Luistro urges study of Avelino ruling for VP Sara impeachment trial voting

House lead prosecutor Representative Gerville Luistro on Monday urged a study on whether the Supreme Court’s (SC) ruling in Avelino v. Cuenco, which recognized a reduced quorum under certain circumstances, may be applied to voting in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

Under the 1987 Constitution, at least two-thirds of all the members of the Senate are required to convict an official. A total of 16 votes is needed for conviction and only nine votes for acquittal.

“Documents will show na sinunod ‘yung Avelino v. Cuenco. Na-reduce ‘yung number of quorum because these senators were outside the coercive power of the Senate,” she said on Unang Balita.

(Documents will show that Avelino v. Cuenco was followed. The quorum requirement was reduced because these senators were outside the coercive power of the Senate.)

“Sa akin po, dapat ito ay pag-aralan rin kung posible bang sundan din itong jurisprudence na ito for the purpose of determining the number of required votes for the purpose of conviction. Hindi lang conviction, pati acquittal,” she added.

(In my view, this should also be studied to determine whether this jurisprudence can likewise be followed for the purpose of determining the number of votes required for conviction. Not only for conviction, but also for acquittal.)

According to Luistro, the SC should determine the correct number needed for the purpose of conviction.

Luistro said she believes that the Constitution and laws are evolving, and they must respond to the demands of time.

“Ito po ang sa akin, bakit ba tayo may mga senador? The purpose is to represent the Filipino people. So kung ang ating senador ay nakakulong, kung ang ating senador ay nagtatago, kung ang ating senador ay nasa labas ng bansa, can we truly say that at that particular occasion, they are representing the interest of the sovereign Filipino people? Of course the answer is no,” Luistro said.

(This is my point: why do we have senators? The purpose is to represent the Filipino people. So if a senator is in detention, if a senator is in hiding, if a senator is outside the country, can we truly say that, on that particular occasion, they are representing the interests of the sovereign Filipino people? Of course, the answer is no.)

To recall, several senators elected Senator Sherwin Gatchalian as Senate President Pro Tempore and later named him acting Senate President amid the continued absence of Senator Alan Peter Cayetano and other members of the majority bloc.

Gatchalian said that the ruling found that an absolute majority of 12 out of 23 members could constitute a constitutional majority for quorum purposes.

For his part, Cayetano has maintained that he remains the Senate President.

At a separate press conference, Luistro reiterated that she believes the voting threshold should be decreased and that two-thirds must be taken from a base number of 22 senators.

“With the current situation, yes. The same way it was reduced in the election of Senate President Pro Tempore and the rest of the chairmen, chairwomen of the different committees of the Senate,” she said.

Luistro said the prosecution team has yet to discuss on whether they will submit a motion to reduce the threshold of votes for the conviction.

Meanwhile, House Impeachment Team Spokesperson Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong and Prosecution member Ysabel Maria Zamora expressed agreement with Luistro, saying they want a Senate that is operational and functional.

“We cannot have a functional Senate if some of the members will not be accessible in terms of passing their judgment through a vote,” he said.

Zamora said that senators who are able to do their jobs are needed for the impeachment proceedings.

“If one is hiding, purposely hiding from, not only his job, but from the people, then he shouldn’t be included in the number when we count. Whether this is for quorum purposes or whether this is for the determination of conviction,” she said.

‘Subject to interpretation’

In a separate interview, Private Prosecutor Lorna Kapunan said that while the Constitution states that votes from at least two-thirds of the Senate are needed, the term “all members” is subject to interpretation.

“So ang sinasabi ko kung ‘yung two-thirds, it should be two-thirds of 24 minus two,” Kapunan said in a Zoom briefing.

(So what I’m saying is the two-thirds, it shuld be two-thirds of 24 minus two.)

“Eh, meron pang susunod na isu-suspended na filan ng kaso sa Ombudsman under the plunder laws or anti-graft corruption laws. ‘Pag suspended ‘yan, dapat hindi kailangan sa bilang ng all of the members. ‘Yan ang legal position namin,” she added.

(There is also another one who will be suspended once a case is filed with the Ombudsman under the plunder laws or anti-graft corruption laws. If that person is suspended, they should not be included in the count of all the members. That is our legal position.)

Kapunan said that officials under preventive suspension should not be allowed to attend hearings.

“If [an] official is charged in court, preventive suspension na ‘yan. So klarong-klaro na dapat kapag preventive suspension, hindi ka makakapag participate. ‘Yung sinasabi na leave of court para mag attend diyan, hindi po tama ‘yan,” she said.

(If an official is charged in court, that would already warrant preventive suspension. So it is very clear that when there is preventive suspension, you cannot participate. The claim that you can attend by obtaining leave of court is not correct.)

SP election

Meanwhile, Luistro maintained that the House of Representatives recognizes the election of Senator Sherwin Gatchalian as Senate President Pro-tempore. Gatchalian was later named acting Senate President.

Despite this, she expressed hope that a Senate President will soon be elected to avoid issues on constitutionality.

“We are quite apprehensive sapagkat napaka-sensitive nito, nitong impeachment trial na ito. And we do not want to encounter another issue of constitutionality,” she said.

(We are quite apprehensive because this impeachment trial is extremely sensitive. And we do not want to encounter another issue of constitutionality.)

Pre-trial brief

The House Prosecution panel is set to submit today the pre-trial brief for the impeachment trial of Duterte.

“So may listahan po tayo ng mga stipulation of facts na pwedeng ang sagot ng depensa, admitted or not admitted. Ang layon po nito, bawasan ‘yung mga pagtatalunan doon sa trial,” she said.

(So we have a list of stipulations of facts to which the defense may answer either admitted or not admitted. The purpose of this is to reduce the number of issues that will be disputed during the trial.)

Aside from this, Luistro said the pre-trial brief contains the list of witnesses and documents that will be presented during the presentation of evidence.

“The significance of this pre-trial brief, it serves like a blueprint, a roadmap, at ito po ang susundin sa atin pong paguumpisa ng paglilitis. And apparently, the rule is, ‘yung nailagay mo lang sa pre-trial brief o napapaloob sa pre-trial order, ‘yan lang ang pwede nating ilatag during the presentation of evidence,” she said.

(The significance of this pre-trial brief is that it serves like a blueprint, a roadmap, and this is what we will follow when we begin the trial. And apparently, the rule is that only the matters included in the pre-trial brief or contained in the pre-trial order may be presented during the presentation of evidence.)

Meanwhile, Luistro said the stipulation of facts will be tackled during the pre-trial conference on June 18, Thursday. — RSJ, GMA News