COMPUTATION OF

APPORTIONMENT
FOR THE PART Y -
LIST SYSTEM
B A N AT V S C O M E L E C
G.R. 179271 APRIL AND JUNE 2009 1
 DEFINITION OF TERMS
• Certiorari – application for a writ for review; a request of a higher court, usually the Supreme
Court, to review a case to consider it for adjudication

• Mandamus – a writ of mandate which orders a public agency or governmental body to perform an
act required by law when it has neglected or refused to do so

• Apportionment – the division, partition, or distribution of a subject-matter in proportionate part

• District Representative – constitutes the House of Representative that is elected directly and
personally from the territorial unit being sought to represent

• Party-List Representative – constitutes the House of Representatives that is chosen indirectly,

through the party represented, which is the one voted for by electorate

2
SECTION 5, ARTICLE VI OF THE 1987
CONSTITUTION
(1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members,
unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the
provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of their respective
inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall be
elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.

(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum (20%) of the total number of
representatives including those under the party-list. For three consecutive terms after the ratification of this
Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by
selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth,
and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.

3
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7941 (PARTY-LIST
SYSTEM ACT)
• Section 11. 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.

4
BANAT VS COMELEC
G.R. 17927 1 APRIL 21, 2009

FACTS:
• On June 27, 2002, Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency (BANAT) filed a
Petition to Proclaim the Full Number of Party-List Representatives Provided by the Constitution,
docketed as NBC No. 07-041 (PL) before the Commission on Election (COMELEC) sitting as the
National Board of Canvassers (NBC).
• BANAT filed its petition because the Chairman and the Members of the COMELEC have recently been
quoted in the national papers that the COMELEC is duty bound to and shall implement the Veterans
ruling, that is, would apply the Panganiban formula in allocating party-list seats. BANAT filed a petition for
certiorari and mandamus assailing the ruling in NBC Resolution No. 07-88 declaring its petition
moot and academic. BANAT did not file a motion for reconsideration.
• On July 9, 2007, Bayan Muna, Abono, and A Teacher asked the COMELEC, to reconsider its decision to
use the Veterans formula as stated in its NBC Resolution No. 07-60 because the Veterans formula is
violative of the Constitution and of Republic Act No. 7941 (R.A. No. 7941). On the same day, the
COMELEC denied the reconsideration during the proceedings of the NBC.

5
BANAT VS COMELEC
G.R. 17927 1 JULY 8, 2009
FACTS:
• There are only 219 legislative district and not 220. Accordingly, the allotted seats for party-list representation
should only be 54 and not 55. The house of representatives seeks clarification on which of the party-list
representatives shall be admitted to the roll of members considering that the court declared as winners 55
party-list representatives.
• The House of Representatives wishes to be guided on whether it should enroll in its Roll of
Members the 32 named party-list representatives enumerated in table 3 (next slide) or only such
number of representatives that would complete the 250 member maximum prescribed by Art. VI, Sec. 5 (1)
of the constitution. In the event that it is ordered to admit all 32, will this act not violate the above-cited
Constitutional provision considering that the total members would now rise to 270?
• The court declared as unconstitutional the 2% threshold only in relation to the distribution of
additional seats as found in the second clause of Sec. 11 (b) of R.A No. 7941. Yet, it distributed first seats
to party-list groups which did not attain the minimum number of votes that will entitle them to one seat.
Clarification is, therefore, sought whether the term "additional seats" refer to the 2nd and 3rd seats only
or all remaining available seats. Corollary thereto, the House of Representatives wishes to be clarified
whether there is no more minimum vote requirement to qualify as a party-list representative.
• For the guidance of the House of Representatives, clarification is sought as to whether the principle laid
down in Veterans that "the filling up of the allowable seats for party-list representatives is not mandatory,"
6
has been abandoned.
BANAT VS COMELEC
G.R. 17927 1 APRIL AND JULY 2009

ISSUES:

I. Whether or not the 20% for the party-list system representative provided
in Article 6 Section 5 (2) is mandatory or a mere ceiling?

II. Whether or not the three-seat limit and two percent (2%) threshold in
Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941 are constitutional?

III. How shall the party-list representative seats be allocated?

7
WHETHER OR NOT THE 20% FOR THE PARTY-LIST
SYSTEM REPRESENTATIVE IS MANDATORY?
RULING:

Yes, in pursuant to Section 5(2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution, 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.

The 1987 Constitution fixes the ratio of party-list representatives to district representatives. This
ratio automatically applies whenever the number of district representatives is increased by law.

Thus, for every four district representatives, the 1987 Constitution mandates that there shall be
one party-list representative.

There is no need for legislation to create an additional party-list seat whenever four additional
legislative districts are created by law. Section 5(2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution automatically
creates such additional party-list seat.
8
WHETHER OR NOT THE THREE-SEAT LIMIT AND TWO PERCENT (2%)
THRESHOLD IN SECTION 11(B) OF R.A. NO. 7941 ARE
CONSTITUTIONAL?

RULING:
Yes, the three-seat cap is constitutional. The three-seat cap is intended by
the Legislature to prevent any party from dominating the party-list system.
There is no violation of the Constitution because the 1987 Constitution
does not require absolute proportionality for the party-list system. The
well-settled rule is that courts will not question the wisdom of the
Legislature as long as it is not violative of the Constitution.
Regarding the 2 % threshold, the ruling is in the contrary. It is
unconstitutional as it hinders the full implementation of Section 5, Article
VI of the 1987 Constitution.
9
HOW SHALL THE PARTY-LIST
REPRESENTATIVE SEATS BE ALLOCATED?
1. Twenty percent of the total number of the membership of the House of Representatives is the
maximum number of seats available to party-list organizations, such that there is automatically one
party-list seat for every four existing legislative districts.
2. Garnering two percent of the total votes cast in the party-list elections guarantees a party-list
organization one seat. The guaranteed seats shall be distributed in a first round of seat allocation to
parties receiving at least two percent of the total party-list votes.
3. The additional seats, that is, the remaining seats after allocation of the guaranteed seats, shall be
distributed to the party-list organizations including those that received less than two percent of the
total votes. The continued operation of the two percent threshold as it applies to the allocation of
the additional seats is now unconstitutional because this threshold mathematically and physically
prevents the filling up of the available party-list seats. The additional seats shall be distributed to the
parties in a second round of seat allocation according to the two-step procedure laid down in the
Decision of 21 April 2009 as clarified in this Resolution
4. The three-seat cap is constitutional. The three-seat cap is intended by the Legislature to prevent any
party from dominating the party-list system. There is no violation of the Constitution because the
1987 Constitution does not require absolute proportionality for the party-list system. The well-
settled rule is that courts will not question the wisdom of the Legislature as long as it is not
10
violative of the Constitution.
1. DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF SEATS:
80-20 RULE
Section 5(2), Article VI of the
1987 Constitution reads in part:

The party-list representatives

shall constitute twenty per
centum of the total number of
representatives including those
under the party-list. x x x

219
𝑥 0.20 = 54.75 𝑜𝑟 54 seats
0.80

• The number of party-list representatives is directly proportional to the number of district

representatives.
• In effect, 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.
11
2. FIRST ROUND OF SEAT ALLOCATION
• Under Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941, garnering 2% of the total votes cast guarantees a party
one seat. Thus, the Court upholds this 2% threshold for the guaranteed seats as a valid
exercise of legislative power.

𝟏, 𝟏𝟔𝟗, 𝟑𝟑𝟖
= 𝟎. 𝟎𝟕𝟒𝟑𝟔 𝒐𝒓 𝟕. 𝟒𝟒%
𝟏𝟓, 𝟕𝟐𝟑, 𝟕𝟔𝟒
12
3. TWO-STEP SECOND ROUND OF
SEAT ALLOCATION
• First, the percentage is multiplied by the remaining available seats, 38 [now 37], which is the
difference between the 55 [now 54] maximum seats reserved under the Party-List System and
the 17 guaranteed seats of the two percenters. The whole integer of the product of the
percentage and of the remaining available seats corresponds to a party’s share in the remaining
available seats
• Second, we assign one party-list seat to each of the parties next in rank until all available seats
are completely distributed.We distributed all of the remaining 38 [now 37] seats in the second
round of seat allocation.
• Finally, we apply the three-seat cap to determine the number of seats each qualified party-list
candidate is entitled.

13
Table 3. Distribution of Available Party-List Seats

14