The House prosecution panel and Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team are set to present oral arguments on the voting threshold required to convict an impeached official as the impeachment trial continues on Wednesday, Sept. 23.
House prosecutor Rep. Leila de Lima represents the Prosecution, while the Defense team has yet to announce its representative.
Each counsel is given 15 minutes to present their arguments, followed by questions from senator-judges before they vote on whether to sustain or overturn the 16-vote threshold.
A simple majority of senator-judges present and voting is required to decide the matter.
No roll call at start of 29th impeachment trial day
Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero deferred the roll call at the opening of the 29th day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Wednesday.
Escudero said the attendance check would be conducted later once the senator-judges are present.
The roll call may take place during the oral arguments.
Poa to represent defense in impeachment oral arguments
Atty. Michael Poa will represent Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team during the oral arguments.
Defense lead counsel Sheila Sison confirmed Poa’s role before the Senate impeachment court on Wednesday.
The court will hear arguments from both the prosecution and defense panels regarding the disputed voting threshold.
Diokno to represent prosecution in impeachment oral arguments
House prosecutor Chel Diokno will represent the prosecution panel during the oral arguments on the 29th day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.
Lead prosecutor Gerville Luistro announced that Diokno will replace Rep. Leila de Lima, who is attending to an important and urgent concern.
Sison, Diokno clash over presumption of innocence in impeachment trial
Tension arose between defense lead counsel Sheila Sison and House prosecutor Chel Diokno during the opening of the 29th day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.
Diokno cautioned against suggesting that the criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt applies to impeachment proceedings, saying it could mislead the public.
Sison maintained that the constitutional presumption of innocence remains non-debatable, warning that claiming otherwise is “dangerous to convey to the general public at sa lahat ng mag-aaral ng batas.”
Escudero retains ‘respondent’ label for VP Duterte
Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero retained the use of “respondent” to refer to Vice President Sara Duterte after the prosecution sought to strike the defense’s use of “respondent-accused” from the record.
In his ruling, Escudero said impeachment proceedings are sui generis, with characteristics similar to both administrative and criminal proceedings.
Escudero therefore allowed the term “respondent” to remain in the record of the impeachment trial.
Diokno calls fixed 24-vote denominator ‘absurd’
House prosecutor Chel Diokno questioned the use of a fixed 24-member denominator for determining the voting threshold in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.
Diokno argued that senators who are unable to participate in the proceedings cannot hear evidence, deliberate, or vote, yet a fixed denominator would still require 16 votes for conviction.
“Absurd po ito,” Diokno said, adding that the constitutional two-thirds requirement should not depend on senators who are incapable of acting as judges.
Poa: ‘When the law is clear, there’s no room for interpretation’
Defense lawyer Michael Poa reiterated the defense’s position that 16 votes should be required to convict Vice President Sara Duterte in the impeachment trial.
Poa cited the Supreme Court’s principle that “when the law is clear, there’s no room for interpretation. There’s only room for application.”
He said the issue before the Senate impeachment court is straightforward, asking how many votes are needed for conviction and answering, “The answer of the defense is straightforward and simple, 16.”
Cayetano likens impeachment voting issue to ‘spaghetti’
Senator-judge Alan Cayetano likened the dispute over the voting threshold in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial to “spaghetti” as the required votes could change depending on the number of senators participating.
Cayetano said the issue should have been settled before the trial began and suggested bringing the matter before the Supreme Court if necessary.
“At sabi ng mga kasing edad ko, Sir, parang spaghetti na po yung impeachment—pababa nang pababa, pataas nang pataas,” Cayetano said.
Tulfo cites senators’ past cases in voting threshold debate
Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo cited the cases faced by senators during the drafting of the 1987 Constitution as part of his argument in the impeachment trial’s voting threshold debate.
Tulfo noted that the cases at the time involved subversion and sedition, rather than plunder or theft.
“Hindi po plunder, hindi po pagnanakaw,” Tulfo said, as he discussed the circumstances considered by the framers of the Constitution.
Villar calls for ‘konting respeto’ amid impeachment debate
Senator-judge Camille Villar became emotional after Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo mentioned senators who are unable to attend the impeachment trial, stressing that their detention or absence was not their choice.
Villar said it was unfair to refer to the detained senators’ alleged crimes as plunder or theft because none of them had been convicted.
“Can we stop it with these attacks on each other? We are senators of the Philippines. Let us give each other due respect,” Villar said.
Tulfo clarifies remarks on senators charged with plunder
Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo apologized and clarified his earlier remarks about senators who are unable to attend the impeachment trial.
Tulfo said he did not refer to any of his colleagues as convicted plunderers, stressing that he only said some were “charged with” the offense.
He added that his statements were not intended as attacks but were meant to address the reality that some senators are physically or legally unable to participate in the trial.
Impeachment court votes to proceed with conviction threshold debate
The Senate impeachment court voted 13-6, with one abstention, to proceed with the discussion and voting on the conviction threshold in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.
The decision followed a point of order raised by Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano questioning the conduct of the vote on the issue.
The impeachment court will continue deliberations on the appropriate voting threshold for conviction.
Padilla asks senators to understand minority amid voting threshold debate
Senator-judge Robin Padilla urged his fellow senators to understand the situation of the minority and senators who are unable to attend the impeachment trial amid the debate over the voting threshold.
“Pinaliliwanag lang po namin na may pinagdadaanan ang minorya at hindi po sana na tayo pa dito ang nagdidiin sa mga kasama ninyo. Bahay natin ito,” Padilla said.
Padilla also hinted that Wednesday could be his last day at the Senate, saying, “Baka ito na rin ang huli kong araw dito; ang hearing ko sa Biyernes na.”
Go: ‘This is what binds us’
Senator-judge Bong Go stressed that the Constitution should remain the basis for determining the conviction threshold in the impeachment trial amid the debate over the required number of votes.
“Two-thirds of 24 is 16. This is what is clearly stated in our Constitution,” Go said.
He added, “This is what binds us. Pag wala ito, watak-watak po tayo,” as he emphasized adherence to the two-thirds vote of all Senate members.
Escudero reverses ruling on 16-of-24 voting threshold
Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero said his earlier ruling requiring 16 of 24 votes for conviction has been reversed following the Senate impeachment court’s vote.
Under the new ruling, senators who are detained or suspended, legally restrained from performing their functions, whose whereabouts are unknown, or physically medically incapacitated will not be counted in the voting denominator.
Six senator-judges did not participate in the vote: Alan Peter and Pia Cayetano, Robin Padilla, Camille Villar, Bong Go, and Imee Marcos, while Mark Villar was present and voted in favor of lowering the denominator.
