A brief exchange occurred between Senator Alan Peter Cayetano and Senator Kiko Pangilinan during the seventh day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Monday, July 20, as the two senator-judges debated whether discussions unrelated to the merits of the case should be allowed on the Senate floor.
The disagreement stemmed from Senator Robin Padilla’s manifestation regarding his submission of a counter-affidavit before the Office of the Ombudsman after Senator Erwin Tulfo earlier raised concerns that some senator-judges were using the impeachment court to discuss matters outside the proceedings.
Cayetano defended Padilla, arguing that the senator was merely clarifying allegations that he failed to comply with the Ombudsman’s directive. He cited a remark attributed to former Senator Joker Arroyo regarding legal discussions.
“Regarding the waste of time here, sabi ni Senator Joker Arroyo, ‘It is useless to argue a legal point with a non-lawyer,’” Cayetano said.
He further explained that Padilla’s statement was intended to address reports questioning his compliance with the Ombudsman.
“Kwe-questionin niyo si Senator Padilla, it was all over the news na hindi niya inintindi or he snubbed the Ombudsman… Senator Padilla just stood up to say sumusunod siya sa batas,” Cayetano added.
Cayetano also questioned why the issue was being debated at length, saying the matter could have been discussed separately through a caucus instead of taking time during the impeachment proceedings.
“Hindi kami ang nag-waste ng time. We can have a caucus, we can talk about it. You want to debate that now?” Cayetano said.
Pangilinan, however, pushed back on Cayetano’s interpretation of the impeachment rules, saying the provisions cited by his colleague were not applicable to privileged speeches or manifestations.
“Rule 6 of our impeachment rules, Mr. President, which was quoted by Senator Cayetano as being suppletory, that refers to evidence, rulings on evidence in the impeachment trial,” Pangilinan said.
He clarified that the supplemental application of the Rules of Court and Senate rules only applies to matters involving evidence and not all discussions raised inside the impeachment court.
“It does not refer to privileged speeches. Therefore, the suppletory nature of the rules of court as well as the Senate rules refer to matters pertaining to evidence and no other,” Pangilinan added.
While Pangilinan said they allowed the discussion in the spirit of fairness, he cautioned against repeatedly raising issues unrelated to the impeachment case.
“In the spirit of liberality, we will allow that. That's precisely why we did not object when he spoke last week. But let us not abuse the liberality of this court,” he said.
The exchange highlighted differing views among senator-judges on maintaining the balance between allowing members to make personal explanations and keeping the impeachment trial focused on the allegations against Vice President Duterte.
