VP defense team may still go to SC over conviction vote

MANILA, Philippines — Following the Senate impeachment court’s decision to lower the conviction threshold, Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team said she reserved her right to exhaust all legal remedies, including raising the issue before the Supreme Court.

“Going up to the Supreme Court is a real possibility. As to when, well, we will have to discuss the matter with our client,” defense spokesperson and lawyer Michael Poa said on Wednesday.

He added that they were set to have a discussion with the Vice President “very soon.”

Article continues after this advertisement

Poa also said that requesting a temporary restraining order (TRO) from the Supreme Court was also “an option.”

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

READ: WATCH: Impeachment court lowers conviction threshold

“That’s definitely an option. But of course, we’ll have to see the pros and cons first,” he said, adding that such a request was unlikely to delay the impeachment proceedings.

The court voted to revise the 16-vote threshold needed to convict Duterte in her impeachment trial. Under the newly adopted rules, the constitutionally required two-thirds vote for conviction will be based only on the number of senators who remain legally and factually capable of participating in the proceedings at the time of voting.

READ: Duterte trial: Presiding officer’s decision can be overturned – Escudero

Article continues after this advertisement

Lawyer Sheila Sison, Duterte’s lead defense counsel, told the court after the voting that the Vice President’s participation in the trial, moving forward, “shall be with express reservation.”

Prevailing ‘circumstances’

“We therefore put on record that, even as we understand that this tribunal will proceed as it deems fit, we are nonetheless constrained to place on record that, from this day forward, the respondent’s participation, or any participation that the respondent may have in this trial, shall be with express reservation, or ad cautelam,” Sison said.

Article continues after this advertisement

“[…] She reserves every right to exhaust all legal remedies available under our laws and the Constitution, in keeping with the essence of a truly free and democratic institution and the right of every citizen to be heard before an impartial court that is neither biased nor intimidated, and that will courageously uphold a fair trial and, ultimately, render a just decision,” she also said.

Sison stated that Duterte will “not shirk from accountability, nor does she fear the outcome of this impeachment trial.”

“She asks for nothing spectacular from this court, only the most essential and basic guarantees due to every individual: fairness and impartiality from a court entrusted with upholding the most fundamental principles under our Constitution,” she said.

Wednesday’s oral arguments on the conviction threshold took an emotional turn after the status and charges of detained senators were alluded to during the proceedings.

Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo, who was arguing in favor of reducing the threshold, pointed out that prevailing “factual circumstances” have prevented some senators to participate.

“So, it only makes sense to examine how these new events affect the computation of the two-thirds vote that our Constitution requires or states,” he said.

Tulfo pointed out that the charges senators typically faced at the time the 1987 Constitution was drafted were different from today’s situation and this could have affected how the specific provision in the Charter was framed.

“The cases of senators then were either subversion, sedition; those were their cases, not plunder or all other things. That’s why it probably didn’t cross the mind of the framers,” he said.

Four of the 24 senators have been absent from impeachment proceedings: Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Rodante Marcoleta have been detained over plunder charges, Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa has been in hiding since he was ordered arrested by the International Criminal Court in connection with the Duterte administration’s war on drugs, and Sen. Loren Legarda has been on medical leave since August.

Emotional Villar

Senator-judge Camille Villar, in response to Tulfo’s pronouncement, came to the defense of her fellow minority senators, stating that being detained and not being able to participate in the proceedings was “not their choice.”

“I think it’s unfair to call them out … All those who are not here, they have not been proven guilty. They are not plunderers, they are not thieves, they have not been proven to [commit those crimes],” a visibly upset Villar said.

“As the youngest member of this august body, can we stop with these attacks on each other? […] Let us give each other due respect,” she said.

Tulfo, in another manifestation, directly addressed Villar’s words and stated that he never said the detained senators have already been convicted.

He maintained that what he said were not attacks, but merely a confrontation of “the present reality that some senators are physically or legally unable to participate in the impeachment trial.”

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

“The issue of detained senators is so intertwined in the determination of denominators, we cannot discuss the baseline without touching on the reasons why four of our senators are absent,” Tulfo said. /cb