Compel Congress to create enabling law vs political dynasties, SC asked

Twenty-five years after the Philippine Constitution was ratified in 1987, a provision banning political dynasties remains without an enabling law. Congress, some of whose members belong to political clans, has yet to define what political dynasties mean. On Thursday, former Vice President Teofisto Guingona Jr. led a group of petitioners in asking the Supreme Court to compel Congress to finally craft an enabling law to address the matter.   In a 26-page petition for mandamus, Guingona's group said the high court has the authority to compel Congress by way of mandamus, especially since passing an enabling law against political dynasties is considered "ministerial because it is a constitutional command." The other petitioners were Dante Jimenez of the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption, Leonard De Vera, Eduardo Bringas, Vicente Velasquez, and Raymundo Jarque.

 

"It is respectfully prayed that the Honorable Supreme Court issue a Writ of Mandamus against the Philippine Senate and House of Representatives, requiring them to enact a law prohibiting and defining political dynasties as mandated by Article II, Section 26 of the Constitution," the petition read. Under Article II, Section 26 of the Constitution states that:: "The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law."

 

"The clear intent of the framers of the Constitution is to prohibit political dynasties and it is the duty of Congress to define the same. Congress is given the discretion in defining political dynasty but not the discretion on when to enact the same," the petitioners said. Guingona bill

 

The petitioners cited a bill against political dynasty introduced by then-Sen. Guingona in 1987. The bill passed the Senate with 16 votes in favor, three opposition, and one abstention.

 

"Congress [then] took no action on the bill passed by the Senate. The bill died in the House of Representatives," the petitioners said.

 

The petitioners added it was "appalled by Congress' inaction... Every bill in Congress against political dynasties was stifled by congressional inaction." A bill against political dynasty, filed by Senatpr Miriam Defensor-Santiago, is pending before the Senate. A counterpart bill was filed by Rep. Teddy Casiño at the House of Representatives.

 

Earlier, petitioner Louis "Barok" Biraogo filed a similar petition for mandamus, asking the high court to require the Commission on Elections to enforce a ban on political dynasties during elections. 

 

He said the "spirit" and "intent" of the particular provision of the Constitution, instead of its letters, should prevail even without the backing of law defining what a political dynasty is.

 

Biraogo blamed Congress for its inaction in coming up with an enabling statute, and cited a Supreme Court ruling stating that "cataclysmic consequences" would crop up if Congress would be allowed "to ignore and practically nullify the mandate of the fundamental law."

 

"The sad reality is that the awaited legislation remains nowhere in sight even after the lapse of the 25 years since the charter was ratified," he said. But Elections chair Sixto Brillantes Jr. has maintained that an enabling law is needed before the poll body can go after relatives of incumbent elected officials who are seeking elective posts.