[] Takeaways from July 14, 2026 privilege speech of Councilor Andales, assailing Cebu City Council move to amend House rules, which mainly take away VM Tomas's right to participate in the legislative process just like a regular councilor:
[1] What pissed off Kons Andales
Councilor Sisenio "Bebs" M. Andales, minority floor leader of the Cebu City Council's minority party BOPK, specified these alleged violations in his speech:
* No valid three-day notice, a "strong argument" on absence of due process; copies were provided on same day the City Council was reorganized.
* The 21-page machine copy does not highlight the inserted and deleted provisions. Not proper legislative practice, Kons Andales said.
Tile of his speech, "Fundamental Rights of the Minority in Adopting New Internal House Rules 2026," tells of his main beef: "Due process was compromised."
[2] "Don't bamboozle minority"
Kons Andales opened and closed his speech on the theme of procedure and due process being allegedly violated and the minority being allegedly "bamboozled" by the majority in the City Council.
He is "flabbergasted," Andales said, and "vehemently and vigorously" opposes the move of the Barug-Kusog majority.
His speech was capped with a request for DILG's regional office "to take note of the issue(s)" he raised. The City Council, on motion of Councilor Philip Zafra, has asked DILG 7 "for resolution and guidance" before approving the new IRP or Internal Rules of Procedure.
Andales urged the City Council to first "discuss and deliberate article-by-article" before approval of the new House rules "in the spirit of transparency and fairness."
[3] New House rules opposed by minority
-- (a) Filing of communications, resolutions and ordinances with the City Council secretary, "with authority and approval of the majority floor leader," for the matter to be included in the agenda.
Andales said the power of the vice mayor, who's the head of the City Council, is "blatantly curtailed and diminished."
-- (b) Statement about the "vital and indispensable role of the presiding officer in legislative work" and his duty "to maintain impartiality."
Removed was the provision in the previous House rules that says the presiding officer "may co-author an ordinance" and "participate if he so desires (in the) deliberation" provided "he first relinquishes the chair as regular presiding officer."
[4] Vice mayor's OK before agenda-ed
The amendment would replace the vice mayor with the majority floor-leader as authorized signatory after the resolution or ordinance is filed with the City Council secretary, for it to be included in the agenda.
Isn't that signature pro-forma, as the City Council member cannot be stopped from filing and the process of legislation can start without the presiding officer's approval? Whatever, the majority wants the VM's signature removed.
[5] 2019 DILG opinion long superseded
Arguing for retention of the old House rule that gives the mayor the right to participate in floor discussion, Kons Andales cited a 2019 opinion from DILG, which said in part...
"... the Vice Mayor may sponsor or co-author an ordinance or resolution. If he finds it urgent to participate in the deliberation of a resolution or ordinance, he may temporarily relinquish his chair to the majority floor-leader..."
However, DILG Opinion #42, series of 2019, used by Kons Andales in his speech, may have long been superseded by DILG Opinion #95 of 2025, which is based on Local Government Code and Supreme Court rulings.
The more recent DILG opinion, dated August 1, 2025, says presiding officers "must be impartial, have no right to join debates, sponsor legislative measures, or deliver privilege speeches, and cannot temporarily step down from the rostrum to participate as a regular council member in floor deliberations."
[6] Reason for limits on VM functions
The "rationale" for the restriction on the functions of vice mayors -- as well as vice governors -- is plain enough to dissuade or lessen disagreement.
The SC rulings in sum make this pitch: "It is not considered a violation of legislative autonomy but rather a strict enforcement of the separation of powers and the strict legal principle that local officials can only exercise powers granted by the LGC."
Vice mayors, and vice governors, are prohibited from doing the functions of regular councilors, or board members, because they don't represent specific districts.
They are like the mayors and governors who represent the entire electorate.
The high court said vice mayors, as well as vice governors, shall be the "epitome of impartiality."
RELATED: [] Seares: Vice Guv Suico and VM Osmeña cannot relinquish job, April 9, 2026. [] Seares: Cebu City Council strips VM Osmeña of functions, July 10, 2026.
[7] Andales concedes these points
-- The majority has the legal right to make changes of the rules. The councilor alleged however that rules of procedure and due process were violated. Because of that, Kons Andales asked for review and debate before passage of the changes in House rules.
In effect, he accepted that the majority dominates but the minority doesn't want to be deceived or tricked, which being "bamboozled" is.
-- Andales said he appreciates deferment of the House rules until DILG-7 would "guide and enlighten" it on the issues disputed.
That must mean Andales submits to the opinion of DILG, to which the City Council has tossed the question. His use of the 2019 opinion in his argument also signifies his acceptance of DILG's pronouncements as source of authority.