Manila: Continuous absence, failure to take the impeachment oath, and voluntary inhibition emerged Wednesday as possible factors in determining who should be counted in the final voting base in Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial. During questioning by Senator-judge Risa Hontiveros, retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno said the Senate impeachment court could look at the reasoning in the 1949 Avelino v. Cuenco case when dealing with a senator who remains a member but continuously stays away from the proceedings.
According to Philippines News Agency, Puno specifically cited the concept of a member being 'beyond the coercive power' of the Senate but stopped short of saying that such a senator should automatically be removed from the impeachment denominator. Avelino involved a dispute over whether 12 senators constituted a quorum in a 24-member Senate when one senator was hospitalized and another was abroad. The Supreme Court later described the senator outside the country as beyond the Senate's coercive power and treated 12 members as sufficient for a quorum. The case dealt with quorum under the 1935 Constitution, not an impeachment vote.
Puno said the impeachment court could examine the precedent only as a guide in determining the status of a senator who continuously absents himself or herself. Hontiveros then raised a different situation - a senator who never took the oath required for senator-judges. Puno said there could be no blanket answer because the court must first determine the purpose of the oath, why the senator failed to take it, and the stage of the impeachment proceedings.
'Mahalaga po ang malaman natin kung anong dahilan at kung ano na yung stage ng impeachment proceedings (It is important to know the reason and what stage the impeachment proceedings are already in),' he said. Article XI, Section 3(6) of the Constitution provides that senators shall be under oath or affirmation when sitting to try impeachment cases and that conviction requires the concurrence of two-thirds of 'all the Members of the Senate.'
Retired Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, meanwhile, said a senator-judge who concludes that he or she cannot render a truthful and fair judgment should voluntarily inhibit - and, in his view, should no longer form part of the denominator. 'If you cannot, then you shouldn't be counted because you will be diminishing the effort and the voice of those who are here present trying to find the truth and trying to be fair,' Panganiban said. His position differs from retired Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna, who has maintained that senators remain part of the constitutional denominator as long as they continue to hold office, regardless of absence or inability to participate.
