SC tells Congress: Enact anti-political dynasty law

The Supreme Court (SC) has directed Congress to enact an anti-political dynasty law at the earliest opportunity, saying its failure to do so for 39 years constitutes grave abuse of discretion, the High Court's spokesperson, lawyer Camille Ting, said Wednesday.

At a press briefing, Ting said Article II, Section 26 of the 1987 Constitution requires Congress to enact a law prohibiting political dynasties.

“The Court directed Congress to comply with its mandatory constitutional duty to enact an anti-political dynasty law at the earliest opportunity, define political dynasties, and determine the scope of the prohibition,” she said.

The ruling stemmed from a petition filed in 2025 by several groups and individuals asking the High Court to direct Congress to enact a law against political dynasties.

Section 26 states: “The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

Ting said the use of the word “shall” makes clear that the State has a duty to prohibit political dynasties.

“The phrase ‘as may be defined by law’ does not give Congress the choice whether to prohibit political dynasties,” she said.

The SC, however, is leaving it to Congress to define what constitutes a political dynasty and determine the scope of the prohibition.

“The SC found that this interpretation is consistent with the intent of the Constitution’s frameworks. Records of the Constitutional Commission showed that the frameworks agreed to leave the definition of political dynasties to Congress after they could not agree on the specific family relationships… that should be covered,” Ting said.

“Thus, Congress has discretion over how political dynasties should be defined and prohibited, but not whether to enact the law,” she added.

House bill

In June, the House of Representatives passed on third and final reading an anti-political dynasty bill that would ban relatives up to the second degree of consanguinity or affinity from running for or occupying a post in the same constituency or jurisdiction.

However, business and civic groups have called on the Senate to reject the measure and urged President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to veto it, saying it would institutionalize political dynasties rather than dismantle them.

‘Widespread’

According to Ting, the SC took note of the numerous anti-political dynasty bills filed in Congress over the years that remained unacted upon.

The Court also considered studies on the prevalence of political dynasties and their relationship with the country's socioeconomic conditions, she said.

“The SC noted that political dynasties have remained widespread and have extended even to the party-list system,” Ting said.

“Despite changes in the composition of Congress over the years, no comprehensive anti-political dynasty law has been enacted, implying either a lack of interest, avoidance for convenience, or service of self-interest,” she added.

Ting said the SC trusts that Congress will comply with its directive.

She said the Court did not set a specific deadline because the Constitution itself does not provide one.

However, Ting said the absence of a constitutional deadline does not mean Congress may indefinitely postpone its constitutional duty.

Should Congress fail to comply, she advised the public to await further action from the Court.

Meanwhile, Ting said the SC ruled that the Commission on Elections (Comelec) cannot be compelled to issue implementing rules to disqualify candidates who belong to political dynasties or cancel their certificates of candidacy.

“Because there is currently no law defining the prohibition,” she said.— MCG, GMA News