Is 2025 in the air? Following a stalled vote over a proposed reorganization of the chairmanship of the Baguio City Council’s existing committees, the council has come into open debate and conflict over interpretations of the majority rule and vote in the conduct of council functions.
The debate started over a January 29 council vote on a proposal from City Councilor Jose Molintas to reorganize the city’s standing committees, with 8 councilors voting in favor and 7 voting against the proposal. As a result, Vice Mayor Faustino Olowan ruled the motion “lost”, basing the decision on the Sangguinian’s Internal Rules of Procedure (IRP) which state that the majority vote is 9 out of 15 following a formula based on the number of present council members.
The 8 council members in favor of reorganization were Councilors Jose Molintas, Peter Fianza, Arthur Allad-iw, Isabelo Cosalan Jr., Lilia Farinas, Fred Bagbagen, Indigenous Peoples Mandatory Representative (IPMR) Maximo Edwin, and Sangguniang Kabataan Federation President John Rhey Mananeng, while the 7 council members who opposed the reorganization were Councilors Elmer Datuin, Benny Bomogao, Betty Lourdes Tabanda, Leandro Yangot Jr., Mylen Victoria Yaranon, Vladimir Cayabas, and Rocky Aliping.
Later sessions would see council debates on the validity of the IRP, with Fianza and Molintas in a February 5 session citing Supreme Court precedents in the cases of La Carlota vs. Rojo and Javier vs. Cadiao, both rulings stating that a simple majority of 8 votes is enough for proposed actions, such as committee reorganization.
With Olowan “correcting” his earlier ruling, other members of the council questioned whether the vice-mayor has authority to unilaterally revoke his ruling without council action, and also spoke of the necessity to adhere to rulings made in accordance with the council’s IRP. The move also brought into question the validity of the IRP itself, with Councilor Cayabas asking for a potential review of the IRP, while Yangot stressed the need to have the council follow IRP, and the potential ramifications of undoing an action in opposition to IRP.
Yaranon has meanwhile sought clarity on the rationale behind needing a committee reorganization, stating that only 2 councilors have asked for its conduct and have not even specified which committees are not performing.
After a debate on February 5, the council’s committees were reorganized, opening up the chairmanship of the committees anew and allowing the council to assign councilors to new roles in the committees during the February 12 session.
In this week’s session, it came to light that the 7 council members who initially voted no to the committee reorganization had sought the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) and injunction against the shakeup before the Regional Trial Court. The TRO was however denied, hence the reorganization proceeded with the 7 council members abstaining during the process. Despite their abstention however, the members of the “magic 7” as they were called during the session, who were voted for chairmanship readily accepted their nominations.
