Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. BitPinas has no commercial relationship with any mentioned entity unless otherwise stated.
📬 Get the biggest crypto stories in the Philippines and Southeast Asia every week — subscribe to the BitPinas Newsletter.
The local web3 community shared mixed reactions to the proposed Crypto Rights Party List by the Innovative Movement of the Philippine Association of Crypto Traders (IMPACT). While some see it as a step toward better representation in policymaking, others caution it could lead to further misunderstanding and politicization.
Proposed Crypto Rights Party List
Filipino crypto influencer Coach Miranda Miner (Arlone Paul Abello) and his group IMPACT are surveying public interest in forming the Philippines’ first Crypto Rights Party List, which aims to represent the web3 community in Congress.
While Abello’s posts suggest the party list is taking shape, co-founder Atty. Clarizel King clarified that it remains in the consultation phase and has not been formally filed.
The group emphasizes that the initiative will only proceed with strong community support, aiming to advocate for crypto rights, blockchain innovation, and clearer regulations. So far, around 1,200 people have expressed support.
In a shared post Luc Montes, CTO of GMMG and head of the mentoring team at Coach Miranda Miner, urged the community to see the bigger picture behind the proposed Crypto Rights Party List, emphasizing that it’s not about political ambition but representation.
Citing Atty. Clarizel King of IMPACT, he noted that with increasing regulation, such as the CASP rules and bans on offshore exchanges, having a voice in Congress could help protect user rights, push for clearer policies, and promo
“So the question is: Do we want to stay unheard while these decisions are being made? Or do we want someone at the table who understands this space and can speak on behalf of the community? Whether you support the initiative or not, it helps to first understand that the goal is to protect user rights, push for clearer policies, and open the door for innovation—not to take control of crypto. Let’s stay informed, not reactive.”
Luc Montes, CTO, GMMG, and Head of the Mentoring Team, Coach Miranda Miner
Yes: Supportive Views
In the BitPinas post about the news, supporters rallied behind the initiative, flooding the comments section with hashtags like #WESUPPORT, #KAMIRANDA3000x, and expressing hope that the crypto community would finally gain a political voice.
Some of the commenters believe the party list could help modernize local financial regulations and provide representation for cryptocurrency holders.
“A powerful step forward for crypto advocacy in the Philippines! Coach Miranda Miner and IMPACT Group showing strong support for the Crypto Rights Party List. It’s time the voice of the crypto community is heard.”
BitPinas Community Member
In another comment, a community member expressed support and advocated for the Philippines to begin holding Bitcoin in its national reserves as a hedge against inflation and a long-term store of value, suggesting that even a small allocation would help future-proof the country’s treasury.
One user suggested that the proposed party list could help strike a balance between innovation and regulation, especially as the country navigates the digital era.
In another comment, a community member argued that crypto groups are a legitimate and growing sector that the Constitution must recognize.
“Crypto groups and organizations are a new sector of our society. They were born out of interest and curiosity of a decentralized system of finances. Whether we want it or otherwise, these people are real and alive that the constitution must actively encompass. Cryptocurrency (And blockchain) is the future of money. And that future is now.”
BitPinas Community Member
In the BitPinas Telegram group, Atty. Rafael Padilla, a legal expert in fintech and blockchain, expressed cautious support for the proposed crypto party list.
“The battle needs to be waged on all fronts, so I appreciate and value this initiative. They might not necessarily succeed in pushing for legislative reforms (we have yet to see that, we know many partylists have failed, but we can give this crypto partylist a chance); but it would be strategic to have them in certain committees like finance and tech, raise objections on certain bills that could compromise important rights (e.g. CBDC bills), and call out government agencies engaging in regulatory overreach (e.g. BSP and SEC).”
Atty. Rafael Padilla
Carlos Tapang, CEO of RockStable, argued that while crypto is not a marginalized sector, political representation is necessary to protect economic freedoms and push back against excessive government control.
“We also need a partylist to protect the industry from too much government encroachment. Too often what I see most businesses do in Pinas is to kowtow to [the] government in order to gain market dominance. This is sad. It means we have given up on our freedoms and the only businesses that can win are those who kowtow to [the] government.”
Carlos Tapang, CEO, RockStable
Tapang emphasized that the initiative is not about claiming disadvantage but about securing a seat at the policymaking table, especially as current regulations increasingly impact the industry. While acknowledging the value of advocacy, they stressed the need to influence legislation directly, warning that leaving the future of crypto solely in the hands of bureaucrats could stifle the movement in the Philippines.
Conversely, Adriel Mirto, CEO of 1COM Worldwide, cautioned that while regulation can lend legitimacy to cryptocurrency, it often comes with burdensome compliance requirements.
“Regulation is a two-edged sword. While it legitimizes crypto more…it also brings with it far more stringent compliance, esp AML-FATF KYC and more oversight from SEC (on tokens they deem to be securities).”
Adriel Mirto, CEO, 1COM Worldwide
No: Skepticism and Opposition
On the other hand, GCash executive Luis Buenaventura noted, in a shared post, that this is the third attempt since 2014 by the local crypto community to form a party list, but such efforts have never taken off. According to him, it is largely due to the high cost of running a successful campaign, which could require ₱50 million to ₱100 million, and the lack of anyone willing to fully fund it.
“I think if crypto truly has a place in modern PH society, it will find its way there organically. A partylist shouldn’t be necessary.”
Luis Buenaventura, Executive, GCash
The comment section of BitPinas also had critics who raised alarms over the potential risks of politicizing cryptocurrency.
Some questioned the motives behind the proposal, accusing its proponents of greed and opportunism.
Other commenters expressed concern that the initiative could trigger increased government scrutiny, with warnings that it might lead to new taxes.
In addition, Christopher Star, founder of OpenVerse, previously criticized criticized the proposed Crypto Rights Party List as a misguided initiative that misinterprets the concept of rights and the Philippine political system, arguing that crypto is a tool, not a marginalized sector, and warning that such a party list could harm the credibility of the crypto space by fueling public skepticism.
Isabella, a blockchain enthusiast, also weighed in on the ongoing discussion. She noted that such an initiative may not be necessary and could risk attracting negative public perception toward the industry. She argued that a more effective and neutral approach would be through existing technical working groups under relevant bills, similar to how the UAE formed joint committees under its Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA).
According to Isabella, these committees should be composed of vetted experts, Ph.D.s, lawyers, and technical professionals with deep experience in cryptography and distributed systems, who can assess protocol risks and design regulatory frameworks that balance innovation with compliance. She emphasized that centralized exchanges, decentralized exchanges, and protocol owners should not be part of these formal groups to avoid conflicts of interest, although they can still contribute feedback and data.
“Joint committees usually incorporate vetted industry specialists for consultation and feedback, including access to user data, adoption metrics, and usage patterns. Protocol teams can and should contribute feedback and their 2c, but they don’t need to be part of the party-list, committee, or technical working group itself. Additionally, this is what special ecozones are kind of for. Most importantly, community and end-user feedback must be included in the dialogue to ensure that the resulting frameworks reflect real-world needs and use.”
Isabella, blockchain enthusiast
In the Facebook post, there are also commenters that expressed abstention-like sentiments, not explicitly siding with or against the proposed Crypto Rights Party List, but showing skepticism, hesitation, sarcasm, or detachment.
This article is published on BitPinas: Community Reactions to Crypto Rights Party List Formation
What else is happening in Crypto Philippines and beyond?
