Wednesday, October 31, 2012

On DUTERTE - Horror story | Inquirer Opinion

Horror story | Inquirer Opinion
See - http://opinion.inquirer.net/39804/horror-story-2

"x x x.


THE EXPLANATION itself is surreal. “I told them,” Davao City Vice Mayor Rodrigo Duterte said, “to be careful because (suspected carjacking leader, Ryan Yu, alias) Baktin is armed and dangerous…. If he surrenders peacefully, that does not involve danger. But once he is arrested and he resists and gets killed, that involves danger to the lives of the arresting officers. That’s why the reward is doubled. I decided to add P1 million more because once he is dead, you cannot bring the body without putting yourself in jeopardy; you’re carrying P5-million worth of baggage in your hands.”
“The reward (on Baktin’s head), dead or alive, that’s legal,” Duterte said. “Do not castrate the government,” he begged Commission on Human Rights Chair Etta Rosales, who has remonstrated with him on this. “That will make us impotent to fight crime. Do not do that to my city.”
Surreal as this is, it’s just a pale echo of the original. “Two million ako kapag buhay si Ryan. Kapag pinatay ninyo, four million ’yan. ’Pag dinala ninyo ang ulo, balutin lang niyo sa ice, dagdagan ko ng one million sa campaign funds … so it’s five million.” (“P2 million if you capture Ryan alive. P4 million if you kill him. You bring his head in—just wrap it in ice—I’ll throw in another million from my campaign funds.”)
Can anyone in his right mind—or in his wrong one, since you have to wonder at the type of characters this will draw to the hunt—possibly miss the meaning of this? Can anyone in his right mind—or in his wrong one, given that this was issued by a high-ranking public official—possibly not know the meaning of this? Of course it is illegal. You offer a bounty for information that leads to the capture of a fugitive, that’s legal. You offer a bounty for the head of a fugitive, you should be jailed.
Make no mistake about it: That is an open invitation to murder. And a huge one, given the size of the bounty and the destitution of the invitees. You can get P5 million instead of P2 million to bring a guy in dead rather than alive, would you bother to bring him alive? Indeed, you can get P5 million instead of P4 million to bring a guy in not just dead but missing his head, or his body, would you not lop off his head while he is in the toilet? And say afterward that he resisted because when you called out to him he turned around and attacked you with his piss? I don’t know how much ice costs in Davao, but surely it’s a negligible deduction from P5 million and worth the investment. The bizarreness of it all lends itself to morbid humor.
I was tempted to say that Duterte has been watching too many Clint Eastwood movies, but it struck me that the more direct inspiration for this comes from another movie. One directed by Sam Peckinpah, who made a fetish of violence, called, “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia.” That is what this is, Duterte saying, “Bring me the head of Ryan Yu,” without any of Peckinpah’s artfulness, with only the muck, sordidness and mindlessness of sick life.
x x x."

Sunday, October 28, 2012

2001 decision of the SC on the PARTY-LIST SYSTEM; a landmark ruling - G.R. No. 147589

G.R. No. 147589

See -  http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2001/jun2001/gr_147589_2001.html

"x x x.


Second Issue:

Participation of Political Parties

In its Petition, Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party contends that "the inclusion of political parties in the party-list system is the most objectionable portion of the questioned Resolution." 27 For its part, Petitioner Bayan Muna objects to the participation of "major political parties." 28 On the other hand, the Office of the Solicitor General, like the impleaded political parties, submits that the Constitution and RA No. 7941 allow political parties to participate in the party-list elections. It argues that the party-list system is, in fact, open to all "registered national, regional and sectoral parties or organizations." 29

We now rule on this issue. Under the Constitution and RA 7941, private respondents cannot be disqualified from the party-list elections, merely on the ground that they are political parties. 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."
Furthermore, under Sections 7 and 8, Article IX (C) of the Constitution, political parties may be registered under the party-list system.
"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." 30
During the deliberations in the Constitutional Commission, Comm. Christian S. Monsod pointed out that the participants in the party-list system may "be a regional party, a sectoral party, a national party, UNIDO, 31Magsasaka, or a regional party in Mindanao." 32 This was also clear from the following exchange between Comms. Jaime Tadeo and Blas Ople: 33

"MR. TADEO. Naniniwala ba kayo na ang party list ay pwedeng paghati-hatian ng UNIDO, PDP-Laban, PNP, Liberal at Nacionalista?

MR. OPLE. Maaari yan sapagkat bukas ang party list system sa lahat ng mga partido."

Indeed, 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. 34 He explained: "The purpose of this is to open the system. In the past elections, we found out that there were certain groups or parties that, if we count their votes nationwide, have about 1,000,000 or 1,500,000 votes. But they were always third or fourth place in each of the districts. So, they have no voice in the Assembly. But this way, they would have five or six representatives in the Assembly even if they would not win individually in legislative districts. So, that is essentially the mechanics, the purpose and objectives of the party-list system."

For its part, 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." More to the point, the law defines "political party" as "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."

Furthermore, Section 11 of RA 7941 leaves no doubt as to the participation of political parties in the party-list system. We quote the pertinent provision below:

"x x x

"For purposes of the May 1998 elections, the first five (5) major political parties on the basis of party representation in the House of Representatives at the start of the Tenth Congress of the Philippines shall not be entitled to participate in the party-list system.

x x x"

Indubitably, therefore, political parties – even the major ones -- may participate in the party-list elections.

Third Issue:

Marginalized and Underrepresented

That political parties may participate in the party-list elections does not mean, however, that any political party -- or any organization or group for that matter -- may do so. The requisite character of these parties or organizations must be consistent with the purpose of the party-list system, as laid down in the Constitution and RA 7941. Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution, provides as follows:
"(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 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." (Emphasis supplied.)
Notwithstanding the sparse language of the provision, a distinguished member of the Constitutional Commission declared that the purpose of the party-list provision was to give "genuine power to our people" in Congress. Hence, when the provision was discussed, he exultantly announced: "On this first day of August 1986, we shall, hopefully, usher in a new chapter to our national history, by giving genuine power to our people in the legislature." 35

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."

The Marginalized and Underrepresented to Become Lawmakers Themselves

The foregoing provision mandates a state policy of promoting proportional representation by means of the Filipino-style party-list system, which will "enable" the election to the House of Representatives of Filipino citizens,
1. who belong to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties; and
2. who lack well-defined constituencies; but
3. who could contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole.
The key words in this policy are "proportional representation," "marginalized and underrepresented," and "lack ofwell-defined constituencies."

"Proportional representation" here does not refer to the number of people in a particular district, because the party-list election is national in scope. Neither does it allude to numerical strength in a distressed or oppressed group. Rather, it refers to the representation of the "marginalized and underrepresented" as exemplified by the enumeration in Section 5 of the law; namely, "labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth, veterans, overseas workers, and professionals."

However, it is not enough for the candidate to claim representation of the marginalized and underrepresented, because representation is easy to claim and to feign. The party-list organization or party must factually and truly represent the marginalized and underrepresented constituencies mentioned in Section 5. 36 Concurrently, the persons nominated by the party-list candidate-organization must be "Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties."

Finally, "lack of well-defined constituenc[y] " refers to the absence of a traditionally identifiable electoral group, like voters of a congressional district or territorial unit of government. Rather, it points again to those with disparate interests identified with the "marginalized or underrepresented."

In the end, the role of the Comelec is to see to it that only those Filipinos who are "marginalized and underrepresented" become members of Congress under the party-list system, Filipino-style.

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. 37

The marginalized and underrepresented sectors to be represented under the party-list system are enumerated in Section 5 of RA 7941, which states:

"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."

While the enumeration of marginalized and underrepresented sectors is not exclusive, it demonstrates the clear intent of the law that not all sectors can be represented under the party-list system. It is a fundamental principle of statutory construction that words employed in a statute are interpreted in connection with, and their meaning is ascertained by reference to, the words and the phrases with which they are associated or related. Thus, the meaning of a term in a statute may be limited, qualified or specialized by those in immediate association. 38

The Party-List System Desecrated by the OSG Contentions

Notwithstanding the unmistakable statutory policy, the Office of the Solicitor General submits that RA No. 7941 "does not limit the participation in the party-list system to the marginalized and underrepresented sectors of society."39 In fact, it contends that any party or group that is not disqualified under Section 6 40 of RA 7941 may participate in the elections. Hence, it admitted during the Oral Argument that even an organization representing the super rich of Forbes Park or DasmariƱas Village could participate in the party-list elections. 41

The declared policy of RA 7941 contravenes the position of the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG). We stress that the party-list system seeks to enable certain Filipino citizens – specifically those belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties – to be elected to the House of Representatives. The assertion of the OSG that the party-list system is not exclusive to the marginalized and underrepresented disregards the clear statutory policy. Its claim that even the super-rich and 

overrepresented can participate desecrates the spirit of the party-list system.
Indeed, the law crafted to address the peculiar disadvantages of Payatas hovel dwellers cannot be appropriated by the mansion owners of Forbes Park. The interests of these two sectors are manifestly disparate; hence, the OSG's position to treat them similarly defies reason and common sense. In contrast, and with admirable candor, Atty. Lorna Patajo-Kapunan 42 admitted during the Oral Argument that a group of bankers, industrialists and sugar planters could not join the party-list system as representatives of their respective sectors. 43

While the business moguls and the mega-rich are, numerically speaking, a tiny minority, they are neither marginalized nor underrepresented, for the stark reality is that their economic clout engenders political power more awesome than their numerical limitation. Traditionally, political power does not necessarily emanate from the size of one's constituency; indeed, it is likely to arise more directly from the number and amount of one's bank accounts.

It is ironic, therefore, that the marginalized and underrepresented in our midst are the majority who wallow in poverty, destitution and infirmity. It was for them that the party-list system was enacted -- to give them not only genuine hope, but genuine power; to give them the opportunity to be elected and to represent the specific concerns of their constituencies; and simply to give them a direct voice in Congress and in the larger affairs of the State. In its noblest sense, the party-list system truly empowers the masses and ushers a new hope for genuine change. Verily, it invites those marginalized and underrepresented in the past – the farm hands, the fisher folk, the urban poor, even those in the underground movement – to come out and participate, as indeed many of them came out and participated during the last elections. The State cannot now disappoint and frustrate them by disabling and desecrating this social justice vehicle.

Because the marginalized and underrepresented had not been able to win in the congressional district elections normally dominated by traditional politicians and vested groups, 20 percent of the seats in the House of Representatives were set aside for the party-list system. In arguing that even those sectors who normally controlled 80 percent of the seats in the House could participate in the party-list elections for the remaining 20 percent, the OSG and the Comelec disregard the fundamental difference between the congressional district elections and the party-list elections.

As earlier noted, the purpose of the party-list provision was to open up the system, 44 in order to enhance the chance of sectoral groups and organizations to gain representation in the House of Representatives through the simplest scheme possible. 45 Logic shows that the system has been opened to those who have never gotten a foothold within it -- those who cannot otherwise win in regular elections and who therefore need the "simplest scheme possible" to do so. Conversely, it would be illogical to open the system to those who have long been within it -- those privileged sectors that have long dominated the congressional district elections.

The import of the open party-list system may be more vividly understood when compared to a student dormitory "open house," which by its nature allows outsiders to enter the facilities. Obviously, the "open house" is for the benefit of outsiders only, not the dormers themselves who can enter the dormitory even without such special privilege. In the same vein, the open party-list system is only for the "outsiders" who cannot get elected through regular elections otherwise; it is not for the non-marginalized or overrepresented who already fill the ranks of Congress.

Verily, allowing the non-marginalized and overrepresented to vie for the remaining seats under the party-list system would not only dilute, but also prejudice the chance of the marginalized and underrepresented, contrary to the intention of the law to enhance it. The party-list system is a tool for the benefit of the underprivileged; the law could not have given the same tool to others, to the prejudice of the intended beneficiaries.

This Court, therefore, cannot allow the party-list system to be sullied and prostituted by those who are neither marginalized nor underrepresented. It cannot let that flicker of hope be snuffed out. The clear state policy must permeate every discussion of the qualification of political parties and other organizations under the party-list system.

Refutation of the Separate Opinions

The Separate Opinions of our distinguished colleagues, Justices Jose C. Vitug and Vicente V. Mendoza, are anchored mainly on the supposed intent of the framers of the Constitution as culled from their deliberations.

The fundamental principle in constitutional construction, however, is that the primary source from which to ascertain constitutional intent or purpose is the language of the provision itself. The presumption is that the words in which the constitutional provisions are couched express the objective sought to be attained. 46 In other words, verba legis still prevails. Only when the meaning of the words used is unclear and equivocal should resort be made to extraneous aids of construction and interpretation, such as the proceedings of the Constitutional Commission or Convention, in order to shed light on and ascertain the true intent or purpose of the provision being construed. 47

Indeed, as cited in the Separate Opinion of Justice Mendoza, this Court stated in Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary 48 that "the debates and proceedings of the constitutional convention [may be consulted] in order to arrive at the reason and purpose of the resulting Constitution x x x only when other guides fail as said proceedings are powerless to vary the terms of the Constitution when the meaning is clear. Debates in the constitutional convention 'are of value as showing the views of the individual members, and as indicating the reason for their votes, but they give us no light as to the views of the large majority who did not talk, much less of the mass or our fellow citizens whose votes at the polls gave that instrument the force of fundamental law. We think it safer to construe the constitution from what appears upon its face.' The proper interpretation therefore depends more on how it was understood by the people adopting it than in the framers' understanding thereof."

Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution, relative to the party-list system, is couched in clear terms: the mechanics of the system shall be provided by law. Pursuant thereto, Congress enacted RA 7941. In understanding and implementing party-list representation, we should therefore look at the law first. Only when we find its provisions ambiguous should the use of extraneous aids of construction be resorted to.
But, as discussed earlier, the intent of the law is obvious and clear from its plain words. Section 2 thereof unequivocally states that the party-list system of electing congressional representatives was designed to "enable 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 x x x." The criteria for participation is well defined. Thus, there is no 
need for recourse to constitutional deliberations, not even to the proceedings of Congress. In any event, the framers' deliberations merely express their individual opinions and are, at best, only persuasive in construing the meaning and purpose of the constitution or statute.

Be it remembered that the constitutionality or validity of Sections 2 and 5 of RA 7941 is not an issue here. Hence, they remain parts of the law, which must be applied plainly and simply.

Fourth Issue:

Grave Abuse of Discretion

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.

When a lower court, or a quasi-judicial agency like the Commission on Elections, violates or ignores the Constitution or the law, its action can be struck down by this Court on the ground of grave abuse of discretion. 49Indeed, the function of all judicial and quasi-judicial instrumentalities is to apply the law as they find it, not to reinvent or second-guess it. 50

In its Memorandum, Petitioner Bayan Muna passionately pleads for the outright disqualification of the major political parties – Respondents Lakas-NUCD, LDP, NPC, LP and PMP – on the ground that under Comelec Resolution No. 4073, they have been accredited as the five (six, including PDP-Laban) major political parties in the May 14, 2001 elections. It argues that because of this, they have the "advantage of getting official Comelec Election Returns, Certificates of Canvass, preferred poll watchers x x x." We note, however, that this accreditation does not refer to the party-list election, but, inter alia, to the election of district representatives for the purpose of determining which parties would be entitled to watchers under Section 26 of Republic Act No. 7166.

What is needed under the present circumstances, however, is a factual determination of whether respondents herein and, for that matter, all the 154 previously approved groups, have the necessary qualifications to participate in the party-list elections, pursuant to the Constitution and the law.

Bayan Muna also urges us to immediately rule out Respondent Mamamayan Ayaw sa Droga (MAD), because "it is a government entity using government resources and privileges." This Court, however, is not a trier of facts. 51 It is not equipped to receive evidence and determine the truth of such factual allegations.

Basic rudiments of due process require that respondents should first be given an opportunity to show that they qualify under the guidelines promulgated in this Decision, before they can be deprived of their right to participate in and be elected under the party-list system.

Guidelines for Screening Party-List Participants

The Court, therefore, deems it proper to remand the case to the Comelec for the latter to determine, after summary evidentiary hearings, whether the 154 parties and organizations allowed to participate in the party-list elections comply with the requirements of the law. In this light, the Court finds it appropriate to lay down the following guidelines, culled from the law and the Constitution, to assist the Comelec in its work.

First, the political party, sector, organization or coalition must represent the marginalized and underrepresented groups identified in Section 5 of RA 7941. In other words, it must show -- through its constitution, articles of incorporation, bylaws, history, platform of government and track record -- that it represents and seeks to uplift marginalized and underrepresented sectors. Verily, majority of its membership should belong to the marginalized and underrepresented. And it must demonstrate that in a conflict of interests, it has chosen or is likely to choose the interest of such sectors.

Second, 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." In other words, while they are not disqualified merely on the ground that they are political parties, they must show, however, that they represent the interests of the marginalized and underrepresented. The counsel of Aksyon Demokratiko and other similarly situated political parties admitted as much during the Oral Argument, as the following quote shows:

"JUSTICE PANGANIBAN: I am not disputing that in my question. All I am saying is, the political party must claim to represent the marginalized and underrepresented sectors?

ATTY. KAPUNAN: Yes, Your Honor, the answer is yes."52

Third, in view of the objections53 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. The extent of the constitutional proscription is demonstrated by the following discussion during the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission:

"MR. OPLE. x x x

In the event that a certain religious sect with nationwide and even international networks of members and supporters, in order to circumvent this prohibition, decides to form its own political party in emulation of those parties I had mentioned earlier as deriving their inspiration and philosophies from well-established religious faiths, will that also not fall within this prohibition?

MR. MONSOD. If the evidence shows that the intention is to go around the prohibition, then certainly the Comelec can pierce through the legal fiction."54

The following discussion is also pertinent:

"MR. VILLACORTA. When the Commissioner proposed "EXCEPT RELIGIOUS GROUPS," he is not, of course, prohibiting priests, imams or pastors who may be elected by, say, the indigenous community sector to represent their group.

REV. RIGOS. Not at all, but I am objecting to anybody who represents the Iglesia ni Kristo, the Catholic Church, the Protestant Church et cetera."55

Furthermore, the Constitution provides that "religious denominations and sects shall not be registered."56 The prohibition was explained by a member57 of the Constitutional Commission in this wise: "[T] he prohibition is on any religious organization registering as a political party. I do not see any prohibition here against a priest running as a candidate. That is not prohibited here; it is the registration of a religious sect as a political party."58

Fourth, 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."59
Note should be taken of paragraph 5, which disqualifies a party or group for violation of or failure to comply with election laws and regulations. These laws include Section 2 of RA 7941, which states that the party-list system seeks to "enable Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties x x x to become members of the House of Representatives." A party or an organization, therefore, that does not comply with this policy must be disqualified.

Fifth, the party or organization must not be an adjunct of, or a project organized or an entity funded or assisted by, the government. By the very nature of the party-list system, the party or organization must be a group of citizens, organized by citizens and operated by citizens. It must be independent of the government. The participation of the government or its officials in the affairs of a party-list candidate is not only illegal60 and unfair to other parties, but also deleterious to the objective of the law: to enable citizens belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors and organizations to be elected to the House of Representatives.

Sixth, 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."
Seventh, 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.

Eighth, 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."61

Epilogue

The linchpin of this case is the clear and plain policy of the law: "to 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."
Crucial to the resolution of this case is the fundamental social justice principle that those who have less in life should have more in law. The party-list system is one such tool intended to benefit those who have less in life. It gives the great masses of our people genuine hope and genuine power. It is a message to the destitute and the prejudiced, and even to those in the underground, that change is possible. It is an invitation for them to come out of their limbo and seize the opportunity.

Clearly, therefore, the Court cannot accept the submissions of the Comelec and the other respondents that the party-list system is, without any qualification, open to all. Such position does not only weaken the electoral chances of the marginalized and underrepresented; it also prejudices them. It would gut the substance of the party-list system. Instead of generating hope, it would create a mirage. Instead of enabling the marginalized, it would further weaken them and aggravate their marginalization.

In effect, the Comelec would have us believe that the party-list provisions of the Constitution and RA 7941 are nothing more than a play on dubious words, a mockery of noble intentions, and an empty offering on the altar of people empowerment. Surely, this could not have been the intention of the framers of the Constitution and the makers of RA 7941.

WHEREFORE, this case is REMANDED to the Comelec, which is hereby DIRECTED to immediately conduct summary evidentiary hearings on the qualifications of the party-list participants in the light of the guidelines enunciated in this Decision. Considering the extreme urgency of determining the winners in the last party-list elections, the Comelec is directed to begin its hearings for the parties and organizations that appear to have garnered such number of votes as to qualify for seats in the House of Representatives. The Comelec is further DIRECTED to submit to this Court its compliance report within 30 days from notice hereof.1Ć¢wphi




The Resolution of this Court dated May 9, 2001, directing the Comelec "to refrain from proclaiming any winner" during the last party-list election, shall remain in force until after the Comelec itself will have complied and reported its compliance with the foregoing disposition.

This Decision is immediately executory upon the Commission on Elections' receipt thereof. No pronouncement as to costs.

SO ORDERED.

Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Kapunan, Pardo, Buena, and Gonzaga-Reyes, JJ., concur.

Davide, Jr., C.J., in the result.
Vitug and Mendoza, JJ., see dissenting opinion.
Quisumbing, De Leon, Jr., and Sandoval-Gutierrez, JJ., join the dissent of J. Vicente M. Mendoza.
Ynares-Santiago, J., abroad on official business.

x x x."

Tobacco firms win legal battles in PH

Tobacco firms win legal battles in PH

See -  http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/14926-tobacco-firms-win-legal-battles-in-the-philippines

"x x x.


In all cases in the courts to date, the tobacco business has had the upper hand. Tobacco firms are mostly challenging proposed government oversights, specifically:
  • Compelling companies to place picture warnings on cigarette packs. Less than two months after the Department of Health issued Administrative Order No. 2010-0013 calling for graphic health warnings, 5 major firms challenged the mandate. So far two tobacco companies have been victorious in getting regional trial courts to declare the order invalid while the other firms have obtained favorable preliminary rulings.
  • Banning smoking in select public places in Metro Manila. Last July, the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) began arresting people caught smoking in certain open areas of the metropolis, like transportation terminals and gas stations, in an attempt to limit exposure to secondhand smoke. A local Mandaluyong court swiftly sided with apprehended smokers, issuing a preliminary injunction in October to stop the agency from making more arrests.
  • Giving the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority over tobacco products for the first time. In 2011, the Philippine Tobacco Institute, an association of leading tobacco companies, asked a Regional Trial Court in Las Pinas City to set aside the implementing rules and regulations of the FDA Act of 2009 which spelled out that regulation of tobacco products falls under the purview of the FDA. Despite what seemed like an initial victory for the FDA in the preliminary rulings, the regional court ultimately sided with the tobacco institute, stripping the FDA of the authority to supervise the quality of tobacco products on behalf of consumers. The FDA elevated the case to the Supreme Court but it has not sought a restraining order or attempted to check tobacco as it waits for the decision.
  • Limiting ads for tobacco products to the interior walls of stores selling them. In 2008, a Marikina court sided with a broad definition of point-of-sale that allows tobacco companies to place advertisements on the outward facing area of a store and within the perimeter of the establishment. The ruling lets tobacco companies turn the shop itself and the space on which it stands it into an advertising area, offering a way around the country's seemingly strict law prohibiting outdoor billboards.
  • Blocking and regulating tobacco promotions. The Department of Health's (DOH) attempt to reign in industry marketing practices was blocked by the Regional Court and the Court of Appeals. In the 2011 Court of Appeals decision, Associate Justice Noel Tijam wrote that the DOH "committed grave abuse of discretion," by trying to ban tobacco promotions, reopening the door for creative marketing practices and sponsorships. The DOH has appealed the unfavorable decision, raising it to the Supreme Court.
“In all tobacco control cases in the Philippines there has been no victory for public health ever,” said Evita Ricafort, a lawyer with Health Justice Philippines, a non-governmental group that keeps tabs on all the cases filed by the tobacco industry and offers legal aid to the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).
x x x."

Govt agency on women calls for decriminalization of prostitution in PHL | News | GMA News Online | The Go-To Site for Filipinos Everywhere

Govt agency on women calls for decriminalization of prostitution in PHL | News | GMA News Online | The Go-To Site for Filipinos Everywhere


See -  http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/280011/news/nation/govt-agency-on-women-calls-for-decriminalization-of-prostitution-in-phl


"x x x.

The government's policy-making body on gender equality and women’s empowerment is echoing the United Nations' call for the decriminalization of prostitution.

The Philippine Commission on Women (PCW) views prostitution as an exploitative system that commodifies and dehumanizes women, men and children who are being victimized within the system, PCW Executive Director Emmeline Verzosa said in a statement.

“As a form of sexual exploitation, prostitution violates a person’s human rights and it reinforces the subordinate status of the more vulnerable individuals who are more often than not, women and children,” Verzosa said.

“We are advocating for the decriminalization of prostituted persons so that they will no longer be arrested, treated and fined like criminals, but we are not in favor of legalizing prostitution,” she added.

Earlier this month, the UN recommended the decriminalization of the world's oldest profession in the Asia and the Pacific Region to help curb the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

The UN said the criminalization of sex-related jobs increases workers’ susceptibility to the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) by “fuelling stigma and discrimination, limiting access to sexual health services, condoms and harm reduction services; and adversely affecting the self esteem of sex workers and their ability to make informed choices about their health.”

Shift criminal liability to exploiters

The recommendation is also a move to stop the exploitation of sex workers and to give them basic rights by suggesting that their jobs, too, should have typical workplace standards in line with the law and government.

According to Verzosa, treating persons in prostitution as criminals will lead to further discrimination and abuse; programs that provide restitution and renewal for an alternative lifestyle and livelihood for the prostituted person should be put in place.

“[Programs] should go hand in hand with the apprehension and prosecution of agents, recruiters, traffickers, pimps, procurers, establishment owners, customers and others who derive sexual gratification, financial gain and advancement, or any other benefit from the prostitution of others, said Verzosa.

“PCW supports the anti-prostitution bills in Congress which shift the criminal liability from the prostituted persons, to those who 'buy' and make profit from such transactions,” Verzosa said.

Verzosa urged the government and the general public to examine the issue of prostitution and the HIV epidemic in a broader context.

“We should go beyond looking at prostitution as the reason for the spread of HIV, thereby placing greater risk of discrimination for the prostituted person. Instead, we should prioritize the implementation of existing laws and policies aimed at addressing HIV and AIDS. Funding support should also be given to programs on prevention of HIV as well as treatment, care and support for people living with HIV and AIDS,” Verzosa said.

Church, 2 senators oppose proposal

Earlier, a Catholic prelate expressed his opposition to the UN's recommendation to decriminalize prostitution.

According to Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo, chair of Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines National Secretariat for Social Action Justice and Peace, decriminalizing prostitution will only worsen promiscuity in the Philippines.

Pabillo also insists that there is no certainty that HIV and AIDS will be prevented once prostitution will be decriminalized or legalized.

“Hindi tama ang kanilang premise na kapag ma-legalize ang prostitusyon ay maiiwasan ang sakit na HIV-AIDS. Kahit sa ibang bansa na ligal ito ay laganap pa rin ang HIV-AIDS at mas malala pa yung promiscuity," Pabillo explained in an interview with Radyo Veritas.

“Kasi ang problema ng mga pananaw lalo na ng UN ay hindi nakikita yung values. Yung behavior ng mga tao at sa ating paninindigan sa Simbahan," he added.

At least two senators have also rejected the United Nations’ proposal to decriminalize prostitution in the Philippines, saying what works in other countries may not work in the country.

“Hindi naman tayo dapat sunud-sunuran sa kagustuhan ng United Nations. Kung kagustuhan ng ibang bansa na maging prostitutes ang lahat ng kanilang kababaihan, bahala sila. Pero palagay ko naman dito sa atin ayaw natin,” said Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile.

He added he is not likely to support such proposal.

“There are many complexities about it. But we are willing to listen to the arguments. But to say offhand I am in favor of it, I am not. I have to be convinced,” Enrile said.

Sen. Koko Pimentel, for his part, believed decriminalizing prostitution in the country will not yield the same results as in other countries.

“Let us not just copy the policies and laws of other countries. Sa more developed countries, ‘yung prostitutes nila nagiging prostitutes dahil sa sarili nilang decision, voluntarily. Ang tanong, is that the case in the Philippines?” he said.

“Kahit i-legalize natin ‘yung prostitution dito, ‘yung objective ay hindi natin ma-achieve dahil hindi pareho ang situation. I don’t think the Filipino electorate, as well as the policy-makers, are ready for such a radical proposal to legalize prostitution. Personally hindi ako pabor,” he added. — Amanda Fernandez/BM, GMA News.

x x x ."

2013 National and Local Elections | Resolutions :: Commission on Elections

2013 National and Local Elections | Resolutions :: Commission on Elections

See -  http://www.comelec.gov.ph/?r=Elections/2013natloc/res/resoTOC&toc_search=all


2013 National and Local Elections | Resolutions

 
 

  • Resolution No. 9540
    IN THE MATTER OF THE CERTIFICATES OF CANDIDACY FOR SENATORS IN THE MAY 13, 2013 AUTOMATED SYNCHRONIZED NATIONAL, LOCAL AND ARMM REGIONAL ELECTIONS.
    Promulgation: 12 October 2012
  • Resolution No. 9539
    IN THE MATTER OF THE DISTRICTING OF THE PROVINCE OF BUKIDNON FOR PURPOSES OF ELECTING THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS.
    Promulgation: 09 October 2012
  • Resolution No. 9538
    IN THE MATTER OF CONSTITUTING THE RANDOM MANUAL AUDIT COMMITTEE (RMAC) IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 AUTOMATED SYNCHRONIZED NATIONAL, LOCAL AND ARMM ELECTIONS.
    Promulgation: 09 October 2012
  • E.M. No. 12-042
    IN RE: PETITION TO ALLOW EARLY VOTING FOR MEMBERS OF THE MASS MEDIA IN THE MAY 2013 ELECTIONS

    NOEL ANGEL ALAMAR, ARIEL J. AYALA, LESLIE ANN G. AQUINO, GERARD ANTHONY M. NAVAL, SHEILA CRISOSTOMO, JENNIFER F. MANONGDO, and on behalf of other members of mass media similarly situated,
    Promulgation: 09 October 2012
  • Minute Resolution No. 12-0873
    IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST FOR CORRECTION OF COMELEC RESOLUTION NO. 9525 PROMULGATED ON SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 ENTITLED: “IN THE MATTER OF THE DISTRICTING OF THE PROVINCE OF COTABATO (NORTH COTABATO) FOR PURPOSES OF ELECTING THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS”
    Promulgation: 04 October 2012
  • Resolution No. 9526
    ALLOCATION OF SEATS OF: (1) MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES; (2) ELECTIVE MEMBERS OF THE SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN; (3) ELECTIVE MEMBERS OF THE SANGGUNIANG PANLUNGSOD; AND (4) ELECTIVE MEMBERS OF THE SANGGUNIANG BAYAN; (5) ELECTIVE MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF THE AUTONOMOUS REGION IN MUSLIM MINDANAO (ARMM) IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 26 September 2012
  • Resolution No. 9525
    IN THE MATTER OF THE DISTRICTING OF THE PROVINCE OF COTABATO (NORTH COTABATO) FOR PURPOSES OF ELECTING THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 26 September 2012
  • Resolution No. 9524
    IN THE MATTER OF THE DISTRICTING OF THE PROVINCE OF PALAWAN AND THE CITIES OF QUEZON AND BACOOR FOR PURPOSES OF ELECTING THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN AND SNAGGUNIANG PANLUNGSOD, RESPECTIVELY IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 26 September 2012
  • Resolution No. 9523
    IN THE MATTER OF THE AMENDMENT TO RULES 2324, AND 25 OF THE COMELEC RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR PURPOSES OF THE 13 MAY 2013 NATIONAL, LOCAL AND ARMM ELECTIONS AND SUBSEQUENT ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 25 September 2012
  • Resolution No. 9521
    IN THE MATTER OF THE APPROVAL OF THE STATEMENT OF WORK BY SLI GLOBAL SOLUTIONS ON THE CONDUCT OF THE SOURCE CODE AND DOCUMENTATION REVIEW, FUNCTIONAL TESTING, TRUSTED BUILD AND END-TO-END TESTING OF THE AUTOMATED ELECTION SYSTEM FOR THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 13 September 2012
  • Resolution No. 9518
    GUIDELINES ON THE FILING OF CERTIFICATES OF CANDIDACY AND NOMINATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF OFFICIAL CANDIDATES OF REGISTERED POLITICAL PARTIES OR COALITION OF POLITICAL PARTIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 AUTOMATED SYNCHRONIZED NATIONAL, LOCAL AND ARMM REGIONAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 11 September 2012
  • Resolution No. 9513
    IN THE MATTER OF: (1) THE AUTOMATIC REVIEW BY THE COMMISSION EN BANC OF PENDING PETITIONS FOR REGISTRATION OF PARTY-LIST GROUPS; AND (2) SETTING FOR HEARING THE ACCREDITED PARTY-LIST GROUPS OR ORGANIZATIONS WHICH ARE EXISTING AND WHICH HAVE FILED MANIFESTATIONS OF INTENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 02 August 2012
  • Resolution No. 9512
    IN THE MATTER OF THE CREATION OF THE COMELEC’S COMMITTEE ON AUTOMATED ELECTIONS FOR STAKEHOLDERS
    Promulgation: 31 July 2012
  • Resolution No. 9486
    IN THE MATTER OF THE PROCUREMENT PROJECT “LEASE OF WAREHOUSE WITH CONFIGURATION FACILITIES” IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 AUTOMATED SYNCHRONIZED NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 29 June 2012
  • Resolution No. 9485
    RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR VOTING OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (PWDs) AND FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCESSIBLE POLLING PLACES IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 29 June 2012
  • Resolution No. 9479
    RULES AND REGULATION ON THE BEARING, CARRYING
    OR TRANSPORTING OF FIREARMS OR OTHER OTHER DEADLY WEAPONS IN CONNECTION
    WITH THE GENERAL REGISTRATION OF VOTERS
    IN THE ARMM TO BE CONDUCTED ON JULY 09 TO 18, 2012
    Promulgation: 27 June 2012
  • EM No. 12-040
    IN RE: PETITION FOR CONFIRMATION OF REPLACEMENT OF RESIGNED PARTY-LIST NOMINEE
    COALITION OF ASSOCIATIONS OF SENIOR CITIZENS IN THE PHILIPPINES, INC., (SENIOR CITIZENS PARTY-LIST
    Promulgation: 27 June 2012
  • Minute Resolution No. 12-0577
    IN THE MATTER OF THE IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR FOR THE OPTION-TO-PURCHASE IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 26 June 2012
  • IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR FOR THE OPTION-TO-PURCHASE
    IN THE MATTER OF THE IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR FOR THE OPTION-TO-PURCHASE IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 26 June 2012
  • Resolution No. 9476
    RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND DISCLOSURE IN CONNECTION WITH THE 13 MAY 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS AND SUBSEQUENT ELECTIONS THEREAFTER
    Promulgation: 22 June 2012
  • Resolution No. 9467
    RULES AND REGULATIONS ON THE CONDUCT OF RAFFLE OF ACCREDITED PARTY-LIST GROUPS
    FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING THE ORDER OF THEIR LISTING IN THE OFFICIAL BALLOT
    Promulgation: 15 June 2012
  • Resolution No. 9413
    IN THE MATTER OF AMENDING COMELEC RESOLUTION NO. 9366 PROMULGATED 21 FEBRUARY 2012, PARTICULARLY SECTION 3, RULE 4 THEREOF
    Promulgation: 27 April 2012
  • Resolution No. 9412
    IN RE: CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION OR DELISTING OF SECTORAL PARTIES, ORGANIZATIONS OR COALITIONS UNDER THE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM IN RELATION TO MAY 2013 ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 27 April 2012
  • Resolution No. 9385
    CALENDAR OF ACTIVITIES AND PERIODS OF CERTAIN PROHIBITED ACTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 03 April 2012
  • Resolution No. 9380
    IN THE MATTER OF RECONSTITUTING THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION COMMITTEE (TEC) IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 03 April 2012
  • Resolution No. 9372
    IN THE MATTER OF CORRECTING COMELEC RESOLUTION NO. 9366 PROMULGATED FEBRUARY 21, 2012, PARTICULARLY, SEC. 5(1) RULE 5 AND RULE 7 THEREOF
    Promulgation: 06 March 2012
  • Resolution No. 9371
    RULES AND REGULATIONS ON DETAINEE REGISTRATION AND VOTING IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS AND SUBSEQUENT ELECTIONS THEREAFTER
    Promulgation: 06 March 2012
  • Resolution No. 9366
    RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE: 1) FILING OF PETITIONS FOR REGISTRATION; 2) FILING OF MANIFESTATION OF INTENT TO PARTICIPATE; 3) SUBMISSION OF NAMES OF NOMINEES; AND 4) FILING OF DISQUALIFICATION CASES AGAINST NOMINEES OF PARTY-LIST GROUPS OR ORGANIZATIONS PARTICIPATING UNDER THE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM OF REPRESENTATION IN CONNECTION WITH THE MAY 13, 2013 NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS, AND SUBSEQUENT ELECTIONS THEREAFTER
    Promulgation: 21 February 2012
  • Minute Resolution No. 12-0159
    IN THE MATTER OF THE CREATION/COMPOSITION OF THE SPECIAL BIDS AND AWARDS COMMITTEE (SBAC), TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP, AND SBAC SECRETARIAT; AND THE CONDUCT OF PROCUREMENT TRAINING
    Promulgation: 14 February 2012
  • Minute Resolution No. 12-0139
    IN THE MATTER OF THE IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR FOR THE MAY 13, 2013 AUTOMATED NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS
    Promulgation: 07 February 2012
  • Resolution No. 9288
    DEFERMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMELEC RESOLUTION NO. 9271 DATED
    AUGUST 12, 2011 ENTITLED "RULES AND REGULATIONS IN THE CONDUCT OF THE RESUMPTION
    OF CONTINUING REGISTRATION OF VOTERS AND VALIDATION OF REGISTRATION RECORDS
    IN THE AUTONOMOUS REGION IN MUSLIM MINDANAO (ARMM)
    Promulgation: 29 September 2011
  • Resolution No. 9271
    RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE RESUMPTION OF THE SYSTEM OF
    CONTINUING REGISTRATION OF VOTERS AND VALIDATION OF REGISTRATION RECORDS
    IN THE AUTONOMOUS REGION IN MUSLIM MINDANAO (ARMM)
    Promulgation: 12 August 2011
  • Minute Resolution No. 11-0623
    IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST OF THE AKAP-PINOY AND PPCRV THAT THE
    NATIONAL DISABILITY PREVENTION AND REHABILITATION (NDPR)
    WEEK BE ALSO UTILIZED OR DECLARED AS WEEK- LONG REGISTRATION FOR PERSON WITH DISABILITY (PWDs)
    Promulgation: 07 June 2011
CREATED: 04.11.2012 LGA, UPDATED: 09.18.2012 CPTB