A quiet question from a fellow educator after a coffee break has echoed across communities, capturing a widespread disillusionment with the party-list system in the Philippines. What was designed as a political equalizer for the marginalized now feels, to many, like a reunion of familiar surnames and entrenched interests.
The Broken Promise of Representation
The party-list system was born with a simple, powerful promise: to widen the halls of Congress for those perpetually left on the margins. Its intended beneficiaries were clear—farmers, fisherfolk, persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, transport workers, and other sectors whose daily struggles rarely inform national policy. It was envisioned as a constitutional tool for amplifying silenced voices.
Decades later, that vision appears distorted. A 2025 report by the election watchdog Kontra Daya delivered a stark finding: 86 out of 156 accredited party-list groups had ties to business interests or established political clans. For teachers striving to teach lessons on civic duty and fairness, this statistic is more than concerning; it is a direct contradiction to the principles they impart.
The evidence is woven into recent electoral history. The DUMPER PTDA, which claimed to represent taxi drivers, was linked to a powerful provincial family. Agimat PL leaned on the Revilla political name while purporting to advocate for workers. The Duterte Youth group faced legal battles over misrepresentation. These are not isolated cases but a pattern revealing how weak regulations and strong political incentives have corrupted the mechanism.
A Public Demand for Authentic Reform, Not Abolition
Despite profound frustration, conversations with teachers, fisherfolk, students, and health workers reveal a consensus against abolishing the system. The prevailing sentiment is not resignation but a determined call to reclaim it. As one young organizer articulated, the system is not broken; it has been "borrowed by those who never needed it." The goal is to restore ownership to its rightful holders.
This has crystallized into several concrete public demands for reform:
Stricter, Authentic Screening: Communities and advocates now insist on verifiable proof of long-term sectoral work and living, active membership—not just advocacy that emerges during election season. It mirrors what educators call "authentic assessment": show your genuine work, not just your slogan.
Clear Definition of 'Marginalized': The Constitution's broad definition has allowed for bad-faith interpretations. There is now a loud call for measurable criteria based on income, occupational risk, and cultural exclusion. As a mother from an informal settlement in Jaro, Iloilo, stated, clarity in the law is a form of protection for the vulnerable.
Genuine Sectoral Nominees: The public insists that nominees must have lived the experience of the sectors they represent. It is a matter of common sense, not romanticism. A farmer's son from Barotac Nuevo expressed the desire for a representative who knows the weight of a failed harvest, not just the vocabulary of farming.
Transparency and Accountability: Voters want clear documentation of their representatives' legislative work, attendance, and use of funds. While groups like ACT Teachers, Gabriela, and Kabataan have shown visible advocacy, others have been criticized as mere "wallpaper congressmen"—present in title but absent in contribution.
The Path Forward: Political Will and Civic Vigilance
The need for reform is recognized even by the system's framers. Former Constitutional Commissioner Christian Monsod has clarified that while the party-list was not meant to be exclusive, it was always intended to deepen—not dilute—representation. He points to the lack of firm anti-dynasty rules and poorly enforced guidelines as core issues.
Senator Bam Aquino's 2025 reform bill aligns with these grassroots demands. Its proposals for stronger screening, disqualifying nominees linked to incumbent officials, and requiring community-vetted sectoral membership echo what citizens have been articulating in barangay assemblies and classrooms nationwide.
The solution, therefore, is reform, not demolition. It requires political will, civic honesty, and patience. Democracy strengthens not when anyone can run, but when those who do are authentically rooted in the communities they claim to represent. As teachers often tell their students, "Show me your work, not your excuse." The nation now asks the same of its party-list system: to demonstrate its work for the marginalized, not just offer excuses for its failure.
