Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Problems of the Panganiban Formula: Underallocation, Nonallocation, Overallocation


The Panganiban Formula was introduced by the Supreme Court when it ruled on the case Veterans Federal Party vs. Comelec (2001). In the said formula, a party-list group is entitled to one seat if it reaches the two-percent threshold of all the party-list votes. The additional number of seats that the party-list group shall receive is determined as follows:

1. if the party-list group has the most number of votes (called as the first party) and if it obtains
a. at least 6% of the total number of party-list votes, then it shall receive two more seats; or
b. at least 4% but less than 6% of the total number of party-list votes, then it shall receive one more seat, or
2. if the party-list group obtains the same number of votes as the first party then it receives the same number of additional seats as the first party, or
3. if the party-list group obtains at least one-half but less than the number of votes of the first party, then it shall receive one more seat, or
4. if the party-list group obtains less than one-half of that of the first party, then it does not receive any additional seat.
Party-List Canvass Report No. 30, the latest Party-list Tally of the Comelec shows that there are 17 party-list groups that obtain at least 2% of the total party-list votes where Buhay is the first party with 7.418753% of the total party-list votes. If we apply the Panganiban Formula we have the following results.

The 1987 Constitution mandates that the party-list shall constitute 20% of the total number of representatives in the House of Representatives including the party-list. There are 220 legislative districts now, the total number of party-list seats available is 220/4 = 55 seats. Note that 55/(220+55) = 0.2 or 20%.

Hence, the Panganiban Formula allocates only 23/55 = 0.41818182 or 41.82% of the total number of seats available. This is a case of underallocation.

In the 2007 party-list election, ninety-three party-list groups were allowed to participate by the Comelec. Thus, there is a possibility that no party will be able to reach the 2%-threshold. If this happens, no party-list group will receive a seat and the party-list will not be represented in the House of Representatives. This is a case of noallocation.

If the first party obtains 6% of the total party-list votes and 27 party-list groups obtains 3% of the the total party-list votes, then there will be 28 party-list groups that are entitled to a seat and their combined share of the party-list votes is 27(3%) + 6% = 87%. Using the Panganiban Formula, the first party shall receive 3 seats and the 27 party-list groups shall receive 2 seats each. The Panganiban Formula will allocate 3+54 = 57 seats. This allocation is two seats over the available number of seats.

Actually, the largest possible allocation of the Panganiban Formula is 65 seats where the first party obtains 6% and there are 31 party-list groups with 3% of the total party-list votes. This allocation is 10 seats over the available number of seats.

These are cases of overallocation.



4 comments:

Deany Bocobo said...

offtopic lex, but I just want to mention to you that business of the Supreme Court adopting the writ of amparo and coming habeas data. It's very impt I think and bears close watching now...am going to publish a critique but haven't gotten hold of their "draft". I think it's unconstitutional, but how do you question it when the supreme court enacts legislation through "rules of court" and grabs executive power along the way too?

Deany Bocobo said...

Lex I just posted on that writ of amparo biznes. I would appreciate your observations here or on my blog.

Jun said...

You have a very interesting blog Sir. So you are a teacher in Ateneo. My sister in-law is planning to study there next semester. She’s also from Bohol.

Jun said...

Keep up the good work and thanks for visiting my site. God bless!