Petitioners challenging key Bangsamoro laws before the Supreme Court (SC) have warned that moves to weaken anti-political dynasty safeguards in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) could allow entrenched families to consolidate power ahead of the region’s first parliamentary elections.
In a very urgent manifestation filed before the SC, petitioners Sultan Alim Saad I. Amate and Maulana L. Mamutuk sought the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) or status quo ante order (SQAO) against the implementation of Bangsamoro Autonomy Act (BAA) 86 and portions of BAA 88 while the constitutionality of the measures is under review.
The petitioners raised concern over separate proposals in the Bangsamoro Parliament that seek to remove anti-dynasty restrictions under the Bangsamoro Electoral Code and the Bangsamoro Local Governance Code.
According to the petitioners, weakening safeguards against political dynasties would run contrary to the goals of the BARMM political transition and undermine democratic representation in the region.
They also argued that the districting provisions under BAA 86 directly affect political representation and warned that elections conducted under allegedly unconstitutional districts could cause lasting damage to the integrity of the electoral process.
The petitioners further claimed that the Bangsamoro Transition Authority (BTA) and the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) failed to comply with the Supreme Court’s April 8, 2026 directive requiring them to comment on the petition and submit documents related to the questioned laws.
The High Court had directed the respondents to provide barangay-level population data, official BARMM maps, legislative deliberation records, and other supporting documents tied to the challenged measures.
However, the petitioners said the respondents neither submitted the required records nor explained their alleged noncompliance despite the lapse of the deadline set by the Court.
They maintained that continued implementation of the questioned laws while the case remains unresolved could result in “irreparable constitutional injury,” especially as preparations continue for the first BARMM parliamentary elections.
In their pleading, the petitioners argued that there is “no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy” available, making the issuance of provisional relief necessary to protect the rights of BARMM voters and preserve the sovereignty of the Bangsamoro electorate.
They added that temporarily suspending the implementation of the contested laws would not prejudice respondents because “no party holds a legitimate interest in implementing an unconstitutional act.”
