(Screenshot from livestream)
MANILA – Retired Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban on Wednesday urged the Senate impeachment court to consider the purpose and practical application of the Constitution, not just a fixed mathematical formula, in determining the votes required to convict Vice President Sara Duterte
Appearing as amicus curiae, or friend of the court, Panganiban questioned whether senators who did not examine the evidence, hear testimony or observe witnesses should participate in the final vote.
“Reality, sometimes, Your Honors, changes the denominator in mathematics. In the same way, constitutional interpretation cannot always stop at abstract mathematics,” he said.
The issue arose from Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo’s appeal seeking clarification on how the constitutional requirement of two-thirds of “all the Members of the Senate” should apply when some senators are unable to participate. Presiding officer Francis Escudero had earlier ruled that conviction would require 16 votes, or two-thirds of the full 24-member Senate.
Panganiban acknowledged that two-thirds of 24 is 16 but said constitutional interpretation should also consider the intent, purpose and circumstances surrounding a provision.
He cited the 1949 Supreme Court ruling in Avelino v. Cuenco, which involved the computation of a Senate quorum rather than the voting threshold for an impeachment conviction.
In that case, the Court considered the number of senators actually available when determining whether a quorum existed. Panganiban said such precedents illustrate why constitutional questions cannot always be resolved through arithmetic alone.
He stressed that senator-judges must personally evaluate documentary evidence, listen to testimony and observe witnesses before reaching a judgment.
“Indeed, meaningful adjudication requires active participation in the search for truth and fairness,” Panganiban said.
He also questioned whether it would be fair for senators who were abroad, detained, hospitalized, in hiding or otherwise absent from proceedings to vote despite not having directly examined the evidence presented before the impeachment court.
Panganiban urged the Senate to fully hear both the prosecution and defense before deciding the case, including their witnesses and legal arguments.
The Senate impeachment court invited Panganiban, retired Chief Justices Reynato Puno and Hilario Davide Jr., and retired Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna to provide guidance on the disputed voting threshold. Davide submitted a legal memorandum instead of appearing personally.
On judicial review, Panganiban said a Senate impeachment judgment is generally final as to the merits, although the Supreme Court may review actions alleged to constitute grave abuse of discretion.
The Senate impeachment court is expected to hear oral arguments from the prosecution and defense on September 23 before senator-judges act on the disputed voting threshold.(PNA)
