Rep. Baguilat v.
Speaker Alvarez
G.R. No. 227757, 25 July 2017
PERLAS-BERNABE, J:
Doctrine:
Section 16 (3), Article VI of the Constitution vests in the House of
Representatives the sole authority to, inter alia, "determine the rules of its
proceedings." These "legislative rules, unlike statutory laws, do not have the
imprints of permanence and obligatoriness during their effectivity. In fact, they
'are subject to revocation, modification or waiver at the pleasure of the body
adopting them.
Facts:
On July 25, 2016, on the opening of the 17th Congress, Sen. then-Acting Floor Leader
Rep. Fariñas and Rep. Jose Atienza (Rep. Atienza) had an interchange before the
Plenary, wherein the latter elicited the following from the former: (a) all those who vote
for the winning Speaker shall belong to the Majority and those who vote for the other
candidates shall belong to the Minority; (b) those who abstain from voting shall likewise
be considered part of the Minority; and (c) the Minority Leader shall be elected by the
members of the Minority. Thereafter, the Elections for the Speakership were held, "[w]ith
252 Members voting for [Speaker] Alvarez, eight [(8)] voting for Rep. Baguilat, seven
[(7)] voting for Rep. Suarez, 21 abstaining and one [(1)] registering a no vote". Thus,
resulting in Speaker Alvarez being the duly elected Speaker of the House of
Representatives of the 17th Congress.
Petitioners in this case hoped that as a "long-standing tradition" of the House — where
the candidate who garnered the second (2nd)-highest number of votes for Speakership
automatically becomes the Minority Leader — Rep. Baguilat would be declared and
recognized as the Minority Leader.
On August 1, 2016, one of the "abstentionists," Representative Harlin Neil Abayon, III
(Rep. Abayon), manifested before the Plenary that on July 27, 2016, those who did not
vote for Speaker Alvarez (including the 21 "abstentionists") convened and elected Rep.
Suarez as the Minority Leader. Thereafter, on August 15, 2016, Rep. Fariñas moved for
the recognition of Rep. Suarez as the Minority Leader. This was opposed by Rep.
Lagman essentially on the ground that various "irregularities" attended Rep. Suarez's
election as Minority Leader, particularly: (a) that Rep. Suarez was a member of the
Majority as he voted for Speaker Alvarez, and that his "transfer" to the Minority was
irregular; and (b) that the "abstentionists" who constituted the bulk of votes in favor of
Rep. Suarez's election as Minority Leader are supposed to be considered independent
members of the House, and thus, irregularly deemed as part of the Minority. However,
Rep. Lagman's opposition was overruled, and consequently, Rep. Suarez was officially
recognized as the House Minority Leader.
Thus, prompted the petition for mandamus, insisting that Rep. Baguilat should be
recognized as the Minority Leader in light of: (a) the "long-standing tradition" in the
House where the candidate who garnered the second (2nd)-highest number of votes for
Speakership automatically becomes the Minority Leader; and (b) the irregularities
attending Rep. Suarez's election to said Minority Leader position.
Issue:
Is the claim of the petitioner on the “long-standing tradition” in the house can legally
compel the respondents to recognize Rep. Baguilat as the Minority Leader?
Ruling:
No. The court held that the petitioners have no clear legal right to the reliefs sought.
The court held that Section 16 (3), Article VI of the Constitution vests in the
House of Representatives the sole authority to, inter alia, "determine the rules of
its proceedings." These "legislative rules, unlike statutory laws, do not have the
imprints of permanence and obligatoriness during their effectivity. In fact, they
'are subject to revocation, modification or waiver at the pleasure of the body
adopting them.
As evident in the facts, prior to the Speakership Election held on July 25, 2016,
then-Acting Floor Leader Rep. Fariñas responded to a parliamentary inquiry from
Rep. Atienza as to who would elect the Minority Leader of the House of
Representatives. Rep. Fariñas then articulated that: (a) all those who vote for the
winning Speaker shall belong to the Majority and those who vote for other
candidates shall belong to the Minority; (b) those who abstain from voting shall
likewise be considered part of the Minority; and (c) the Minority Leader shall be
elected by the members of the Minority. Thereafter, the election of the Speaker of
the House proceeded without any objection from any member of Congress,
including herein petitioners.
In the absence of a showing of a clear and unmistakable present right on the part
of petitioners, considering the possibility of shifting political alliances.
