Metro Manila, Philippines – At least two petitions have been filed with the Supreme Court challenging the Senate Impeachment Court’s ruling on who among the senator-judges could give a verdict in the trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.
Former Executive Secretary Vic Rodriguez and constitutional lawyer Ernesto Francisco Jr. separately asked the high court to overturn the Sept. 23 ruling that abandoned a fixed threshold of 16 votes, or two-thirds of the full 24-member Senate.
Rodriguez filed a petition for review and prohibition with an urgent application for a temporary restraining order or writ of preliminary injunction.
He argued that the impeachment court committed grave abuse of discretion when it changed the operative meaning of an express constitutional provision without following the prescribed process for amending or revising the Constitution.
“There is also no provision anywhere in our Constitution that permits the impeachment court to alter the constitutional denominator of 24 pro hac vice or ‘only for the occasion of the impeachment trial of the Vice President,’” Rodriguez said.
He said Congress’s authority to promulgate rules does not allow the impeachment court to revise the Constitution permanently or solely for Duterte’s trial.
Rodriguez also warned that applying a different voting base for Duterte could raise an equal protection issue because the same constitutional provision covers all impeachable officials.
Francisco, meanwhile, filed a separate petition for review seeking a status quo ante order against the Sept. 23 ruling.
A status quo ante order would restore the situation before the impeachment court adopted the new formula, when 16 votes were required to convict Duterte.
The impeachment court voted 13-1 to overturn presiding officer Francis Escudero’s earlier interpretation that two-thirds of “all the members of the Senate” meant 16 votes based on a 24-member chamber.
Six senator-judges did not participate in the vote. Escudero cast the dissenting vote.
Under the new formula, the voting base will include only senators who remain “legally and factually capable” of participating when the court renders its judgment.
Senators who are detained, suspended or legally restrained from performing their duties may be excluded from the denominator.
Those who are physically or medically incapacitated, beyond the Senate’s coercive processes or similarly situated may also be excluded.
The court must first determine through competent and sufficient evidence whether a senator falls under any of those categories.
The ruling did not automatically set the threshold at 14 votes.
If the court determines that only 20 senators are capable of participating, however, at least 14 votes would be required because any fractional result must be rounded up.
The impeachment court said the ruling would apply only to Duterte’s trial and would not bind future impeachment courts.
Senate: Trial will continue
Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian said the impeachment trial would continue under the new formula unless the Supreme Court intervenes.
“Tuloy. Wala namang TRO, so tuloy,” Gatchalian said in a chance interview at the Senate on Friday.
[Translation: “It will continue. There is no TRO, so it will continue.”]
Gatchalian said the impeachment court remained bound by its ruling pending the petitions.
“Well, iyon ang ruling ng court and the court made that decision, so iyon ang susundin namin,” he said.
[Translation: “That is the ruling of the court, and the court made that decision, so that is what we will follow.”]
Gatchalian said he had received no indication that any senator-judges intended to stop participating in the proceedings because of the threshold dispute.
He maintained that the court did not change the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds vote.
Duterte defers to lawyers
Duterte confirmed Friday that she had learned about Rodriguez’s petition but said she had not read it.
“Yes, oo. Nabalitaan ko kahapon na merong nag-file si Atty. Vic Rodriguez ng petition sa Supreme Court at hindi ko pa kasi nabasa iyong kanyang petition,” Duterte told reporters in Davao City.
“So, tingnan natin kung ano iyong comment ng defense team,” she added.
[Translation: Yes. I learned yesterday that Atty. Vic Rodriguez filed a petition before the Supreme Court, but I have not read it. Let us see what the defense team has to say.]
Asked about her position on the new voting threshold, Duterte declined to discuss the issue and deferred to her lawyers.
“Sandali ah, kasi pagalitan ako ng mga abogado ko nito. So, iwan ko na lang sa spokesperson ng defense team kung ano iyong comment nila,” she said.
[Translation: Wait, because my lawyers might scold me for this. I will leave it to the defense team’s spokesperson to give their comment.]
Defense studying separate SC action
Duterte defense spokesperson Justin Gular said the defense team was not involved in filing the petitions.
“We really could not control anyone who would file a petition in regard to this issue,” Gular said in an interview on The Newsmaker.
“The defense team has not read or studied the petitions. Hindi naman po kami na-inform na magpa-file po ng petitions,” he added.
[Translation: We were not informed that petitions would be filed.]
Gular said Duterte’s lawyers were still studying whether they should initiate a separate Supreme Court challenge.
“As of the moment, pinag-aaralan pa rin namin iyong propriety of whether to go to the Supreme Court and to question the threshold ruling of the impeachment court,” he said.
[Translation: As of the moment, we are still studying whether it would be proper to go to the Supreme Court and question the threshold ruling.]
He said the defense must also determine when any petition should be filed and what relief it should seek.
“There is no final decision from the defense whether to question this before the Supreme Court as of the moment,” Gular said.
