Solicitor General asks SC to junk senators’ petition on Senate impeachment voting rule

Manila— The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) has urged the Supreme Court (SC) to dismiss the petition filed by Senators Robin Padilla and Bong Go challenging the Senate impeachment court’s interpretation of the constitutional voting requirement for convicting Vice President Sara Duterte.

In a 47-page comment, the OSG—representing the Senate impeachment court—argued that the petition for certiorari and prohibition is premature and lacks merit. It also asked the high tribunal to deny the petitioners' prayer for a status quo ante order, temporary restraining order (TRO), and writ of preliminary injunction.

Padilla, Go, and their political party, Partido Demokratiko Pilipino-Lakas ng Bayan (PDP-Laban), filed the petition in October. They sought to block the impeachment court and the House of Representatives from excluding any sitting senator from the constitutional count of “all members of the Senate.”

The dispute stems from the impeachment court's decision to compute the mandatory two-thirds vote threshold based only on the number of senators legally and factually capable of participating in the trial. Under the 1987 Constitution, a conviction requires the concurrence of two-thirds of all Senate members.

Defending the court's stance, the OSG maintained that establishing the applicable voting baseline falls entirely within the Senate impeachment court's authority and does not constitute grave abuse of discretion.

The government's lead counsel noted that the senator-judges reached the decision after evaluating arguments from both the prosecution and defense, hearing expert opinions from invited amici curiae, and deliberating in an open session where objections were formally addressed.

"Indisputably, the challenged ruling was a product of a deliberative process where all the parties were given the opportunity to defend their respective positions. Each objection was entertained and resolved," the OSG said.

The OSG added that the Senate did not alter the constitutional benchmark for conviction, but merely defined how the rule applies when certain senators are unable to take their oaths or sit in trial.

"The Senate's threshold ruling was not an attempt to remove the two-thirds requirement. It was a rule on who should be counted as part of the Senate impeachment court when some senators are unable to take their oaths or participate. 

"Without such a rule, non-participating senators would be counted as though they had performed functions and as if they had voted for acquittal," the OSG explained.