Akbayan Partylist Rep. Chel Diokno said efforts to curb political dynasties should also address the partylist system, which he said has become another avenue for families to gain and retain political power.

Diokno noted that the anti-political dynasty bill approved by the House of Representatives does not prohibit members of the same family from holding office through partylist groups, a restriction that was included in Akbayan’s proposed version of the measure.

“Our proposal for the Anti-Dynasty Law and our separate proposal for partylist reform included a provision preventing members of the same family from obtaining public office through partylist groups and other national positions,” he said in a radio interview.

According to Diokno, the partylist system has drifted away from its original constitutional purpose of giving marginalized and underrepresented sectors a voice in Congress.

“The reason we have a partylist system is not for contractors or political families. The Constitution recognized partylists so that various sectors, especially marginalized groups, would have the opportunity to participate in the passage of laws that affect them,” he said.

The lawmaker added that concerns go beyond family ties, pointing out that some partylist groups no longer genuinely represent the sectors they claim to serve.

Term-sharing deals

He said reforms are needed to establish stricter standards on who may qualify as a partylist organization and who may legitimately represent such groups in Congress.

Diokno’s position was echoed by 1Sambayan convenor and law professor Howard Calleja, who said the partylist system has also become linked to term-sharing arrangements and political dynasties.

“Political parties and the partylist system need to be studied. The law needs to be amended because, for me, dynasties are connected to the partylist system and to term-sharing practices,” Calleja said.

Both Diokno and Calleja also expressed support for the Senate version of the Anti-Political Dynasty Bill, which they said imposes stricter restrictions on political families.

While both the House and Senate proposals prohibit relatives within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity from simultaneously seeking elective office, the Senate version allows a family to field only one candidate for elective office at any given time.

The House version, approved on third and final reading on 3 June, still permits members of the same political family to run for different positions in separate jurisdictions.

Pending at Senate

“I would prefer the Senate version over the House version because it aligns more closely with the mandate of the Constitution,” Diokno said.

Calleja agreed, saying the Senate proposal would significantly reduce the influence of entrenched political families.

“Although it will not eliminate all dynasties, it could remove perhaps 20 to 30 percent of them,” he said.

The House recently passed House Bill 8389, its version of the Anti-Political Dynasty Act, but the Senate has yet to approve a counterpart measure, leaving the proposed reform pending in the upper chamber.