The House anti-dynasty bill: Approved, but not applauded

Caloocan 2nd District Rep. Edgar Erice —File photo by Grig C. Montegrande | INQUIRER

(First of two parts)

After decades of gridlock that stymied previous Congresses, the House of Representatives has finally passed an antipolitical dynasty bill on third reading—seemingly fulfilling a long-delayed constitutional aspiration.

Article continues after this advertisement

Yet, implementing the proposed law as drafted will tell a different story.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

READ: Anti-dynasty version passed is what got biggest support — Sandro Marcos

Under its current provisions, for example, Juan dela Cruz could clinch the presidency, his father a governorship, his sister a mayoralty, and his other clan members congressional seats across the nation.

That is far from the curb envisioned by the 1987 Constitution. It still leaves dynasties free to stack power across every rung of government, giving them room to turn legislation into a seat-grabbing bonanza instead of restricting their access to positions of political and economic influence.

Interviews by the Inquirer with lawmakers, analysts, and a source familiar with the discussions suggest that the breakthrough came only after House leaders advanced a version tailored to win support in a chamber dominated by political families.

Article continues after this advertisement

Critics said the result was an antidynasty measure that largely spared family or clan interests, leaving ample room for them to continue to prevail in their bailiwicks and beyond despite House leaders’ claims that they followed the constitutional edict in crafting the bill.

The Constitution prohibits political dynasties but left the drafting of an enabling law to the very people naturally averse to limiting their own entrenched influence and dominance in the system.

Article continues after this advertisement

Public office in the Philippines has often been treated like an heirloom, being passed down from one family generation to another.

“When a few families are able to dominate access to political power across generations, it suggests that our electoral system, political parties, and regulatory mechanisms are not providing a level playing field,” Arjan Aguirre, an assistant professor of political science at the Ateneo de Manila University, said.

Competing pressures

“This limits political competition, discourages new leaders from emerging, and concentrates power in the hands of a few,” he added. “Strong democracies are built on strong institutions, not on the continued dominance of political families.”

Voting 267-20-7 on June 3, House members passed House Bill No. 8389 through a swirl of obstacles, including competing pressures from dynastic politicians who wanted an even tamer version and progressives who sought a more robust ban.

There was hardly any applause from the floor or the gallery when it happened. Only the palpable air of frustration as minority bloc members spent nearly an hour taking turns assailing for the record the version that had just been approved.

According to Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong, the chair of the suffrage and electoral reforms committee who navigated approval of the measure through the chamber, appeasing both sides was a tightrope walk. In the end, a palatable version backed by the House leadership was forged.

The finished bill, however, blocked amendments that could have strengthened it.

It failed to fully reflect survey results from a caravan of public hearings, where most participants wanted the ban on House posts covered, according to Caloocan Rep. Edgar Erice, a staunch critic of the bill, and a source who requested anonymity to discuss the matter.

The source said House Majority Leader Ferdinand Alexander “Sandro” Marcos III pushed his version of the proposal days before the Adiong committee’s final hearing on the proposal, where the panel was ordered to immediately pass the bill.

‘Game plan’

Erice said that minority lawmakers were dumbstruck by the quick approval of the bill in the committee. “We were surprised that the bill was suddenly passed,” he said.

The source added that the “game plan” was for the proposed changes to be set aside in the committee, with opposing lawmakers told to raise them on the floor. That move effectively locked the majority bloc’s version in place, as the electoral reforms panel did not entertain amendments before sending it to the plenary, according to Erice.

“After the public hearings, a meeting was called, and that was when they immediately adopted their [majority’s] version,” Erice said.

While revisions could still be proposed during floor debates, their fate hinges on whether the plenary majority chooses to adopt them.

Adiong, who defended the bill on the floor, insisted that it went through the legislative process judiciously, for more than a month, including holding exhaustive public consultations.

“There’s no railroading,” he said.

Marcos’ role in the process was limited to filing a version of the bill, which drew the broadest support and the required number for approval despite an initial pushback in a chamber where eight out of 10 lawmakers belong to political clans, Adiong said.

He said there were two sides against the bill—one calling it “diluted” and the other describing it as “extreme.” The premise used as a “solid foundation” to argue against both was the Constitution itself, noted Adiong, a member of a political clan governing Lanao del Sur, a province of 1.3 million people.

‘Nothing will change’

Erice believes the bill will not meaningfully alter Philippine politics as it would not curb the dynastic influence of district representatives. “It’s a bill that institutionalizes or legalizes the existence of political dynasties,” he said. “They agreed to it because nothing will change.”

The “Prohibited Dynasty Relationships” of HB 8389 sets specific bars against a person with relatives up to the second degree of consanguinity or affinity—by blood or marriage, “whether legitimate or illegitimate, full or half-blood.” These are the person’s spouse, parents and grandparents, children and grandchildren, and siblings.

The bar is applied to elective positions at three different government levels—national, provincial and local.

Applied horizontally, it does not allow a president to have a second-degree relative holding another national position, such as vice president or senator.

Similarly, no relatives within this degree can serve simultaneously in the same province as governor, vice governor, and board member, or in the same city or municipality as mayor, vice mayor, and councilor.

The bill enforces these restrictions with two specific rules.

For different positions within the same political unit: If second-degree relatives are elected to different positions in the same local government (such as mayor and vice mayor), only the candidate elected to the higher office will assume the post.

For multiseat positions: in the event relatives are elected to positions with multiple seats within the same unit—such as the Senate, provincial boards, or municipal councils—only the candidate with the highest number of votes can take office.

The bill disallows spouses or second-degree relatives from “simultaneously holding membership in the House of Representatives within the same legislative district.” Critics say this particular provision is absurd and unnecessary because the Constitution itself already limits one representative per district.

Practically exempted

Opponents of the bill also point to another provision that allows relatives of all civil degrees to run for any congressional seat, essentially exempting House members from the dynasty prohibitions as long as they run in different districts.

Because HB 8389 does not ban vertical dynasties across different levels of government, a mayor may have a father for governor, a brother for president, and another sibling or cousin for congressman, or even a mayor who is a sibling in another town or city.

Adiong explained that House members operate in “such a unique way” that family ties do not necessarily shape how they vote on legislation. “In fact, in many cases, their positions are conflicting,” he said.

The draft approved by the House electoral reforms committee had banned relatives from simultaneously running in the same legislative district, but it was struck down. Adiong said that running for office and being elected are different matters.

If the bill became law and applied today, Sen. Imee Marcos would not be allowed to take her seat as her brother, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., is the President. But her nephew, Congressman Marcos, could remain in the House.

The bill did not seem to take account of the current situation in the Senate where there are four pairs of siblings, three of whom ran separately—in the national and the midterm polls.

If its rules were applied during the 2022 national elections, Jinggoy Estrada, who landed 12th, will have to leave behind his half-brother, 10th placer JV Ejercito.

(To be concluded)

If the person of reference is elected President

If the person of reference is elected District Representative

If the person of reference is elected Governor