The current Senate controversy over remote participation—including debate and voting—of senators hiding from arrest or being detained on charges of corruption and plunder has drawn interest in procedures of local legislatures as well.
Contrasting Rules on Virtual Sessions
The Cebu City Council IRP, or Internal Rules of Procedure, differs from the Cebu Provincial Board IRP on the matter of digital or virtual sessions. Neither rules of procedure of the two local legislatures grant remote participation for a member or some members while the legislative body itself conducts a physical session at City Hall or the Capitol. DILG Opinion bans sessions held outside the LGU or closed to the public but doesn't expressly prohibit—not yet?—electronic sessions.
City Council: Unconditional Use of Electronic Means
The City Council allows without condition or qualification the use of any of the kinds of communication, leaving it to the Secretariat to provide the platform. Under Section 2, Article 1 (Sessions), the City Council's IRP provides: "The Sanggunian may conduct its sessions through face-to-face, teleconferencing, video-conferencing, and other remote or electronic means of communication." The Secretariat "shall be in charge of providing for the appropriate platform." The City Council's IRP has requirements for executive sessions, none for virtual or digital sessions. Virtual sessions must be covered by the IRP provision that the rules governing regular or special sessions shall apply to virtual or digital sessions.
Provincial Board: Stricter Requirements
In contrast, the PB's IRP separately imposes requirements for the conduct of a virtual or digital session, namely: It shall be conducted only in cases of "public emergencies, fortuitous events, disasters, or other analogous circumstances." A PB member may initiate "motu propio" or upon the governor's request, a special session. If a quorum cannot be immediately secured, the PB may convene a "hybrid session," requiring the physical presence at the session hall of the presiding officer and at least three other members, or a total of at least four members in physical attendance. Other members through online teleconference will raise the number to constitute a quorum. A requisite is that no hybrid session shall be scheduled unless there's a "prior commitment" of PB members "sufficient to constitute a quorum."
Length and Detail of Rules
Comparing on length alone, the PB rules of procedure on virtual or digital sessions contain three main paragraphs, one of which has three sub-paragraphs. In contrast, the City Council IRP has only one paragraph, providing for the right to use different means of communication, along with physical face-to-face, and for its Secretariat to supply the "appropriate platform." In effect it says, Whatever kind or form, bring it on. The PB IRP doesn't just demand service from its Secretariat. The office of the secretary, the PB rules say, "shall provide and maintain an online platform that ensures every member a convenient, secure, and adequate opportunity to participate in deliberations and proceedings, both physically and virtually."
Gap for Individual Remote Participation
What if only one, two, or a few ask for digital participation? IRPs of the legislatures of the two big LGUs in Cebu are silent in case one or some members want to participate virtually in an otherwise face-to-face session of the body. There's no provision in the IRP of the City Council or the PB that covers remote participation of a member or less than the full body. That is, in a regular or special physical session where only one or some of the members want to vote or debate by electronic means. Under City Council or PB rules of procedure, the body as a whole goes total-digital or, in the case of the Capitol lawmakers, hybrid-digital. The rules don't apply to a situation where a councilor or PB member on, say, a trip outside Cebu may need to join virtually a physical face-to-face session at City Hall or the Capitol.
DILG Opinion on Virtual Sessions
DILG opinion on the issue in sum affirms the need for sessions of the local legislature to be (a) physical, (b) open to the public, and (c) conducted inside the jurisdiction of the local government that it serves and represents. DILG policy may be outdated on the matter of using electronic means in cases where physical sessions cannot be held, such as during disaster or any other public crisis or emergency. In Opinion #81 dated December 28, 2023, DILG "inferred" on the requirement of physical presence of Sanggunian members when conducting a session. "There is no law, rule and regulation .... which authorizes the local Sanggunian to conduct sessions through teleconference, video conferencing and other electronic means." Not even when Covid-19 pandemic struck the country March 9, 2020 to July 22, 2023. Well, currently under rules adopted in July 2025, both the Cebu Provincial Board and the City Council allow virtual sessions, with the PB hewing closely to the existing law and the reason why physical sessions are required. And there's no express prohibition, which must give local legislative bodies some latitude in adopting rules that meet exigencies with new methods and devices.
