Present but missing: Atienza questions ‘quorum’ in House session

MANILA, Philippines — If there were 211 legislators present in the session, then why were there only 127 lawmakers inside the plenary hall?

This was the question posed by Buhay Party-list Rep. Atienza on Wednesday as he took note of the number of legislators who were inside the plenary hall, which he said did not match the roll call of the secretariat.

“The Secretariat announced the presence of 211, our count now — and I have people counting by the second — is only 127. I’d like to ask the secretariat, where is the balance on members that they are counting present but they are not around?” Atienza said in a manifestation.

According to Atienza, House rules state that the lower chamber cannot hold a session without a quorum.

“Physical presence is necessary to claim presence in the session and the rules are very clear: No quorum, we should not hold a session nor take up any matter and business for the day,” he said.

Deputy Majority Leader Walter Palma of Zamboanga Sibugay agreed with Atienza that the House rules prohibit holding a session without a quorum.

However, he explained a provision in the House rules that counts as present some members even if they are not in the plenary hall.

Rule XI, Section 71 of the Rules of the House of Representatives states that while House is in session, the following shall be deemed present:

• members who are attending committee meetings as authorized by the Committee on Rules, upon written notification to the Secretary-General by the concerned committee secretary
• members who are attending meetings of the Commission on Appointments, the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, and Bicameral Conference Committees
• members who are on an official mission as approved by the Speaker

Palma pointed out the following:

• Twelve members were attending the Commission on Appointments meeting.
• Four members were on official foreign travel.
• Three members were on official local travel.
• Six members were in a special meeting on the rehabilitation of areas affected by the Taal Volcano eruption.
• Six members were attending the public information committee meeting.
• Ten members were attending the meeting of the constitutional amendments committee.
• Two members were in a meeting of the special committee on persons with disabilities.

The total number of these members, however, still did not match the number of lawmakers present as announced by the secretariat.

“What meetings were they attending? Let them state it. Show it to us now.  I am willing to check the documents myself – if they have authority to do just that,” Atienza said, speaking partly in Filipino.

Palma then agreed to provide a copy of the authorization letters before Atienza moved for the session to be suspended.

When the session resumed, Atienza withdrew his request but said that the lower chamber should be consistent with its rules.

Atienza mentioned the “open-close” session on Tuesday, where the lower chamber immediately adjourned the session for lack of quorum as some female legislators of the House were on an official trip.

Tuesday’s session only lasted for less than six minutes.

“Yesterday, we did not constitute a quorum simply because members were not on the floor and no explanation was given except to say they were meeting outside and meeting with the committees,” Atienza said.

“But today that’s the very reason why we are citing the same rule that they implemented yesterday. And the rules are very clear on attendance and the requirement for a quorum before any business of the day is taken up,” he added.

Atienza said House members should all follow the rules.

“We would like to remind the majority leader that we shall be doing this every day of session simply because we should learn how to follow the rules. Otherwise, we cannot tackle any business of the day in sanity, fairness, and transparency,” Atienza said.

Palma agreed with Atienza and the session proceeded.

/atm