The men and women who drafted the 1987 Constitution built the impeachment court on an assumption that now looks fragile: that every senator seated as a judge would show up and take part. Lawyer Rene Sarmiento, one of those framers, said that expectation left no room for the situation the Senate faces today.
Speaking on One News’ “The Big Story,” Sarmiento said the drafters simply never pictured senator-judges who might be behind bars or evading arrest. “Present, active, functioning and participative” — that, he explained, was the profile the framers had in mind for anyone sitting in judgment.
The gap between that intent and current reality has forced the question of how many votes it takes to convict Vice President Sara Duterte back onto the table. A conviction under the Constitution requires the concurrence of two-thirds of all members of the Senate, a figure the court’s presiding officer earlier fixed at 16 based on the chamber’s full roster of 24. Whether “all members” means all 24 or only those able to sit in the trial is now the subject of formal review, with independent legal experts scheduled to be heard on September 16.
Sarmiento said he thinks the threshold could be brought down, though he expects any move in that direction to end up before the Supreme Court.
That reading aligns with a position staked out by retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, who argued in a separate “The Big Story” interview on September 9 that holding impeached officials to account matters more than a rigid vote count. Counting senators who take no part in the proceedings makes little sense, Carpio said, and the two-thirds should be measured against the senator-judges actually seated.
The dispute is not abstract. Six senators are, for varying reasons, sidelined. Jinggoy Estrada and Rodante Marcoleta are detained on plunder charges. Ronald dela Rosa has gone into hiding. Loren Legarda is abroad on an extended medical leave. Alan Peter Cayetano and Pia Cayetano are also overseas on personal travel.
Where the framers assumed a full bench, the court that will decide Duterte’s fate may have to reckon with how few of its members can lawfully cast a vote at all.
