The Philippine Constitution provides that people can directly propose and enact laws, or approve or reject any act or law passed by Congress or local legislative body. This is done through a petition signed by at least 10% of the total number of registered voters, where each legislative district is represented by at least 3% of registered voters.

As of January 2025, the total number of registered voters in the Philippines is 68,431,965. This means that at least 6,843,196 people should have signed the petition to create, change, or extinguish a law. On top of this, every legislative district in the Philippines must be represented. By way of example: if the second district of Quezon City (comprised of Cubao, Libis, Loyola Heights, etc) has 328,316 registered voters, at least three-percent or 9,849 people from that district should sign the petition.

The Constitution and Republic Act No. 6735, the Initiative and Referendum Act, provide for two different actions: initiative and referendum.

Initiative, more popularly known as People’s Initiative in the Philippines, is the power of the people to propose amendments to the Constitution or to propose and enact statutory laws and local ordinances by way of election for this purpose. Statutory laws are the second highest form of legislation, while ordinances are considered city or municipality-level laws. On the other hand, referendum is the power of citizens to approve or reject statutory law and local ordinances.

The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) presides over all these processes, making sure that the minimum numbers of voters signing the petition are accounted for and that all signatures are true and verified.

Recent examples

Just last year in 2024, the People’s Initiative for Reform Modernization and Action (PIRMA) launched a People’s Initiative calling on citizens to band together and sign a petition to change the 1987 Constitution. While there were no specific changes proposed in its 60-second television advertisement called “EDSA-pwera,” PIRMA called out the present constitution for disregarding the interests of ordinary citizens in favor of the ruling class.

In the wake of the pork barrel scandal of 2013, the People’s Initiative Against Pork Barrel (PIAP) started a People’s Initiative to pass a law that would enhance transparency in the yearly government budget allocations passed by Congress. By way of review: every single penny spent by government agencies must approved by Congress each year. This goes through months of public deliberation where every line of the national budget proposal is scrutinized. Often, there are lump sums such as confidential funds and the so-called “priority development assistance funds.” These are prone to abuse by politicians and private contractors given their vague nature, and the latter fund was eventually ruled as illegal by the Philippine Supreme Court.

In 2006, the group Sigaw ng Bayan filed a petition with the COMELEC to change the present bicameral-presidential system of government to a unicameral-parliamentary system. The signature sheets distributed to the public read:

Abstract: Do you approve of the amendment of Article VI and VII of the 1987 Constitution, changing the form of government from the present bicameral-presidential to a unicameral-parliamentary system of government, in order to achieve greater efficiency, simplicity and economy in government; and providing an Article XVIII as Transitory Provisions for the orderly shift from one system to another?

The Supreme Court declared this move as invalid since the people who signed did not actually see the full text of the specific changes. This meant that ordinary citizens were deprived of the chance to fully comprehend the implications of this change.

Amidst all of these, the Initiative and Referendum Act does not even provide for a way for the Constitution to be changed by People’s Initiative. In 1997, the Supreme Court to empower ordinary citizens to propose and approve changes to the Constitution. Although the Constitution recognizes the power of the people to do so, it also requires that a separate law be passed by the legislative branch providing for the specifics for a People’s Initiative on the Constitution.

The Supreme Court did not bother to cover up its disappointment, saying that “there was, therefore, an obvious downgrading of the more important or the paramount system of initiative. R.A. No. 6735 thus delivered a humiliating blow to the system of initiative on amendments to the Constitution by merely paying it a reluctant lip service.”

Twenty-three (23) years later in 2020, the COMELEC tried to patch up the deficiencies of the Initiative and Referendum Act with its own rules and regulations on conducting an Initiative to amend or revise the Philippine Constitution. This was then withdrawn in 2024 following the “EDSA-pwera” campaign since the COMELEC thought that their rules were insufficient.

Success Rate of People’s Initiatives

To date, not a single People’s Initiative has been successful since the enactment of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Almost all the time, the required number of signatures is not achieved due to the sheer difficulty and effort involved in getting these and having these verified. Just like in the Sigaw ng Bayan case, even the smallest infirmities in how the PI was carried out would operate to void the whole operation.

It is not a lost cause, however. Take Switzerland for example. With its system of direct democracy, Switzerland—or rather its citizens–has successfully passed fourteen (14) initiatives from 1891 to 2004. Although this may seem like a sparse amount for the given period, this shows that People’s Initiatives can work.

The difference is that only 100,000 signatures must be collected for a Popular Initiative–as it’s called in the Swiss system. This is tiny compared to the 6,000,000 needed to successfully prosecute a People’s Initiative in the Philippines.

With this huge disproportion, citizens must be creative and resourceful in finding solutions to secure those six million votes.

The role of digital signatures

Technological innovations have the potential to breathe life into the law. In particular, electronic signatures—with their widespread acceptance as an integral part of commerce, industry, and daily life–may be the key in successfully mounting a People’s Initiative.

The rise of e-signatures have made businesses and government agencies move faster. Slowly, the days where physical documents have to be transported around the city or even across countries are being eradicated. The most pressing concern with this method has always been security; anyone can take a picture of a signature and paste it onto a document.

Modern providers of e-signature services (such as local startup Twala) feature advanced security features to ensure they are tamper-proof. This is a far cry from simply taking a screenshot of a signature and pasting the image into a Word or Google Docs file. In fact, services like Twala have been recognized by government agencies such as the Department of Science and Technology and have ensured full compliance with local and international laws governing the use of e-signatures.

How do e-signatures or digital signatures work?

A valid and legal e-signature should not be alterable when affixed to a digital document. There must be a clear way for the other party to verify the e-signature (See Section 8, E-Commerce Act). Electronic signatures has also been distinguished from a digital signatures. An electronic signature refers merely to any distinctive mark in electronic form which represents the identity of a person in an electronic document that is used with the intention of authenticating, signing, or approving an electronic document.

A digital signature goes deeper. This uses an asymmetric cryptosystem—a system which generates two digital keys: one for creating the signature itself and another to verify the same (See Section 1(e), Rules on Electronic Evidence).

Our courts generally allow the use of electronic signatures and it is presumed that the same is valid. If anyone calls out its validity, however, the person who used it must show that the electronic signature can be verified and that there was no error in affixing the same.

How can digital signatures work in People’s Initiatives?

The use of digital signatures is a game changer in conducting a People’s Initiative. Not only does this have the potential of virtually doing away with all the issues with verification and authentication of signatures. The use of e-signatures speeds up the process and, hypothetically, the entire campaign can be carried out online. This will do away with the need for actual door-to-door campaigns, sorties, and massive assemblies just to attain votes. In turn, the financial cost of actually carrying out a campaign will be greatly reduced.

One requirement for People’s Initiative is the need for the people to read the full text of the proposed law (see Section 5(e), Initiative and Referendum Act). As we saw in the Sigaw ng Bayan case, the petition for Initiative failed due to the absence of this requirement. With a software-based Initiative, citizens will be able to access the proposed law on their smartphones, read through this at their own leisure, and then proceed to digitally signing the proposed law with a press of a button.

In effect, a People’s Initiative actually becomes an initiative of the people—a signature campaign for change that any ordinary citizen of modest means may carry out. This will lessen the need of financial backers with personal agendas driving a campaign. This will lower the allegations of undue influence.

Conclusion

Indeed, the use of digital signatures will democratize the People’s Initiative. And it can work, as long as all safeguards are assured through modern technology and the processes mandated by the Constitution, statutes, and relevant rules and regulations are followed.

With the widespread acceptance of digital signatures in various industries today, we believe that a successful People’s Initiative may push through sooner than later. We just need to find the right law to propose and build the right digital platform for the job, where people can read the proposed law and sign at the click of a button.