Cotabato City / Marawi City – The Bangsamoro Autonomy Act No. 77, earlier touted as the Bangsamoro Parliamentary Redistricting Act of 2025, has plunged into a legitimacy crisis after two top leaders of the Bangsamoro Transition Authority (BTA) openly contradicted each other over its enactment.
On August 28, BTA Speaker Pangalian Balindong issued a formal Notice to the Public declaring that the signature attributed to him on the redistricting bill was “unauthorized, void, and without legal effect.” He stressed that he neither signed nor authorized anyone to sign on his behalf and warned that the act of affixing a “For” signature was a violation of law.
“Accordingly, BAA No. 77 cannot be deemed signed or enacted,” Balindong stated, emphasizing that only the Speaker has the power to sign all acts, resolutions, and bills of Parliament under the BTA’s rules.
Tan Pushes Back: “Signature Is Valid”
Hours later, Deputy Speaker Atty. Nabil Tan issued his own statement, confirming that it was he who signed Parliament Bill No. 351 (which became BAA No. 77). While admitting that he did so without the Speaker’s express authority, Tan argued that his act was valid and legally effective under the Parliamentary Rules.
According to Tan, his role as Deputy Speaker allowed him to act in the Speaker’s absence “to ensure the continued operations of the Parliament.” He described the act of signing as ministerial, not discretionary — a mere attestation of Parliament’s will after the bill had already passed third and final reading on August 19.
“The ministerial act of signing was not an assertion of personal authority, nor was it intended to diminish the authority of the Speaker. Rather, it was a step to guarantee that the will of the Parliament is properly carried forward,” Tan said.
He further justified his decision by citing the Chief Minister’s Certificate of Urgency and the congressional mandate to amend BARMM’s districting law after Sulu’s exclusion, warning that delays would defeat the very purpose of the postponement of the first regional elections.
COMELEC Already Deferred Implementation
Amid the legal wrangling, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has already moved to defer the implementation of the redistricting, citing time constraints ahead of the October 13 parliamentary elections. COMELEC Chairman George Garcia said ballots, candidate lists, and deployment plans will remain unchanged to avoid confusion.
But the Speaker’s notice and the Deputy Speaker’s rebuttal now raise deeper constitutional and political questions: even if COMELEC can defer implementation, can a law with disputed signatures be considered valid in the first place?
Opposition in Lanao del Sur Intensifies
The controversy has only emboldened opposition groups in Lanao del Sur, who argue that the redistricting law is both unjust and unconstitutional. The RAnow Movement staged a peace rally in Marawi City, joined by local government leaders, ulama, traditional elders, women and youth groups, civil society organizations, and academics.
Protesters from Kapai, Pualas, Lumba Bayabao, Tagoloan, and Tubaran warned that redistricting would marginalize their municipalities and distort representation in the Bangsamoro Parliament.
For many in Lanao del Sur, the conflicting statements from Balindong and Tan only prove their point: the law was rushed, procedurally compromised, and politically motivated.
Editorial Perspective: A Parliament in Crisis
What began as a technical exercise in redistricting has now spiraled into a political and institutional crisis. With the Speaker and Deputy Speaker at odds over the same law, the Bangsamoro Parliament faces a credibility challenge that could undermine public confidence in its legislative process.
For critics in Lanao del Sur, the controversy is not just about lines on a map but about the integrity of autonomy itself. If laws can be contested at the highest level because of disputed signatures, the very foundations of BARMM’s democratic experiment are at risk.
The Bangsamoro struggle was anchored on inclusivity, justice, and the rule of law. But as the Parliament’s leadership now publicly clashes, the promise of genuine self-governance is clouded by procedural lapses and political maneuvering.
The question now is stark: Whose authority truly stands — the Speaker who disowns, or the Deputy Speaker who defends? Until that is resolved, BAA No. 77 is less a law than a symbol of the deepening cracks within the Bangsamoro Parliament.