Senator Rodante Marcoleta has asserted that his current imprisonment does not strip him of his authority or legal capacity to participate and cast his vote as a senator-judge in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.
In a letter dated July 20, 2026, addressed to Senate President Win Gatchalian and Presiding Officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero—which was made public by his office on Wednesday, September 9—Marcoleta insisted that he remains fully qualified to fulfill his duties in the impeachment court.
“There is no impairment to my legal capacity to vote as a Senator-judge for I am not under preventive suspension,” Marcoleta wrote.
The letter surfaced following calls from several senator-judges to reexamine Escudero’s earlier determination that 16 votes are necessary to convict the Vice President. That threshold was set when only 21 of the 24 senators were active, following the arrests of Marcoleta and Senator Jinggoy Estrada on plunder charges, as well as the disappearance of Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa following an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant.
Citing the internal impeachment rules of the Senate, Marcoleta highlighted a provision granting the Senate President authority to prescribe procedure for senators unable to cast votes in person due to valid reasons.
He interpreted this clause as covering lawmakers who are “driven into hiding, detained, suspended, hospitalized but not permanently incapacitated or even temporarily abroad.”
“Limitations to my legal capacity to perform the functions of senator-judge are not insurmountable. 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,” Marcoleta said.
Marcoleta argued that his detention poses no “constitutional obstacle” to participating in the trial, maintaining that the same principle should extend to Estrada and “others who may be subjected to political persecution and detention.”
The lawmaker also expressed support for Escudero’s ruling on the 16-vote conviction threshold, noting that two-thirds of all Senate members are constitutionally required to convict, and pointing out that no member objected when the ruling was established.
“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 stated.
However, Marcoleta opposed Escudero’s appointment as presiding officer over the trial. Escudero assumed the leadership post on June 3 after 12 senators voted for another member to preside while the then-majority bloc led by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano was absent.
That group maintained that quorum should be calculated based only on senators capable of physically attending, excluding dela Rosa and Estrada due to their legal troubles.
Conversely, minority senators argued that quorum requires a majority of the entire 24-member chamber.
“The Senate cannot distort the plain meaning of the Constitution by supplying additional exceptions, such as designating a senator other than the Senate president as presiding officer,” Marcoleta stressed.