Cayetano raises jurisdiction, timing concerns over Impeachment Court’s vote threshold review
Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano on Wednesday maintained that the jurisdiction over the interpretation of the voting threshold in an impeachment trial falls on the Supreme Court, and that it should have been settled before the Impeachment Court had even passed its rules.
As the Senate proceeds with debates on the threshold, Cayetano warned that changing the rules mid-trial could give either party grounds to challenge the proceedings before the Supreme Court, with the entire trial at risk of nullification if the change is found to constitute grave abuse of discretion.
Cayetano made the manifestation on September 23 as the Impeachment Court heard oral arguments on the appeal earlier made by Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo to reconsider Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero’s ruling on the number of votes needed to convict Vice President Sara Duterte.
The Minority Leader urged the Impeachment Court not to vote on the matter, maintaining that it is the Supreme Court that has the jurisdiction to interpret the threshold.
“On the record, I would prefer – and I would insist – that if there is a question on the threshold, the question be brought before the Supreme Court,” he said.
Cayetano explained that even if the Impeachment Court has jurisdiction over its own rules, “it may disappear when there is grave abuse of discretion that amounts to lack or excess of jurisdiction” on certain matters.
He recalled raising the voting threshold issue himself on the trial’s first day, saying the said Constitutional rule is ultimately a question of jurisdiction.
Cayetano added that even if the Impeachment Court has the power to change the voting threshold, it should have been done at the start and not mid-trial.
“Timing is essential,” he said. “If we did it before we passed the rules of the Senate, all parties would have been informed and all parties would have had the chance to go to the Supreme Court.”
“To discuss it in the middle of the trial, just before the prosecution is ending and just before the defense will be presenting their evidence, is not only inconvenient or uncomfortable, but I use the word ‘mistrial,’” he added.
Emphasizing fairness in dispensing justice, Cayetano also noted how the Impeachment Court was reconsidering the voting threshold while several opposition senators remained unable to attend the trial amid political pressures outside the court.
“There are real politics happening here. It’s not an accident na hindi panay opposition ang puro wala na dito,” he said.
“Inside the court, nararamdaman natin y’ung fairness. But the reality is, this court does not exist in a vacuum. May nangyayari sa labas… Hindi dapat gumawa ng mga akusasyon dito, pero hindi rin pwedeng bulag-bulagan dito na walang nangyayari sa ating bansa,” he added.
Filipino Version
Cayetano kinuwestiyon ang hurisdiksyon, ‘timing’ ng Impeachment Court sa pagrepaso sa vote threshold
Korte Suprema ang dapat magpasya sa usapin ng voting threshold sa impeachment trial, at dapat ginawa na ito bago pa man naipasa ng Impeachment Court ang rules nito, giit ni Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano nitong Miyerkules.
Ipinahayag ito ng senador noong September 23, sa gitna ng nagpapatuloy na talakayan ng Impeachment Court hinggil sa bilang ng botong kailangan para mahatulan si Vice President Sara Duterte.
Dinidinig ng Impeachment Court ang apela ni Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo na muling pag-aralan ang naunang desisyon ni Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero na 16 ang kailangang boto mula sa 24 na senador.
Babala ni Cayetano, kung babaguhin ang threshold na ito sa gitna ng trial, maaaring maging grounds ito para iakyat ng alinmang panig sa Korte Suprema ang magiging hatol ng Impeachment Court kay Duterte, at sa huli ay mabalewala ang buong paglilitis kung lumabas na may “grave abuse of discretion” ang Impeachment Court.
Hinimok niya ang Impeachment Court na huwag nang pagbotohan pa ang isyu dahil Korte Suprema ang may hurisdiksyon pagdating sa interpretasyon ng voting threshold na nakasaad sa Konstitusyon.
“On the record, I would prefer – and I would insist – that if there is a question on the threshold, the question be brought before the Supreme Court,” wika ni Cayetano.
Paliwanag niya, kahit may hurisdiksyon ang Impeachment Court sa sarili nitong rules, “it may disappear when there is grave abuse of discretion that amounts to lack or excess of jurisdiction” pagdating sa ilang partikular na usapin.
At kung may kapangyarihan man ang Impeachment Court na baguhin ang kinakailangang bilang ng boto, dagdag pa ni Cayetano, dapat aniya ay pinagpasiyahan iyon sa simula pa lang ng paglilitis.
“Timing is essential,” giit niya. “If we did it before we passed the rules of the Senate, all parties would have been informed and all parties would have had the chance to go to the Supreme Court.”
“To discuss it in the middle of the trial, just before the prosecution is ending and just before the defense will be presenting their evidence, is not only inconvenient or uncomfortable, but I use the word ‘mistrial,’” dagdag niya.
Binanggit rin ni Cayetano ang pulitikal na kontekstong bumabalot sa isyu ng pagpapababa sa voting threshold.
“There are real politics happening here. It’s not an accident na hindi panay opposition ang puro wala na dito,” aniya.
“Inside the court, nararamdaman natin y’ung fairness. But the reality is, this court does not exist in a vacuum. May nangyayari sa labas… Hindi dapat gumawa ng mga akusasyon dito, pero hindi rin pwedeng bulag-bulagan dito na walang nangyayari sa ating bansa,” dugtong niya.
Share This Post
