Aksyon Magsasaka-Partido Tinig ng Masa v.

Comelec
Petitioners: Aksyon Magsasaka-Partido Tinig ng Masa (AKMA-PTM)
Respondents: Commission on Elections
Topic: House of Representatives
Summary: The petition assails COMELEC for prematurely and erroneously
allocating additional seats to certain party-list groups proclaimed as initial winners
in the 2013 automated elections. The Court ruled that the COMELEC did not err in
the allocation of additional seats because it is authorized by law to proclaim winning
candidates if the remaining uncanvassed returns will not affect the result of the
elections and COMELECs allocation of additional seats was in accordance with the
BANAT ruling.
Facts:
Petition for certiorari and mandamus assailing the respondent COMELEC for
grave abuse of discretion in prematurely and erroneously allocating
additional seats to certain party-list groups proclaimed as initial winners in
the 2013 automated elections
Petitioner was among the accredited candidates for party-list representative
during the national and local elections held on May 13, 2013.
On May 24, 2013, COMELEC proclaimed 14 party-list groups which obtained
at least 2% of the total votes cast for the party-list system and were thus
entitled to one guaranteed seat each.
Petitioners arguments:
o COMELECs allocation of additional seats for those two-percenters and
38 other groups proclaimed as initial winners greatly prejudiced its
interest and those other parties or organizations as potential winners
o Proclamation was hasty and premature because at the time the
canvassing was still ongoing, there were still uncanvassed and
untransmitted results from Mindanao, uncanvassed overseas and local
absentee votes and results from special elections.
o Projected figures of COMELEC were difficult and impracticable
considering there existed a considerable number of untransmitted
results due to breakdown and malfunctioning of the PCOS machines.
o Allocation of votes did not conform with Sec 11, RA 7941 and BANAT
product of the percentage of votes multiplied by additional seats
available is not an integer
OSGs comment:
o COMELEC faithfully adhered to the procedure prescribed in BANAT.
Party-list groups with products of less than one were still allocated
seats depending on their rank and availability of seats.
o Votes yet to be canvassed did not materially affect the results of the
elections
Issue:
WoN COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in allocating the additional seats for
the 38 party-list candidates proclaimed as winners in the May 13, 2013 elections
NO

COMELEC is authorized by law to proclaim winning candidates if the

remaining uncanvassed election returns will not affect the result of the
elections
o Sec 233, Omnibus Election Code authorizes the board of canvassers
to proclaim winning candidates in cases of delayed or lost election
returns if the missing returns will not affect the results of the election
o Barbers v. Comelec
o There was no significant change in the rankings as per the latest
canvass and therefore COMELEC had sufficient basis for proclaiming
the initial winners and reserving only five buffer seats
o No competent evidence had been presented by petitioner in support of
its allegations on irregularities and glitches in the POCS machines
o Factual question of number of uncanvassed votes should have been
raised before the COMELEC because this Court is not a trial of facts.
o COMELEC enjoys presumption of good faith and regularity in the
performance of official duty

COMELECs allocation of additional seats for party-list in accordance with

ruling in BANAT
BANAT
o additional seats maximum seats reserved under the Party List
System less the guaranteed seats
o Allocation of additional seats not limited to the two-percenters
o Two steps in the second round of seat allocation
1. Percentage x Remaining Available Seats = whole integer partys
share in the remaining available seats
Remaining available seats = maximum seats reserved under the
party-list system (55) guaranteed seats of the two-percenters
(17) = 38
2. We assign one party-list seat to each of the parties next in rank
until all available seats are completely distributed.
o
o

Party-list groups garnering less than 2% of the party-list votes may yet
qualify for a seat in the allocation of additional seats depending on
their ranking in the second round.
Petitioner mistakenly assumed that the statement in BANAT disallowing
fractional seats insofar as the additional seats for the two-percenter in
the second rond should also apply to those party-list groups with less
than 2% votes