The insights shared by three former Supreme Court Justices during their appearance before the Impeachment Court Wednesday left an “indelible” mark on Senator-Judge Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson and will help guide his decision when the Court votes next week on the disputed voting threshold for conviction.
Lacson said Thursday that he learned much from retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno’s discussion of “textual vs. contextual” interpretation, retired Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban’s emphasis on “truth and fairness,” and retired Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna’s interpretation of the phrase “all means all” in determining the threshold.
In Filipino: Lacson: Pananaw ng mga Dating SC Justice, Tumatak at Gagabay sa Desisyon sa Voting Threshold
“Engaging in open court with three of the Court’s most esteemed former justices (including two former Chief Justices) was an unforgettable experience. Concepts like ‘textual vs. contextual,’ ‘truth and fairness,’ and ‘all means all’ certainly left an indelible mark on my mind and conscience. These insights will directly guide my decision next week,” he said on X.
Engaging in open court with three of the Court’s most esteemed former justices (including two former Chief Justices) was an unforgettable experience. Concepts like ‘textual vs. contextual,’ ‘truth and fairness,’ and ‘all means all’ certainly left an indelible mark on my mind and…
— PING LACSON (@iampinglacson) September 17, 2026
During Wednesday’s proceedings, Puno expressed favor towards a “contextual” interpretation of the Constitution, saying the two-thirds requirement should not necessarily be treated as a fixed 16 votes when circumstances legally prevent a senator from functioning as a member of the Impeachment Court.
Panganiban said senators may interpret the Constitution in accordance with their mandate as representatives of the people, guided by “truth and fairness.” He also questioned whether senator-judges who had not participated in the trial should be included in the voting threshold.
For his part, Azcuna had a different position on the phrase “all the members of the Senate” in Article XI, Sec. 3 (6), saying that “As long as they are members of the Senate, they constitute the denominator in computing the threshold of two-thirds because all means all.”
Retired Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., in a memorandum read during Wednesday’s proceedings, also said that the basis of computing the two-thirds must be the number of senators “who are qualified to vote.”
Lacson, in his interjection Wednesday, asked Panganiban how the Impeachment Court can ensure the “fairness and truth” he cited when nine senator-judges could not attend the impeachment trial, leaving only 15 – one short of the 16 votes to represent two-thirds of all Senate members required for conviction.
The senator-judges are to vote next week whether to uphold or modify the ruling of Impeachment Court presiding officer Sen. Francis Escudero that 16 votes are required for conviction, based on the Constitution’s provision that “no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.”
The issue was raised after Sen. Erwin Tulfo appealed Escudero’s initial ruling on the voting threshold.
*****
Lacson: Pananaw ng mga Dating SC Justice, Tumatak at Gagabay sa Desisyon sa Voting Threshold
Tumatak kay Senator-Judge Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson ang mga pananaw na ibinahagi ng tatlong dating mahistrado ng Supreme Court sa kanilang pagharap sa Impeachment Court noong Miyerkules, at makatutulong ang mga ito sa kanyang pagdedesisyon kapag bumoto ang Impeachment Court sa susunod na linggo sa pinagtatalunang voting threshold para sa conviction.
Sinabi ni Lacson nitong Huwebes na marami siyang natutuhan mula sa talakayan ni retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno tungkol sa “textual vs. contextual” interpretation, pagbibigay-diin ni retired Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban sa “truth and fairness,” at interpretasyon ni retired Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna sa pariralang “all means all” sa pagtukoy ng threshold.
“Engaging in open court with three of the Court’s most esteemed former justices (including two former Chief Justices) was an unforgettable experience. Concepts like ‘textual vs. contextual,’ ‘truth and fairness,’ and ‘all means all’ certainly left an indelible mark on my mind and conscience. These insights will directly guide my decision next week,” ani Lacson sa X.
Noong Miyerkules, pabor si Puno sa isang “contextual” na interpretasyon ng Konstitusyon, at sinabing hindi dapat awtomatikong ituring na nakapirming 16 boto ang two-thirds requirement kapag may mga sitwasyong legal na humahadlang sa isang senador na gumanap bilang miyembro ng Impeachment Court.
Sinabi naman ni Panganiban na maaaring bigyang-kahulugan ng mga senador ang Konstitusyon alinsunod sa kanilang mandato bilang mga kinatawan ng taumbayan, na ginagabayan ng “truth and fairness.” Kinwestyon din niya kung dapat isama sa pagbibilang ng voting threshold ang mga senator-judge na hindi nakadalo o nakibahagi sa paglilitis.
Para naman kay Azcuna, iba ang kanyang posisyon sa pariralang “all the members of the Senate” sa Article XI, Sec. 3 (6) ng Konstitusyon, at sinabi niyang, “As long as they are members of the Senate, they constitute the denominator in computing the threshold of two-thirds because all means all.”
Ayon naman kay retired Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. sa kanyang memorandum na binasa sa proceedings nitong Miyerkules, dapat ibatay ang pagkukuwenta ng two-thirds sa bilang ng mga senador na “qualified to vote.”
Sa kanyang interjection noong Miyerkules, tinanong ni Lacson si Panganiban kung paano matitiyak ng Impeachment Court ang “fairness and truth” na binanggit nito kung siyam na senator-judge ang hindi makadalo sa impeachment trial, na mag-iiwan lamang ng 15—isang kulang sa 16 na boto na kumakatawan sa two-thirds ng lahat ng miyembro ng Senado na kinakailangan para sa conviction.
Boboto ang mga senator-judge sa susunod na linggo kung pananatilihin o babaguhin ang ruling ni Impeachment Court presiding officer Sen. Francis Escudero na 16 na boto ang kinakailangan para sa conviction, batay sa probisyon ng Konstitusyon na “no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.”
Nabuksan ang usapin matapos iapela ni Sen. Erwin Tulfo ang unang ruling ni Escudero hinggil sa voting threshold.
*****