By Wilnard Bacelonia
MANILA – A senator-judge who missed previous proceedings in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte may still cast a vote on the final verdict, provided the senator is physically present and legally able to participate on voting day, Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian clarified on Thursday.
Gatchalian said the same rule works the other way: a senator-judge who regularly attended the trial but is absent when the verdict is taken cannot cast a vote.
“Kailangan andito ka physically para bumoto (You have to be here physically to vote),” Gatchalian said in a chance interview.
The clarification follows the impeachment court’s decision on Wednesday to abandon a fixed 16-vote requirement and instead compute the constitutional two-thirds threshold based on senators who are legally and factually capable of participating when judgment is rendered.
Asked whether a senator who had not participated in the trial could still vote by simply appearing on judgment day, Gatchalian answered in the affirmative.
He said such a senator may still have followed the proceedings through recordings or studied the transcripts and evidence presented before the court.
“We are assuming, ako, I am assuming na when the time comes na nandito sila, there will be a possibility na binasa nila yung transcript. Nanood sila ng YouTube, napanood nila yung trial itself (I am assuming that when the time comes and they are here, there is a possibility that they have read the transcript, watched on YouTube, and watched the trial itself),” he said.
Gatchalian acknowledged that senator-judges who attend proceedings are in a better position to observe witnesses, ask questions, and assess their demeanor.
However, he said, the circumstances of individual senators differ, making physical presence and the absence of a legal impediment the practical tests when the final vote is called.
“Ang basic doon, kung dadating ang panahon magkakaroon tayo ng botohan at present sila dito, factual, walang legal impediment, then they can vote (The basic rule is that when the time comes for us to vote and they are present here, that is factual; if there is no legal impediment, then they can vote),” he said.
The issue is particularly significant because several senator-judges have been unable to participate in the trial for varying reasons.
Gatchalian said senators under court custody may still seek permission from the Sandiganbayan to participate, although any attendance would remain subject to the anti-graft court’s approval.
He earlier said detained senators themselves must seek such permission because they are already under the court’s jurisdiction.
The question of participation was among the issues considered before Wednesday’s ruling.
Retired Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., one of the amici curiae consulted by the impeachment court, had taken a more restrictive view, saying a senator-judge who never attended or performed duties in the trial should be deemed not to have participated.
Gatchalian, however, stressed that Wednesday’s vote establishing the new threshold rule should not be read as an indication of how senator-judges would decide Duterte’s guilt or innocence.
“Pagdating sa (When it comes to the) verdict, it’s about the evidence, it’s about the testimonies, it’s about how the prosecution and defense will present their cases,” he said.
Asked whether the 13 senators who supported overturning the fixed threshold could therefore be considered votes for conviction, Gatchalian replied, “Walang sure (Nothing is certain).”
