PASAY CITY, Philippines — Senate President Win Gatchalian clarified on Thursday, September 24, that the 13 senator-judges who supported adjusting the baseline for the voting formula in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial have not signaled their final stance on her conviction or acquittal.
Gatchalian explained that Wednesday’s vote focused strictly on interpreting the constitutional two-thirds vote requirement rather than assessing the merits of the impeachment allegations.
“The vote yesterday, hindi ibig sabihin na iyon na rin ang magiging boto para sa conviction. Malayo yun. Depende pa rin yan sa presentation ng evidence. Depende pa rin yan kung anong sasabihin ng mga testigo,” Gatchalian told reporters.
“So, hindi pa yan yung boto para i-convict o hindi pa rin yan yung boto para i-acquit,” he added.
The Senate impeachment court recently reversed its prior directive mandating a fixed 16-vote threshold to convict the Vice President. Under the revised framework, the required two-thirds majority will be calculated using only the total number of senators who are “legally and factually capable of participating” when the verdict is rendered.
The motion passed with support from 13 senator-judges. Presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero voted against the revision, while six other senator-judges chose not to participate.
Gatchalian defended allowing non-attending senators to participate in the final verdict, provided they face no legal impediments and are physically present. He noted that excluding absent lawmakers automatically could result in an acquittal without determining their actual stance.
While acknowledging that senators attending the trial gain direct familiarity with evidence and witnesses, he emphasized that absent members can review the case through official transcripts and audio-visual recordings.
When asked if a senator who missed portions of the proceedings could still cast a vote upon attending the final session, Gatchalian confirmed,
“Pwede siyang bumoto.”
He noted that the same standard applies to detained senators if legal restrictions are lifted and physical attendance is achieved before the final vote. Under the updated guidelines, individuals facing legal prohibitions or factual incapacity will be excluded from the baseline count, with the tribunal evaluating individual eligibility when the vote takes place.
Legal capacity hinges on whether the presiding judicial authority grants permission, whereas physical presence proves factual capacity.
“For example, kung dadating ang panahon magkakaroon tayo ng botohan at present sila dito, factual, walang legal impediment, then they can vote,” Gatchalian explained.
Regarding detained lawmakers, Gatchalian stated that the impeachment court must respect the jurisdiction of the overseeing courts, referencing a Supreme Court decision requiring court authorization before detained officials can execute certain duties.
He mentioned that detained members, such as Senator Jinggoy Estrada—whose earlier request to participate was denied—may reapply if their circumstances shift.
Comparing the trial procedures to standard legislative operations, Gatchalian highlighted the necessity of physical attendance.
“Kailangan warm body,” Gatchalian stated, explaining that the physical presence requirement mirrors standard legislative procedures, such as voting on third readings of bills.
The impeachment tribunal’s ruling leaves the constitutional requirement for a two-thirds vote intact, modifying only the baseline calculation used to determine that threshold.