THE Commission on Elections (Comelec) has expressed confidence that Congress will pass the proposed anti-political dynasty (APD) bill by next year or before the 2028 presidential and vice presidential elections.
Comelec Chairman George Erwin Garcia said Tuesday that all poll stakeholders, including the Comelec, Congress and civil society, were supportive of an APD law, as mandated by the Constitution.
“I believe that this will not take long because of the concerted efforts, starting from the president, the Senate, the House. It simply means that our honorable members of Congress are the ones pushing the Anti-Political Dynasty Law,” added Garcia, noting that the only hard part is the technical aspect.
He said that the Constitution’s declaration of policy clearly prohibits a political dynasty, and it tasked Congress “to define it, make a law for its implementation.”
Garcia said the APD provision, although not defined by the framers of the Constitution, was included under Article II on the Declaration of Principles and State Policies.
“It is actually a policy of the State, The Right of Suffrage is under Article V, the Declaration of [Principles and] Policies is superior to any other provision after Article II,” he said. “There is no more issue whether we need the anti-political dynasty law or not. We have no more debate on that. Will it affect the economy? We have no issue with that. The question is, how can we implement it correctly?” added Garcia.
Meanwhile, election watchdog Legal Network for Truthful Elections (Lente) said the prohibition against political dynasties is not solely an electoral issue, but is part of a broader issue of effective public service.
It pointed out that the anti-dynasty provision is “sui generis,” a situation which is distinct and thus not easily categorized under existing legal frameworks or conventions, and as such, should not be limited to undergo the same usual processes that all of us are used to in elections.
As to the definition, Lente proposed that it be defined as the running and subsequent occupation of family members in more than one position at the national level, more than one position at the provincial level, and more than one position at the municipal, city, and or barangay level.
So, after one electoral cycle, one family can occupy a maximum of 3 positions at the same time. One national, one provincial, and one municipal, city and/or municipal level.
As to the degree of consanguinity or affinity of family members, it is proposed to follow what is already provided in the SK Reform Law — prohibition extends up to the second degree of consanguinity or affinity.
As to the implementation mechanism, the primacy of the anti-dynasty provision as a constitutional directive should be controlling, in relation to the grounds for disqualification as enumerated under our election laws.
