Senator Marcoleta asserts right to vote as senator-judge in impeachment trial despite being in jail

Senator Rodante Marcoleta has maintained that his ongoing detention does not prevent him from exercising his duties as a senator-judge in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

In a July 20, 2026 letter addressed to Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian and Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero, Marcoleta argued that his legal capacity to vote remains intact.

“There is no impairment to my legal capacity to vote as a senator-judge, for I am not under preventive suspension,” Marcoleta wrote.

His office released the letter on Wednesday as senator-judges weighed whether to revisit Escudero’s earlier ruling requiring 16 votes to convict Duterte.

Escudero established the 16-vote threshold at a time when only 21 senator-judges were active in the trial—following the arrests of Marcoleta and Sen. Jinggoy Estrada on plunder charges, alongside the absence of Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, who remains in hiding over an International Criminal Court arrest warrant.

Citing the Senate Rules on Impeachment, Marcoleta highlighted a provision stating: “The president of the Senate shall, in the event any senator cannot personally cast his/her vote due to any valid reasons, prescribe the manner and procedure on how the vote shall be cast and communicated to the chamber.”

Based on this rule, Marcoleta asserted that lawmakers do not lose their seats merely because they are detained, in hiding, suspended, hospitalized, or out of the country, provided they are not permanently incapacitated. Consequently, he argued there is no constitutional barrier preventing detained senators from taking part in the proceedings.

Marcoleta added that the same principle should extend to Estrada and any other senators who might face detention, framing the charges as political persecution.

“Limitations to my legal capacity to perform the functions of senator-judge are not insurmountable,” Marcoleta stated. “Historically and realistically, there is no constitutional obstacle to the adoption by the Senate of means to overcome such limitations in order to ensure equality of arms between the prosecution and defense.”

Despite insisting on his right to participate, Marcoleta voiced support for Escudero’s 16-vote conviction threshold, citing the constitutional requirement that “no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the members of the Senate.” He also emphasized that no senator objected when the ruling was made.

“There were 21 senator-judges present. No one objected to the foregoing ruling. It is therefore the prevailing ruling of the impeachment court. I vote in favor of the foregoing ruling and reasoning,” he wrote.

However, Marcoleta broke with Escudero on the issue of his appointment as presiding officer.

He opposed the June 3 vote that placed Escudero in the role—a move approved by 12 of the Senate’s 24 members during a plenary session skipped by the majority bloc, then led by current Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano.

-Paraluman News