can handle. Some
suggestions are ignored for no reason at all to the consternation of the
proponents.
The presiding officer makes several decisions for the body even though it is
obvious
that most members are against them. Issues and problems affecting the organization
are discussed for hours but are left unresolved. As a result, the organization is
unable
to come up with concrete solutions to the problems presented during the meeting.
The author is pretty sure that most professionals or even students have
attended a meeting closely resembling to the one described above. It is probably
because of this reality that parliamentary procedure was introduced. Not a few
people entertain the notion that parliamentary procedure is meant only for the use
of
legislators, jurist, and lawyers. Experience has proven that parliamentary
procedure
has been useful to people of various profession and statures in resolving issues
and
problems during meetings especially when under contentious situations. The more
potentially contentious the issucs in a meeting, the more important the practice of
parliamentary procedure becomes
According to General Henry M. Robert:
"Parliamentary law is the best method yet devised to enable assemblies of
any size, with due regard for every member's opinion, to arrive at the general
will on the maximum number of questions of varying complexity in a
minimum time and under all kinds of internal climate ranging from total
harmony to hardened or impassioned division of opinion."-Robert's Rules of
Order Newly Revised (1990)
Nature, Definition and Purposes of Parliamentary Procedure
Parliamentary procedure is defined as an established and systematic body of
principles, rules, precedents, and practices used by deliberative assemblies to
ensure
that the conduct of such is fair and efficient and in accordance, with democratic
principles and ideals.
In a nutshell, parliamentary procedure upholds members' rights regardless
of whether they belong to the majority or the minority. It insures that the will of
the
majority is carried out and the rights of the minority are protected. While it is
the
decision of the majority that will be implemented by the body, those belonging to
the
minority have the right to articulate their position on the issues being
deliberated,
actively participate in the debate, and cast their votes when the question is put
to a
vote.

The purpose of parliamentary procedure is to allow deliberation upon

questions of interest to the organization and to arrive at the sense or the will of
the
assembly upon these questions. In other words, while parliamentary procedure cannot
guarantee that every member of an organization is pleased with the outcome of a
decision, it aims to insure that every member is satisfied by the manner in which
the
decision was made, and that the organization makes decisions efficiently but in
consideration of every member's opinion.
It is not actually difficult to discern the rationale behind parliamentary
procedure as it is mostly common sense and giving respect to the rights and
privileges of everyone in the assembly.
Parliamentary procedure also aims to strike a balance between uptifting the
interest of the individual and safeguarding the interest of the group. While an
individual member has the right to talk and participate in the discussion,
parliamentary procedure insures that the member does not engage in grandstanding or
dilatory tactics that will impede the proceedings. Parliamentary procedure provides
the Chair and the assembly ample powers to deal with this kind of situation.

——
Fundamental Rules of Parliamentary Procedure
In pursuance of its aim
of maintaining decorum and facilitating the orderly
and democratic proccedings of the assembly, parliamentary procedure adopts the
following, fundamental rules:
1. All members have equal rights and obligations. Every member of
the organization enjoys the same rights as the other members. These
rights include the following:
To be notified of the holding of the meeting and be informed
of its agenda, date, time, and venue.
b. To attend mectings.
C. To make motions and participate in debates and
deliberations.
D. To nominate
E. To vote or be voted upon.
F. To enjoy the privileges
organization.
attached to his position in the
It must be emphasized however, that the rights conferred upon the
member are not absolute. For instance; a right of a member to spcak
during the proceedings, may be restricted or even. denied by the
Chair or the assembly, as when he is ruled out of order or when he
utters vulgar or indecent remarks.
2. The rights of the organization: supersede the rights of the
individual members. The organization has the right to make its
own rules which must be followed by all members. Should there be a
conflict between the right of a member and the right of the
organization to do its business, the right of the organization prevails.
This is illustrated in an instance when after several hours of debate
and hearing all sides of the issues, a member who still wants to
spcak in debate has to be restricted by the presiding officer to give
way to the division of the house.
3. A quorum must be attained to do business. A quorum is the
number of members who must be present in the meeting to legally
transact business. The required number is usually provided for in the
organization's by-laws. Most organizations require the quorum to be
at least the majority of all. members. which is fifty percent of the
members plus one member. A few organizations would require the
quorum to be as low as 25 percent to as high as 75 percent but this
should be stated in the by-laws that is approved by the majority of
the organization's members. The purpose of requiring a quorum is to,
prevent an unrepresentative assembly from making decisions in the
name of the organization.
4.
The majority rules. If it is not possible for the assembly to reach a
unanimous decision or consensus, the assembly, in resolving the
issues brought before it, should abide by the decision of the
majority. Majority rule is the essence of democracy. However, the
minority is accorded the right to be heard and participate in the
debate or deliberation. The division of the house determines what
the decision of the majority is. The majority decision must be
considered as the decision of the organization. Once a decision is.
reached by the assembly, it must be carried out and respected by
every member including those who had opposed the decision.

5. Two -Thirds Vote Rule on Some Motions. A two-thirds vote is

required whenever the assembly is limiting or taking away the rights
of members or whenever the assembly is changing something that
has already been decided: As a rule, the rights of the members must
be protected by the assembly, but as has been pointed out earlier, the
rights of the organization prevail over those of the members.
In
some instances, the assembly, after proper deliberation and motions,
may opt to restrict the rights of members, suspend the rules of the
organization, or reconsider its prévious decisions. The motions must
take into consideration the interest of the organization but since these
motions if carried out might violate the rights and adversely affect
the interest of some members, a higher fraction and not just a
majority of votes in the assembly is required.
6. Silence is consent. While members of the organization have the right
to vote affirmatively or negatiycly on every motion brought before
the assembly, they also have the right to abstain or not to participate
in the voting or division of the house. Parliamentary rule cannot
force them to take the affirmative or negative side of a motion:
Parliamentary rule must presume that they have a valid reason
abstaining which should be respected by the assembly. It is also
presumed, however, that by their silence they agree to go along with
the decision of the majority. Just like those who voted against the
motion, those who abstained must respect the decision of the
majority.
7. Full and free debate must be allowed. In order for members to
come up with intelligent decisions, all questions or motions raised
before the assembly, with the exceptions to a few, must be accorded
full and free debate before they are submitted to a vote. Those who
are in favor of a motion should be given a chance to explain the
rationale and virtues of their proposition: Those who are against the
motion must be allowed to- articulate their reasons why the motion
should be turned down. To insure fairness in debate, it is suggested
that speakers from the opposing sides be recognized alternately.
Full and free debate cables the members to be enlightened on the
issues surrounding the question, and to vote on it judiciously. The
question must not be put to a vote unless all sides have been heard:
As a measure to efficiently manage time and expedite the
proceedings, the Chair or the assembly may set a time limit allotted
for the debate or certain rules that the members must observe during
the debate such as not allowing those who have spoken on the
question to speak again until all those who want to speak have been curtailment to
the right to engage in debate but simply house rules
that are designed to serve the gencral interest of the organization.
8.
Motions must be voted upon. With the exceptions of a few types of
motions, all motions raised. before the assembly should be voted
upon for their proper disposition. A motion may be disposed of
permanently or temporarily, affirmatively or negatively, but, in any
case, it should be put on a vote because it is only through this process
that the true will of the assembly can be determined.
There are, however, certain motions but which, by their nature, do
not require to be voted upon by the assembly because they may be
disposed of by the Chair, as when a member rises on a point of order,
point of information, or point of parliamentary inquiry.
9. Singularity of Subject. Parliamentary procedure and common sense
dictate that only one subject should be brought before the assembly
at a time. This is to avoid confusion on the part of the members as to
what motion or question is being submitted to them for action or
resolution. No motion is in order which does not directly relate to
the question under consideration. Although it is possible that several
motions that apply to a particular subject are brought to the floor at
the same time, the presiding officer must dispose or act on these
motions one by one following the rules on the precedence of
motions.
10. Personal remarks are always out of order. Parliamentary
procedure is basically giving respect and courtesy to everyone in the
assemblv. No matter how heated the debate is, the moment a speaker
starts giving personal remarks; the Chair must iramediately declare
him out of order. The Chair himself may order or à member may
move that the personal remarks be stricken off the records of the
proceedings. While a member may assail someone's ideas, he has no
right to assail the dignity of the person presenting those ideas.
11. The Chair must be impartial. The Chair is a respected figure in
the assembly. He has moral ascendancy over the members of the
organization. As such, he can unduly influence the outcome of any
discussion or debate participated in by the members. If a debate is in
progress; the Chair must refrain from taking sides or advancing his
own personal opinion. If the Chair wants to participate- in the debate;
he should do it from the floor and ask another officer of the
organization to preside over the meeting.

——-
BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PARLIAMENTARY LAW
The basic rules of parliamentary procedure are derived from
principles that can be used in cases where the procedures are vague
and needs to be clearly interpreted before they are applied. Just like
any legal soldier of the law that is either prosecuting or defending
his client, he needs to rely on certain principles of law to successfully
win the case of his client. He presents his basis and legal precedents
or customs and very often laws enacted before he goes to court to
defend his case. This is because just like parliamentary practice,
the principal aim and function of the lawyer is to make sure he
maintains decorum before the court, facilitate an orderly and
harmonious transaction of the case and to ascertain the will of the
law which is decided by majority.
This is the reason why before any experienced member of an
assembly or a meeting raises any motion before the body, he has to
have some basis to this effect. In so doing, he effectively gets and
wins the motion.
The following are the most important principle of parliamentary
procedure:
1. Every member has equal rights and obligations. Each and
every member of an assembly possesses and can exercise
the same rights as that of
his colleagues. Each has
the right to vote and be
voted upon, to propose
any motion, to oppose
any motion, to nominate
and be nominated and to
discuss a motion, to name
a few.
However, just like the
rights in the Bill of Rights
of
the
1987
Philippine Constitution, these are not absolute. These rights may be
subiect to certain restrictions or worse can be denied to any
individual who may want to go beyond the boundaries
in exercising these rights. He may perform acts that may
offend the personality or the dignity of any member or
worse that of the organization. When this happens, he may
be ruled out of order.
Corollary to the enjoyment and limits in the exercise
of these rights is the mutual responsibility to perform
obligations required of members to do so. One classic
example of said obligation is that of consistently attending
sessions of the assembly. It is the duty, as well, of the
presiding officer to remind and note down the absences
of said members. Any act that would show any motive
of discrimination should therefore be prohibited in the
assembly.
2. The majority's decision prevails. This principle is in
consonance with the ideals of democracy. This means that
the will of the greater number of members is the decision
of the entire body and that no act or word can overturn
said decision. No group can ever tolerate a control by the
minority.
The term majority literally means a total of at least
one-half plus one of a certain number of members present
and voting. However, in other organizations majority may
be interpreted to mean a bigger number other than those
voting and present.

3. The minority rights must be protected. An assembly is

deliberative in nature. And because it is deliberative, it is
supposed to have members with extreme point of views
compromising and meeting in the middle to reach an
agreement. It is therefore imperative that there must be
the presence of the minority in this deliberative assembly
to fiscalize the actions of the majority and take an equal
and democratic stance on any issue. It is also important to
understand the rights of this marginalized group and that
there privileges be cosseted in the assembly. An example
of these rights are the right to be heard, to understand
the question to be decided fully, or the right to use any
parliamentary tactic to prevent an action on, or approval of
any question should be protected.
4.
Singularity of subject matter. Only one subject must be
discussed before the assembly at a time. This is justified by
the fact that if one motion is
considered first before any
other motion is entertained,
the appropriate order and
decorum will be achieved
and business transaction will
be expedited the soonest.
Wait!
One
Tre pRose,
Hil What's your
name?where do
you live? How o)L
are you?
The old cliché that says, "You
cannot serve two masters
at the same time" may be
applied in this principle.
This means that you cannot
effectively and intelligently
discuss and worse you may
not efficiently decide when
you are confronted with two
or more topics.
5. Full and free debate must be allowed. Every issue brought
before the assembly must be heard to its fullest extent.
Both sides of the subject matter must be heard thoroughly.
Authors and proponents of the question should be given
enough time and opportunity to present the virtues of
his/their proposition. Likewise, members against or are in
opposition to said motion should have the chance to reveal

its faults. However, not every question requires full and free
debate. There are certain motions that may be decided out
right by the presiding officer in his capacity as chair or just
simply be voted upon by the body immediately after it is
raised.
6. Every motion must be voted
upon. Although it was mentioned
earlier that not all motions
TAS
motion
Move
require full debate, it is a basic
principle however that, most of
the questions brought before the
assembly must be voted upon. It
may be disposed of affirmatively
or negatively, temporarily
or
permanently. What is important
is that the motion was decided
through a democratic process
and the will of the assembly is determined accurately. But
as reiterated, there are certain motions which by their very
nature no longer needs to go through the process of dividing
the house such as a point of a parliamentary inquiry, point
of information or a point of order.
7.
Group
interest
must prevail. Eve-
ry member should
understand that
he/she is not above
the rest of the oth-
er members of the
assembly. Even if
it holds a distinc-
tive position in the
assembly, he can-
not claim superiority over the other simple members of the
group. Each one plays a very important role in the collec-
tive efforts of the group. And that although he may have
his own idea regarding the issue, he should not carry this
thought to the point of disrupting the proceedings.

Because if everyone insist too much in carrying out

his/ her own point and does not listen to the views of his
colleagues particularly that of his own block then it may
result in disunity in the group and worse a dissolution of
the organization.
It is therefore important to establish unity and teamwork
among the members. Personal views must always be
blended with the interest of the group.
S. Delegation of function is allowed. In large assemblies
compromising of numerous membership and a gargantuan
of issues to resolve, it is a must that questions be delegated
to a small number of people commonly known as a
"committee" who will act for and in accordance with the
entire assembly. The reason for this is that this will expedite
the process to a shorter period of time and in so doing
settle the conundrum immediately to the people's benefit.
Committees are created to recommend and help the body
hasten the disposition of issues placed before it.
9. The presiding officer must be impartial. They say that
leadership is both power and prestige. This is the reason why
almost everyone wants to be a leader. But being the presiding
officer of any assembly is not all a bed of roses. It requires
not only knowledge of parliamentary rules and laws but
also a sound personal discretion and tactfulness. He should
not take part in the discussion but act only as a facilitator/
moderator to the body. His opinion or views is better kept
for himself in the meantime unless it becomes so necessary
that his judgment is of great impact to deciding on the
issue. In which case, he volunteers to do so by relinquishing
his position either temporarily or permanently. In fact, in
organizations that are fully established, a presiding officer
does not vote unless he is asked to break the tie.
These principles can be applied in almost all types of
assembly be it deliberate or not. Legislative bodies apply
these rules to maneuver them in resolving problems more
or less left unanswered by parliamentary law.