Three retired Chief Justices told the Senate Impeachment Court that the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds vote to convict an impeached official should not be fixed at 16, but instead depend on the number of senators qualified to vote.
On Day 26 of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, Hilario Davide Jr., Artemio Panganiban, and Reynato Puno argued that senators who are legally or physically unable to perform their duties should not be counted in the denominator when computing the two-thirds threshold.
Davide listed categories of senators who should be excluded, including those who have resigned or been expelled, those incapacitated by illness, those abroad or in hiding, and those under detention or suspension due to graft or plunder charges.
Puno emphasized a “contextual and functional interpretation” of Article XI, Section 3(6) of the Constitution, warning that a rigid requirement of 16 votes could lead to absurd outcomes.
He noted that the framers deliberately used a fraction rather than a fixed number, meaning the threshold should adjust to circumstances.
Panganiban likewise cautioned against inflating the denominator with senators absent or unable to participate, stressing that fairness to both the impeached official and the public requires a realistic interpretation.
All three former Chief Justices rejected the view that 16 votes is permanently required, saying constitutional interpretation must balance mathematics with practical realities.
Meanwhile, those who argue for a fixed threshold maintain that Article XI, Section 3(6) of the Constitution clearly requires “two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.”
They interpret this to mean the full membership of 24 senators, regardless of absences or incapacities. ||
