SC: Political dynasties insulting, an affront to the Constitution

June 7, 2026 | 12:00am

MANILA, Philippines — The prevalence of political dynasties remains an insult to the 1987 Constitution that explicitly bans them, the Supreme Court (SC) declared.

According to an SC decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio Kho Jr., “That 80 percent of the district seats in the House of Representatives and 75 percent of the country’s cities are ‘ruled’ by political dynasties is an affront to the Constitution.”
Kho cited two reports from the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) in 2025 that revealed 212 out of 254 district representatives, and 113 out of 149 city mayors, belong to political dynasties.

From the 212 winning district representatives, 174 “have at least one relative who was elected to a local position (in the May 2025 elections) or is serving a term until 2028.”
The PCIJ reports gave as examples the Marcoses and Dutertes, who both secured their bailiwicks Ilocos Norte and Davao City.

Article II, Section 26 of the 1987 Constitution mandated a prohibition on political dynasties “as may be defined by law.”

“To be clear, the reasons behind the prohibition of political dynasties are not difficult to discern. Time and again, the concentration of political power to a few families or clans, long held to be the aim and effect of political dynasties, has been shown to ‘skew economic and political institutions to favor and protect the private interests of elites,’” Kho said.

“And perhaps more unfortunately, political dynasties and elite interests thrive and become even more predatory the more underdeveloped and farther their localities are from the national capital,” he added.
Kho, former commissioner of the Commission on Elections, said the SC recognized that “apart from Republic Act 10742, no law before or since has provided a workable definition of what constitutes a political dynasty.”

Through a unanimous vote, the SC denied the petition for certiorari filed by Merson Calubag, and “affirmed in toto” the Comelec’s ruling to cancel his certificate of candidacy (COC) for Sangguniang Kabataan chairman of Barangay Magtangale in the town of San Francisco, Surigao del Norte in the 2023 barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan polls.

Calubag “misrepresented” in his COC by declaring he had no relative in public office despite his mother being an incumbent kagawad at the time, according to the 10-page decision promulgated last April 8 and published on the SC website on June 1.

The SC also ruled Calubag failed to prove he did not receive the summons from the poll body, even by email.

Only SC Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh did not vote, being on leave. The SC also ordered the copy of the decision “furnished to the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Philippines for their reference.”