Manila:House prosecutor Chel Diokno of Akbayan Party-list stated that a Supreme Court challenge regarding the impeachment voting threshold would be appropriate only if the Senate convicts Vice President Sara Z. Duterte with fewer than 16 votes. This position was articulated during a session where Senator-Judge Alan Peter Cayetano questioned whether the dispute should be settled by the Senate Impeachment Court or the Supreme Court.

According to Philippines News Agency, Diokno emphasized that the issue is not yet ready for Supreme Court review, as it remains hypothetical without a verdict. He explained that if the conviction vote reaches 16 or more, there would be no issue for the Supreme Court to resolve. A petition filed before an actual vote, he noted, would likely be dismissed as premature.

Diokno clarified that an actual controversy suitable for Supreme Court consideration would arise only if the Senate's vote results in fewer than 16 supporting a conviction, thereby making the threshold question decisive. This distinction is crucial to keep the Senate's proceedings separate from potential court challenges.

Cayetano referenced an earlier ruling and queried why the issue couldn't already be brought before the Supreme Court. Diokno reiterated that only a final verdict vote could generate a justiciable controversy over the threshold.

The ongoing Senate Impeachment Court's task is to conduct the trial, resolve procedural questions, and vote on the Articles of Impeachment. Diokno noted that the controversy over voting thresholds would only matter if the vote count affects the outcome.

The discussion also touched on whether the impeachment court could order the Sandiganbayan to allow detained senators to attend the trial. Diokno asserted that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over such matters, including the criminal cases and the custody of accused individuals.

In conclusion, Diokno delineated the roles of the involved institutions the Senate Impeachment Court conducts and decides the impeachment process, the Sandiganbayan handles criminal proceedings, and the Supreme Court may later address any concrete constitutional controversies that arise from the final vote. Until such a point, the impeachment court is to continue its constitutional responsibilities.