Lacson urges early resolution of voting threshold in VP Duterte impeachment trial

Senator Panfilo Lacson on Sunday said he hopes the issue of the voting threshold required to convict Vice President Sara Duterte in her impeachment trial would be settled early to avoid complications later in the proceedings. Lacson said he would welcome any petition before the Supreme Court questioning the 16 affirmative votes required to convict Duterte, saying it would be better for the issue to be resolved while the trial is still underway. “Mas mainam kung mayroong mag-petisyon sa Korte Suprema, ma-resolve na this early. Kasi napaka-awkward kung sakaling nag-ruling na kami... Para habang hindi pa kami nakakapagdesisyon ng conviction or acquittal based on the number, malinaw na sa amin kung ano ang threshold,” Lacson said in an interview with Super Radyo dzBB. (It would be better if someone files a petition before the Supreme Court so the issue can be resolved early. It would be very awkward if we had already made a ruling. Before we decide on a conviction or acquittal, the voting threshold should already be clear to us.) After being elected presiding officer of the impeachment court, Senate President Francis Escudero said the 1987 Constitution requires the concurrence of two-thirds of all members of the Senate—or 16 votes—to convict an impeachable official. Escudero also said his pronouncement constituted a formal ruling of the impeachment court, subject to any legal remedies available to the parties. Despite welcoming a possible court challenge, Lacson said he agrees with Escudero's interpretation that 16 votes are needed for a conviction. “I support the 16 to constitute 'yung two-thirds of the 24 senators. Base sa aking pagtatanong sa mga abogado na nakakausap ko, eh ganun, pag sinabing all members, whether nag-participate or not, 16 pa rin yung two-thirds,” he said. (I support the requirement of 16 votes to constitute two-thirds of the 24 senators. Based on my consultations with lawyers, when the Constitution says 'all members,' whether they participated or not, two-thirds is still 16.) Former Supreme Court Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna earlier said he does not believe it is necessary at this stage to bring the voting threshold issue before the high court. “Palagay ko hindi pa kailangan na, hindi pa panahon na dalhin ito sa Supreme Court dahil hindi pa naman magbobotohan. Ito ay isang posisyon lamang ng chair regarding the voting threshold, which can be appealed to the body,” Azcuna told GMA News. (I don't think it is necessary yet to bring this to the Supreme Court because the Senate has not yet voted. This is merely the chair's position on the voting threshold, which may still be appealed to the impeachment court.) The issue arises at a critical juncture for Philippine politics, as the Vice President holds a significant position that could lead to presidential succession. Any instability surrounding the Vice President's office could potentially impact national governance and stability.