House prosecution dismisses Panelo's warning on impeachment vote threshold change

The House prosecution panel has brushed aside former presidential legal counsel Salvador Panelo's warning that the decision to change the threshold for convicting Vice President Sara Duterte violates the Constitution. Panelo, who previously served as chief presidential legal counsel to former President Rodrigo Duterte, described the senator-judges' move as a "tragedy" and a "blatant violation of the Constitution," asserting that they cannot vote on matters the Constitution explicitly forbids them from meddling with. However, private prosecutors Lorna Kapunan and Amando Ligutan appeared unfazed by Panelo's comments. Kapunan stated, "Who is he? Don't know him," while Ligutan responded, "Not familiar, sorry." The Senate impeachment court voted to interpret the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds vote based on the number of senators "legally and factually capable of participating" in the impeachment proceedings. This ruling effectively overturned presiding officer Senator-judge Francis "Chiz" Escudero's earlier decision that 16 votes, or two-thirds of all 24 senators, would be needed for conviction. The vote came after 13 senator-judges favored a motion by Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo to reconsider Escudero's July 6 ruling, citing the continued absence or inability of some senators to participate in the trial. Panelo had also warned that senator-judges voting under the new, allegedly unconstitutional, formula could face criminal liability under Article 204 of the Revised Penal Code for "knowingly rendering an unjust judgment." The prosecution, however, remained dismissive of these warnings. This shift in voting threshold interpretation is a significant point of contention regarding the separation of powers and constitutional interpretation within Philippine politics, with potential implications for future judicial decisions.