UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW

Constitutional Law 1 Law 121

Prof. Dante Gatmaytan
Abang Lingkod Party-list (ABANG LINGKOD) v. Commission on Elections (COMELEC)

Petition for certiorari filed by ABANG LINGKOD assailing the Resolution issued by the COMELEC en banc which
affirmed the cancellation of Abang Lingkods registration as a party-list group.

FACTS:

Abang Lingkod - sectoral organization that represents the interests of peasant farmers and fisherfolks and
were registered under the party-list system.
o It participated in May 2010 elections but failed to obtain number of votes for a seat in the House
of Representative.
o ABANG LINGKOD manifested before the COMELEC its intent to participate in the May 2013
elections.
August 2, 2012 COMELEC issued Resolution No. 9513 which required previous party-lists that have filed
their Manifestations of Intent to undergo summary evidentiary hearing for the purposes of determining
their continuing compliance with the requirements under RA 7941 and the guidelines set forth in Ang
Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v. COMELEC. They also released a resolution where they set summary
evidentiary hearings of the previously registered party-list groups.
o Following the resolution, ABANG LINKGOD filed with the COMELEC pertinent documents to
prove that it is in compliance with the requirements under RA 7941.
After due proceedings, COMELEC en banc decided in its resolution that ABANG LINGKODs registration as
a party-list is cancelled because it failed to establish its track record regarding their activities which shows
that they are indeed uplifting the cause of the marginalized and the underrepresented. The COMELEC
further added that ABANG LINGKOD also failed to show that its nominees are part of the marginalized and
underrepresented or that they were involved in activities which aim to shed light to the plight of the
marginalized or underrepresented sector it represents.
Abang Lingkod then filed a petition for certiorari, alleging that the COMELEC committed grave abuse of its
discretion in cancelling its registration under the party-list system.
April 2, 2013 - Court in Atom Paglaum, Inc. V. COMELEC laid down new parameters to be observed by the
COMELEC in screening parties, organizations or associations seeking registration under the party-list sys.
o Three different groups may participate in the party-list system: 1) national parties or
organizations, 2) regional parties or organizations, and 3) sectoral parties or organizations
o National/Regional parties or organizations do not need to organize along sectoral lines and do
not need to represent any marginalized or underrepresented sector.
o Political parties can participate in a party-list elections provided they register under the party-
list system and do not field candidates in legislative elections. A political party, that fields
candidates in legislative district elections can participate in party-list elections through its
sectoral wing that can separately register under the party list system. Sectroal wing is
independent and is linked to a political party through a coalition.
o Sectoral parties or organizations may either be marginalized and underrepresrented or
lacking in well-defined political constituencies. It is enough that their principal advocacy
pertains to the special interests and concerns of their sector. (Marginalized and
underrepresented sectors: labor, peasant, fisher folk, urban poor; sectors lakcing in well-defined
pol. Constituencies: women, youth professionals)
o A majority of the members of the sectoral parties or organizations that represent the
marginalized and underrepresented must belong to the marginalized and the
 UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
Constitutional Law 1 Law 121
Prof. Dante Gatmaytan
underrepresented sector they represent. Similarly, majority of the members of the sectoral
parties or organizations that lack well-defined political constituencies must belong to the
sector they represent. The nominees of sectoral parties that represent marginalized and
underrepresented or that represent those who lack well defined political constituencies either
must belong to their respective sectors or must have a track record or advocacy fir their
respective sectors.
o National, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations shall not be disqualified if some of their
nominees are disqualified, provided that they have at least one nominee who remains
qualified.
Court remanded to the COMELEC the cases previously registered as party-lists including ABANG LINGKOD
to determine whether or not they are still in compliance with the new guidelines set forth in Atom
Paglaum.
COMELEC, after reviewing the party-lists again, issued the assailed resolution which affirmed the
cancellation of Abang Lingkods registration under the party-list system.
o Held that in cancelling Abang Lingkods registration, it is not enough that the party-list claim
representation of a marginalized or an underrepresented sector because representation is easy
to claim and that it is reasonable to require from groups consistent participation and advocacy in
the sector is seeks to represent. And it also held that the pictures submitted by Abang Lingkod to
show their track record appears to have been edited to show in the banners that Abang Lingkod
participated in the activites.
Abang Lingkod filed for reconsideration, but withdrew said motion and filed a petition of certiorari
instead.
o They claim that COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion when it affirmed the cancellatuon
of its registration without a summary evidentiary hearing.

ISSUE/S:

1. W/N ABANG LINGKOD was denied of due process when the COMELEC affirmed the cancellation of its
registration under the party-list system without any summary evidentiary hearing
2. W/N COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in cancelling ABANG LINGKODs registration under the party-
list system

JUDGMENT: PETITION IS GRANTED. Resolution issued by COMELEC cancelling the registration of Abang Lingkod is
REVERSED.

HELD/RATIO:

1. NO. Court finds that the COMELEC had afforded ABANG LINGKOD sufficient opportunity to present
evidence to establish its qualification as a party-list group. Abang Lingkod was able to file its
Manifestation of Intent and other required documents pursuant to Resolution no. 9513 issued by the
COMELEC and which they set for summary hearing on three separate dates.

But there was no necessity to conduct further summary evidentiary hearing after the decision in Atom
Paglaum which set new standards to be followed for the screening of groups to be included in the party-
list system and DID NOT require the COMELEC to conduct summary evidentiary hearings.
 UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
Constitutional Law 1 Law 121
Prof. Dante Gatmaytan
Court just remanded the cases filed by the party-list group to reassess their qualifications in pursuant to
the new parameters laid down in Atom Paglaum but did require COMELEC to conduct a hearing. The court
only gave COMELEC the option to conduct further summary evidentiary hearing should they deem it
appropriate to do so. Lastly, the fact that Abang Lingkod was able to file a motion for reconsideration with
the COMELEC negates its claim that it was denied due process.

2. YES. COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in cancelling the registration of Abang Lingkod under the
party-list system.

COMELEC affirmed the cancellation on the ground that it declared untruthful statement in its bid
for accreditation through the digitally altered photos for the submission of the track record of
the group.
o RA 7941, Sec. 5 did not require groups intending to register under the party-list system
to show their track record as a group. The track record requirement was ONLY imposed
in Ang Bagong Bayani where the court held that national, regional, and sectoral parties
or organizations seeking registration under the party-list system must prove through
their track record that they truly represent the marginalized and the underrepresented.
Track record mentioned in Ang Bagong Bayani is different to the submission or
presentation of constitution, bylaws, platform of government, list of officers, coalition
agreement and other relevant information which is required in Sec. 5 of RA 7941
o Under the decision in Atom Paglaum it was established there that the national or
regional parties need not to represent any marginalized and underrepresented sector;
and that it is only required of sectoral organizations. BUT, still, according to the
Paglaum decision in sectoral organizations it is enough that their principal advocacy
pertains to the special interests and concerns of their sector.
o At the very least, evidence showing track record in representing marginalized and
underrepresented sectors is only required from nominees of sectoral parties.
Dissent of Leonen: he maintains that parties or organizations intending to register under the
party-list system are still required to present a track record notwithstanding the Courts
pronouncement in Atong Paglaum. And that, sectoral orgs. Must prove their links to the
marginalized and underrepresented white national or regional parties must show that they have
been existing as a bonafide org.
o To submit to the dissent wiykd result into an absurd and unjust situation Varying track
record would unnecessarily put premium on groups intending to register as national
and regional parties as against those intending to register under the sectoral orgs.
(Unjust additional burden on sectoral orgs)
Deceit committed by Abang Lingkod through falsified photos puts in question the existence of
Abang Lingkod.
o COMELEC cancelled Abang Lingkods registration SOLELY on the ground of lack of its
track record. Existence of ABANG LINGKOD per se and the genuineness of its
representation was never raised in the proceedings issue is limited to track record of
Abang Lingkod.
o Digitally altered photographs of activites of Abang Lingkod was done for the purpose of
its track records and since under the new paramaters in Atom PAglaum track record is
not required, these do not affect the qualification of Abang Lingkod as a party-list
group.
 UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
Constitutional Law 1 Law 121
Prof. Dante Gatmaytan
Failure of Abang Lingkod to present track record of its nominiees justified the cancellation of its
registration
o Assuming, that the nominees of Abang Lingkod do not have track records showing their
participation in activities, same would not affect the registration of Abang Lingkod as a
party-list.
o Disqualification of one or some of the nominees of party-list group should not
automatically result in the disqualification of the group.
In the case of Abang Lingkod, three of the five nominees are farmers and are
thus, not required to present their track record.

DISSENT, LEONEN:

COMELEC did not gravely abuse its discretion.

o Thus, certiorari must not be granted because it should only be exercised when grave abuse of
discretion is shown
Atom Paglaum v. COMELEC did not remove the legal requirement that party-list groups must have
proof of their existence and genuineness as provided by law.
o Proof that national, regional, sectoral parties exist are genuine is required by the law to
determine whether a party-list is eligible for registration, under RA 7941 Sec 2. Kind of record
that is required by law is different from what is required in Ang Bagong Bayani.
o The law which defined political parties and sectoral parties pertains to the use of ideology,
platform, principles, policies, advocacy of special interests and concerns of the sector and the
existence of constituencies in defining parties all pertain to evidence of a duly existing and
genuine party-list group. This is what RA 7941 requires from all parties who aspires to
participate in the party-list elections.
o Atom Paglaum did not remove the genuineness and bondafide existence requirements for
registration with the COMELEC. It only qualified that the nominees of secotral parties need not to
prove both membership in their sector and their record of advocacy.
COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in cancelling ABANG LINGKODs registration under
the party-list system when the party-list group made an untruthful statement which violates Sec. 6,
RA 7941.
o Digitally manipulated pictures submitted by ABANG LINGKOD it was done to prove the
continuous qualifications of the party-list group for registration with the COMELEC.
o What is at issue is the genuineness and existence if the party-list group, this includes the
question as to whether they truly represent the sector. And this claim can be supported by proof
of their activities.
Submission of edited photos shows the intent of ABANG LINGKOD to deceive the
COMELEC and the electorate which tantamount to submitting untruthful statements
under Sec 6 RA 7941 and a ground of the registration/accreditation of the party-list
group.