For a city that with nearly two million inhabitants, equal to Manila’s current population, Davao only has three congressional districts. With 4,234 hectares in total land area, Manila, however, has six districts that are based on the 250,00-per-district constitutional rule.
Why not add new districts to a city that has been outpaced by its demographic growth?
Since 1916 when the region was first represented in the legislature, Davao, as a whole, only had one assemblyman. The set-up was adopted until the war and, as part of the province of Davao del Sur that was created in 1967, it remained in effect until 1972.
During the Interim Batasang Pambansa, the city was represented at-large by three legislators as Region XI. When the regular Batasang Pambansa was instituted, two assemblymen-at-large were elected. It was only in 1986 that the city was divided into three congressional districts.
In 1997, Davao City councilor Aristeo Albay commissioned a study to recommend the redistricting of the city into four. The result was submitted to Rep. Manuel M. Garcia (2 nd District, Davao City) as basis for filing a bill in the House of Representatives but the lawmaker advised against it because the proposal amounted to amending the 1986 Constitution.
Aside from filing a resolution in the City Council, Albay also discussed the matter with Rep. Prospero C. Nograles and Garcia whose districts were the ones affected by the study. Under the redistricting plan, barangays Poblacion and Agdao, still undivided, would be placed under District I to comply with the population requisite, while the rest of District II would comprise the second legislative district.
The constituents in Talomo up to Toril had to be placed under District III, while the proposed fourth district would comprise the regions west of the city.
Actually, there is nothing in the post-1986 Charter needing amendment to push through with the redistricting. Article VI, Section 5 (1) states that the House shall be composed of not more than 250 members “unless otherwise fixed by law,” and Section 5 (3) stipulates that each legislative district “shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact, and adjacent territory” with a population of at least 250,000. The 1995 government survey showed the city
with 1,006,840 inhabitants; 1,530,365 residents in 2011; and 1,776,949 individuals in 2020.
The compelling reason to not redistrict the city was largely political. Then city mayor Rodrigo Duterte did not support the idea, and there was worry the creation of a new congressional district would eventually divide Davao into two cities, an idea City Hall was strongly averse.
Years later, the redistricting issue was revived in the Sangguniang Panlungsod. Councilor Danilo Dayanghirang, who sought the creation of two more legislative districts, passed a 2008 resolution supporting the Albay initiative, and followed it up with another proposal the following year. Central to his resolution was the additional P100 million in development funds per year (increased to P70 billion per district in 2010) the city could get if the new districts were approved.
Political observers, however, point to several reasons why redistricting cannot prosper in the meantime. First, even with a mandate that permits the city to have six districts based on population, the creation of new congressional turfs have far-ranging political ramifications.
Second, the expansion of the number of districts from three to six will become the trigger that will eventually give rise to the creation of new cities within Davao City. That would also mean the partition of the unaudited confidential and intelligence funds enjoyed by the city mayor.
Third, the subdivision of the city into several districts will give rise to new political leaders whose mere presence will become a challenge to the Duterte foothold and will threaten the survival of people dependent for political survival on the prevalent dynasty.
And fourth, there is a diminution or dissipation of territorial jurisdiction.
