Majority senators hail SC ruling upholding June 3 Senate session

Majority senators on Friday welcomed the Supreme Court’s dismissal of a petition questioning the legality of the June 3 Senate session that led to the removal of then-Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano.

In an en banc resolution dated August 26, the high court ruled that petitioners Valeriano Loon and Zigfred Diaz failed to establish that respondents committed grave abuse of discretion in convening and conducting the session. The Court noted that the proceedings appeared to be “in accord with the facts and applicable law and jurisprudence.”

Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, one of the respondents, said participating senators were confident from the start that they were acting within legal bounds.

“We were certain then—and it is now validated by the Supreme Court—that we stood on solid legal ground when we reorganized the Senate by removing Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano and electing Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian as Senate President Pro Tempore and Acting Presiding Officer, having a clear majority of 12 in our bloc,” Lacson said in a statement.

Senator Francis Pangilinan also welcomed the decision, calling on his colleagues to put political differences aside and focus on legislative work.

“We acknowledge the Supreme Court’s ruling on the June 3 Senate session with respect and humility,” Pangilinan said. “In the words of my Gen Z kids, ‘Move on na.’ Tuloy-tuloy na tayong magtrabaho (Let us continue working).”

Senator Sherwin Gatchalian echoed his colleagues' sentiments, saying the Senate convened “in accordance with the Constitution and established jurisprudence” to prevent a operational deadlock in the chamber.

During the controversial June 3 proceedings, Sen. Francis Escudero joined 11 members of the former minority bloc to establish a quorum.

The group set the total Senate membership at 22 for quorum purposes—citing the landmark Avelino v. Cuenco ruling—and excluded Senators Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa and Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada from the tally on the ground that they were outside the Senate's “coercive power.” -Paraluman News