Sara Duterte impeachment trial: Senate court deliberates on changing conviction vote threshold

The Senate impeachment court on Wednesday voted to base the two-thirds vote to convict the impeached Vice President Sara Duterte on the number of senators who are capable of "legally and factually participating in the impeachment proceedings." Thirteen senator-judges voted in favor of the motion put forward by Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo, who sought reconsideration of the July 6 ruling after some senators became unavailable to participate in the impeachment trial. This overturns the initial threshold of 16 votes (two-thirds of all 24 senators) set by presiding officer Senator-judge Francis "Chiz" Escudero on July 6. Article 11, Section 6 of the Constitution does not state a specific number, instead reading, "No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.” The same constitutional provision also states that "The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment." Of the 13 who voted in favor of Tulfo’s motion, only Senator Villar is from the Minority bloc. The lone no vote came from Escudero. The six minority bloc senators did not participate in the vote. Defense team lead counsel Sheila Sison said the Vice President’s camp will exhaust all legal remedies to address the new threshold for conviction. "She reserves every right to exhaust all legal remedies available under our law and Constitution, with due regard for the essence of a truly free, democratic institution. And it is the right of every citizen to be heard in an impartial court that fears no one," she added. Meanwhile, House prosecutor Chel Diokno of Akbayan party-list argued that the threshold must be changed, asserting that the Vice President’s case should be decided on its merits, not by default due to the absence of senator-judges. "Yes, the Constitution deliberately makes conviction harder by imposing the two-thirds requirement. But making it harder is not the same as making it depend on senators who are not judges or who are incapable of acting as judges. That would be tantamount to an acquittal by default, a failure to arrive at the threshold number caused not by the judgment of the incapacitated senators, but by their mere inclusion in the denominator," Diokno added. However, defense counsel Michael Poa argued that Escudero's July 6 ruling setting 16 votes as the threshold cannot be appealed as it is not provided under Senate impeachment rules. "Last July 6, 2026, on the very first day of trial, the presiding officer ruled that a voting threshold to convict is 16. At that time, no senator-judge objected. No senator-judge sought reconsideration. No senator-judge appealed. Your Honors, that was over two months ago. There is no supervening event. Our point is, nothing changed between July 6 and today," Poa said. Escudero, however, rebutted Poa by citing a Supreme Court decision in People v. Amigo, GR number 116719, which states that Supreme Court decisions are "not petrified rules grown rigid once pronounced, but may be reconsidered upon further reflection in light of new perspectives." He added, "The July ruling issued during an ongoing proceeding is not a final judgment on any Article of Impeachment. It cannot claim greater; therefore, this issue cannot claim greater immutability than the judicial doctrine itself. Where the governing impeachment rules prescribe no period and no final judgment has been rendered, the court remains free to reconsider its interpretation." Tulfo also addressed Poa’s comments about no supervening event, citing that the detention of four colleagues due to alleged plunder, their hiding from authorities, and their leaves of absence are realities the court should address as elected representatives of the people. Camille Villar then appealed to her colleagues not to attack their detained fellow senators, stating they have not yet been convicted. Her take was seconded by her brother, Mark Villar, citing the need for respect among colleagues. Erwin Tulfo apologized if his comments offended his colleagues but stressed he never said they were convicted, only charged in court. "Further, the statements were not attacks against our fellow senators but merely confronting the present reality that some senators are physically or legally unable to participate in the impeachment trial. The issue of detained senators is so intertwined in the determination of the denominator," Tulfo said. Information source: GMA News Philippines