Senate Impeachment Court Sparks Constitutional Crisis; VP Duterte’s Conviction Threshold Lowers to 13 Votes

Senate Impeachment Court Sparks Constitutional Crisis; VP Duterte’s Conviction Threshold Lowers to 13 Votes

By Bing Jabadan – TheNATIONWEEK.com | September 24, 2026

MANILA, Philippines – The Philippine Senate has ignited a constitutional crisis by unilaterally redefining the conviction threshold for Vice President Sara Duterte in her ongoing impeachment trial. In a contentious 13-1 vote, the Senate Impeachment Court abandoned the fixed 16-vote requirement, opting instead for a two-thirds majority derived solely from senators “capable of participating” in proceedings. This unprecedented move, criticized by legal experts, fundamentally alters the constitutional mandate for conviction and sets a dangerous precedent for judicial overreach.

Altering the Constitutional Denominator: A Dangerous Precedent

The Senate’s new formula introduces a variable “denominator” for conviction, excluding senators deemed “detained, suspended, in hiding, medically incapacitated, beyond the Senate’s coercive power, or similarly situated.” This means the two-thirds majority could drop to as low as 13 votes if only 20 senators are considered “capable of participating,” starkly contrasting the Constitution’s explicit language.

Legal analysts, including former Ombudsman Assistant Special Prosecutor Atty. Anthony Ludalvi A. Vista, emphasize that this redefinition directly conflicts with Article XI, Section 3(6) of the Constitution, which unequivocally states: “No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.” The Constitution makes no provision for “members capable of participating” or “available senators.” A senator legally holding their seat, regardless of status, remains a full member of the Senate. The Senate, through a mere vote, cannot amend the foundational law of the land.

Beyond Procedure: A Direct Constitutional Challenge

This is not a routine procedural or evidentiary ruling. The Senate has fundamentally altered the constitutional condition for conviction mid-trial, compelling the defense to proceed under an arbitrarily shifted threshold. The constitutional issue is now ripe for judicial review, demanding intervention from the Supreme Court.

While the Senate holds sole power to try impeachment cases, this power remains strictly subordinate to the Constitution. The Supreme Court’s mandate under Article VIII, Section 1 is to determine whether any branch of government has committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. The Court’s role is not to rule on the Vice President’s guilt but to ensure the Senate has not exceeded its constitutional authority.

VP Duterte Faces Graft, Corruption Allegations Amid Reduced Threshold

Vice President Duterte faces impeachment allegations including graft, corruption, bribery, and an alleged assassination plot against President Ferdinand Marcos. Several senators have been absent from the trial, including Jinggoy Estrada and Rodante Marcoleta (detained on separate plunder charges), Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa (in hiding amid an International Criminal Court arrest order), and Loren Legarda (on medical leave).

Voting Breakdown for the New Threshold:

In Favor (13 votes):

• Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian, 
• Senate President Pro Tempore Vicente Sotto III, 
• Majority Leader Juan Miguel 
• Zubiri, Senators Bam Aquino, 
• Senator JV Ejercito, 
• Senator Risa Hontiveros, 
• Senator Lito Lapid, 
• Senator Panfilo Lacson, 
• Senator Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan, 
• Senator Erwin Tulfo, 
• Senator Raffy Tulfo, 
• Senator Joel Villanueva, 
• Senator Mark Villar.

Against (1 vote):

• Presiding Officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero.

Abstentions / Did Not Participate (6 votes):

• Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano, 
• Senators Pia Cayetano, 
• Senator Imee Marcos, 
• Senator Christopher “Bong” Go, 
• Camille Villar, 
• Robin Padilla. 

These senators had previously argued against the impeachment court unilaterally deciding the vote threshold.

Presiding Officer Escudero, who initially opposed the change, accepted the court’s judgment, clarifying that the ruling applies “only”  to the current impeachment proceedings and does not establish binding precedent. Any fractional result in the two-thirds computation will be rounded up.

Call for Supreme Court Intervention

Legal experts are urging the defense to immediately challenge this unconstitutional ruling. Recommended actions include:

• Formally registering a continuing objection and securing official documentation.
• Filing a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the Supreme Court, seeking a declaration of unconstitutionality for the new formula and a temporary restraining order to prevent its application.
• Ceasing participation in the presentation of merits, maintaining only a limited appearance “ad cautelam”  to preserve objections and protect the Vice President’s rights during the Supreme Court challenge.

The Senate cannot rewrite the Constitution through an interlocutory vote.

This constitutional crisis is a direct assault on the rule of law. Immediate recourse to the Supreme Court is imperative to compel adherence to the Constitution’s actual words and safeguard the nation’s democratic foundations. If convicted under this new, contested rule, Vice President Duterte would be removed from office and permanently barred from holding any public position.