Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. COMELEC

    Uploaded by

    Ryd Noguerra
    The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) disqualified 52 party groups from participating in the 2013 elections, claiming they failed to establish that their nominees represented marginalized sectors. One disqualified group, Atong Paglaum, Inc., challenged this decision, arguing COMELEC made a mistake. However, the Supreme Court ruled that COMELEC did not err and was merely following prior court rulings setting standards for the party-list system. The Court also provided new guidelines for determining representation of marginalized sectors to standardize application of the party-list system.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. COMELEC

    Uploaded by

    Ryd Noguerra
    5 views1 page
    The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) disqualified 52 party groups from participating in the 2013 elections, claiming they failed to establish that their nominees represented marginalized sectors. One disqualified group, Atong Paglaum, Inc., challenged this decision, arguing COMELEC made a mistake. However, the Supreme Court ruled that COMELEC did not err and was merely following prior court rulings setting standards for the party-list system. The Court also provided new guidelines for determining representation of marginalized sectors to standardize application of the party-list system.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) disqualified 52 party groups from participating in the 2013 elections, claiming they failed to establish that their nominees represented marginalized sectors. One disqualified group, Atong Paglaum, Inc., challenged this decision, arguing COMELEC made a mistake. However, the Supreme Court ruled that COMELEC did not err and was merely following prior court rulings setting standards for the party-list system. The Court also provided new guidelines for determining representation of marginalized sectors to standardize application of the party-list system.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    5 views1 page

    Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. COMELEC

    Uploaded by

    Ryd Noguerra
    The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) disqualified 52 party groups from participating in the 2013 elections, claiming they failed to establish that their nominees represented marginalized sectors. One disqualified group, Atong Paglaum, Inc., challenged this decision, arguing COMELEC made a mistake. However, the Supreme Court ruled that COMELEC did not err and was merely following prior court rulings setting standards for the party-list system. The Court also provided new guidelines for determining representation of marginalized sectors to standardize application of the party-list system.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Atong Paglaum, Inc. v.

    COMELEC
    GR No. 203766, April 2, 2013

    FACTS:
    During the elections last May 2013, approx. 280 groups and organizations manifested their
    desires to participate in the party-list elections. However, 52 of these groups were subsequently
    disqualified by COMELEC, including some that were duly registered and accredited as political
    parties. They were excluded based to the contention that the said groups failed to establish their
    representatives of marginalized and underrepresented sectors and that their nominees were
    indeed members of the sectors that they were seeking to represent.

    ISSUE:
    If the COMELEC made a mistake in disqualifying 52 party groups from participating in the May
    2013 elections.

    RULING:
    No, what the COMELEC did was merely followed existing law set forth by the SC in its earlier
    rulings. For the purpose of setting uniform standards and understanding of the party-list system
    in the Philippines, the Court provides an extensive account of the history and dynamics of the
    party-list system as stated in the 1987 Constitution and as envisioned by the Framers, and
    institutes new guidelines to be used in resolving issues with similar concepts in the future/

    You might also like