MANILA – House minority lawmakers unleashed a scathing critique on Thursday against a newly filed anti-political dynasty bill spearheaded by Speaker Faustino “Bojie” Dy III and Majority Leader Ferdinand Alexander “Sandro” Marcos, branding it “inadequate” and “misleading” despite its fanfare as a landmark reform. In separate statements, Liberal Party Rep. Leila de Lima and the three-member Makabayan bloc argued that House Bill No. 6771, which limits simultaneous office-holding among relatives, would still enable political families to dominate government across multiple levels, falling far short of the 1987 Constitution’s mandate to prohibit dynasties.
The bill’s filing follows President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s directive to prioritize anti-dynasty legislation to restore public trust amid the P20-billion flood control scandal, where graft probes into ghost projects and kickbacks have implicated lawmakers and officials, fueling the Trillion Peso March’s calls for systemic overhaul. Yet, critics contend HB 6771 is a diluted distraction, allowing “fat political dynasties” to persist.
Bill Provisions: A Narrow Ban on Concurrent Roles
HB 6771 proposes to bar spouses, siblings, and relatives within the fourth civil degree of affinity or consanguinity from holding the same elective positions simultaneously (Section 5). While it elevates the prohibition to the fourth degree—encompassing grandparents, parents, children, grandchildren, siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and first cousins—it only targets concurrent roles at the same level (e.g., two senators or two mayors). Overlapping positions across hierarchies, like a president, congressman, governor, and mayor from one family, would remain permissible.
Dy and Marcos, in their explanatory note, hailed the measure as a “faithful execution” of Article II, Section 26 of the 1987 Constitution, expressing hope it would bring Congress closer to its anti-dynasty mandate. House Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms Chair Zia Alonto Adiong noted he had awaited the leadership’s version before advancing deliberations on the 10 pending anti-dynasty bills, with initial hearings slated for January.
Minority’s Fire: ‘Watered Down and Further Dilutable’
De Lima lambasted the bill’s scope: “While it sets the higher bar of the fourth degree of consanguinity, this effectively means that a single family ‘could still occupy several national and local positions at the same time, from Congress down to barangay posts.’ That’s a clear political dynasty – a fat political dynasty.”
The Makabayan bloc—ACT Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio, Gabriela Rep. Sarah Elago, and Kabataan Rep. Renee Co—echoed the disdain, pointing out the measure’s loopholes: “For example, relatives who are senators, congressmen, governors, and mayors, or presidents, congressmen, governors, and mayors, can sit together. Relatives can also be congressmen from different districts. The only thing that is prohibited is relatives sitting together as senators or relatives sitting together as provincial or local officials.” They warned: “It is already watered down, and it is expected to be watered down even further once it is submitted to deliberation. We should not be satisfied with this proposal.”
The bloc tied the bill’s flaws to the flood scandal’s rot, where dynastic entrenchment allegedly enabled multibillion-peso graft, leaving communities exposed to typhoons like Uwan. Both Dy (from Isabela’s powerful clan, with two nephews in the 20th Congress) and Marcos (son of the president and nephew of Sen. Imee Marcos) hail from dynasties themselves, adding irony to their authorship.
Broader Context: A Mandate Unfulfilled
The 1987 Constitution’s anti-dynasty provision remains unenforced after nearly four decades, with 76 of 82 provinces under family rule. The Anti-Dynasty Network (ADN), a coalition of reform-minded dynasts like Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto and Aika Robredo, demands a stricter fourth-degree ban plus prohibitions on overlapping constituencies and party-list ties. Marcos’ prioritization, alongside anti-corruption and disaster resilience bills, has sparked hope but skepticism, with Akbayan Rep. Percival Cendaña daring certification as urgent to prove sincerity.
As bicameral talks loom, the minority’s salvo isn’t just scrutiny—it’s a summons: In the graft grapple’s gathering storm, a “landmark” bill that’s more loophole than legacy risks drowning in the deluge of doubt. Will Congress rise to the Constitution’s call, or let dynasties dictate another decade of delay?
Bill vs. Critics Snapshot:
| Aspect | HB 6771 Provision | Minority Critique |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Ban | 4th civil degree; no simultaneous same-level roles | Allows multi-level dominance (e.g., pres + gov + mayor) |
| Overlaps | None prohibited | Permits family in different districts/levels |
| Scope | National/local elective offices | Fails to curb “fat dynasties” across gov’t |
| Status | Filed; deliberations Jan 2026 | “Watered down”; demands stronger version |