Senator-judges may need more time to consider the voting threshold for conviction in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio before deciding the issue, Senator-Judge Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson said Saturday.

Lacson said that while they were enlightened by the insights of three former Supreme Court justices who appeared before the Impeachment Court, they still have to consider the oral arguments of the prosecution and defense on the issue.

In Filipino: Lacson: Maaaring Kailangan ng Senator-Judges ng Dagdag na Panahon Bago Magpasya sa Voting Threshold sa Impeachment

“I’d like to think we would be given more time to sleep over it, so we can dissect everything discussed during the oral arguments. It may not be enough to vote immediately after the oral arguments. But that is the schedule we agreed upon at least for now,” he said in English and Filipino in an interview on DZMM radio.

“I’d rather wait for the oral arguments on Wednesday because the prosecution and defense will share their ideas and arguments. It is better to listen to them to broaden the basis of our decision,” he said when asked how he would vote on Sept. 23.

On Sept. 23, the senator-judges are to hear the oral arguments of the prosecution and defense, then decide whether to retain or modify the ruling of Presiding Officer Francis Escudero that 16 votes are required for conviction.

When asked if senator-judges may appeal to the presiding officer to defer the voting to the week after, Lacson said it is possible.

“If some of us may still need more time, a motion may be made to defer the voting to the following week,” he said.

Lacson reiterated that he was enlightened by the insights shared last Wednesday – by former 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.

Puno, Panganiban and Azcuna appeared before the impeachment court last Wednesday, while former Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. sent his memorandum that was read during the proceedings.

Lacson said he has also sought inputs from other legal luminaries, including another former Chief Justice who gave insights on a possible “automatic acquittal” if 16 votes cannot be obtained for conviction even if there are situations where nine senator-judges could not attend the impeachment trial.

Also, Lacson said the Impeachment Court’s consultation with the “amici curiae (friends of the court)” should address claims that the impeachment court acted with grave abuse of discretion.

“I believe we exercised prudence and due diligence by consulting with legal eagles. You cannot downplay the importance of three former Chief Justices and one former senior Associate Justice. I would like to think that if anyone accuses us of grave abuse of discretion, our consultation with them would greatly weaken that argument,” he said.

Meanwhile, Lacson said he does not see any connection between the investigation of Senators Camille and Mark Villar over alleged questionable joint venture agreements entered into by Prime Water Infrastructure Corp. and the impeachment trial.

“We do not have any influence over the actions of the Ombudsman or executive branch, or the judiciary, in this case the Sandiganbayan or the RTC. We don’t think this is connected with the impeachment trial. As far as we are concerned, we look at the testimonies of witnesses, documents, arguments, and the inputs of the amici curiae,” he said.

Lacson also said it is not too late for Sen. Ronald dela Rosa to participate in the impeachment trial, so long as he comes out and takes his oath.

“It is not too late for dela Rosa to come out and take his oath but he has to take the risk when he comes out to participate. It may not be like last May’s leadership change when he got into the Senate and managed to leave. It’s up to him but we welcome his participation. Once he takes his oath, he becomes within the coercive jurisdiction of the Senate,” he said.

Senators may also discuss the issues about the impeachment trial informally in a caucus next week but their discussions will not be binding, he said.

Lacson also reiterated his position that the Senate and impeachment court should not interfere in the bids of Senators Rodante Marcoleta and Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada to take part in the impeachment trial.

“If we will be asked to comment, it would be better not to because we may be misinterpreted as putting undue pressure on the Sandiganbayan. It would be better for the Senate and impeachment court not to interfere,” he said.

*****

Lacson: Maaaring Kailangan ng Senator-Judges ng Dagdag na Panahon Bago Magpasya sa Voting Threshold sa Impeachment

Maaaring kailanganin ng senator-judges ng dagdag na panahon upang pag-aralan ang voting threshold para sa conviction sa impeachment trial ni Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio bago magpasya sa usapin, ayon kay Senator-Judge Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson nitong Sabado.

Sinabi ni Lacson na bagama’t nakatulong sa kanilang pag-unawa ang mga pananaw ng tatlong dating mahistrado ng Supreme Court na humarap sa Impeachment Court, kailangan pa rin nilang isaalang-alang ang oral arguments ng prosecution at defense sa usapin.

“I’d like to think baka pagbigyan pa kami to sleep over it para i-dissect namin lahat na napag-usapan sa oral argument. Baka di sapat after the oral arguments magbotohan. But yan ang napagkasunduan as of now,” aniya sa isang panayam sa DZMM radio.

“I’d rather wait for oral arguments sa Wednesday. Kasi mag-share pa ng kanilang ideas and arguments ang prosecution and defense. Mas mainam pakinggan na rin namin para mas malawak ang panggagalingan namin, paghuhugutan,” aniya nang tanungin kung paano siya boboto sa Setyembre 23.

Sa Setyembre 23, nakatakdang dinggin ng senator-judges ang oral arguments ng prosecution at defense, at pagkatapos ay magpasya kung pananatilihin o babaguhin ang ruling ni Presiding Officer Francis Escudero na 16 na boto ang kailangan para sa conviction.

Nang tanungin kung maaaring hilingin ng senator-judges sa presiding officer na ipagpaliban ang botohan sa susunod na linggo, sinabi ni Lacson na posible ito.

“Kung hindi pa maliwanag sa iba sa amin, baka pwedeng mag-motion kung pwedeng i-defer ang botohan sa following week,” aniya.

Muling sinabi ni Lacson na nakatulong sa kanyang pag-unawa ang mga pananaw na ibinahagi noong nakaraang Miyerkules — ang talakayan ni dating Chief Justice Reynato Puno hinggil sa “textual vs. contextual” interpretation, ang pagbibigay-diin ni retired Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban sa “truth and fairness,” at ang interpretasyon ni retired Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna sa pariralang “all means all” sa pagtukoy ng threshold.

Humarap sina Puno, Panganiban at Azcuna sa impeachment court noong nakaraang Miyerkules, habang nagpadala naman si dating Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. ng kanyang memorandum na binasa sa mga pagdinig.

Sinabi ni Lacson na humingi rin siya ng mga pananaw mula sa iba pang legal luminaries, kabilang ang isa pang dating Chief Justice na nagbigay ng pananaw hinggil sa posibleng “automatic acquittal” kung hindi makuha ang 16 na boto para sa conviction kahit may mga sitwasyong siyam na senator-judges ang hindi makadadalo sa impeachment trial.

Sinabi rin ni Lacson na dapat makatulong ang pagkonsulta ng Impeachment Court sa mga “amici curiae (friends of the court)” upang tugunan ang mga alegasyong kumilos ang impeachment court nang may grave abuse of discretion.

“Sa aking pananaw nag-exercise kami ng prudence, due diligence, by consulting with legal eagles. Di naman matatawaran ang tatlong former Chief Justice and one former senior Associate Justice. I would like to think na para akusahan pa kami na nag-grave abuse of discretion na-commit namin, parang malayong mangyari. Hihina ang argument na nag-commit kami ng grave abuse of discretion,” aniya.

Samantala, sinabi ni Lacson na wala siyang nakikitang koneksyon sa pagitan ng imbestigasyon kina Senators Camille at Mark Villar kaugnay ng mga umano’y kuwestiyonableng joint venture agreements na pinasok ng Prime Water Infrastructure Corp. at ng impeachment trial.

“Hindi namin saklaw ang ginagawa ng Ombudsman or executive branch, or magiging action ng judiciary, in this case Sandiganbayan or RTC. Di namin iniisip na yan ay may kinalaman sa impeachment trial na nangyayari. Sa amin ang tinitingnan namin pinakikinggan namin witnesses, documents, arguments, at pati ang amici curiae,” aniya.

Sinabi rin ni Lacson na hindi pa huli para makilahok si Sen. Ronald dela Rosa sa impeachment trial basta’t lumabas siya at manumpa.

“Hindi huli ang lahat para mag-take siya ng oath but he has to take the risk when he comes out to participate. Baka di mangyari ang dati nang nagkaroon ng leadership change, nakapasok at nakalabas siya… Nasa kanya yan but welcome siya kung sakaling lalabas siya mag-take ng oath, mag-participate siya kasi nandiyan siya. He now becomes within the coercive jurisdiction of the Senate,” aniya.

Maaari ring talakayin ng mga senador nang impormal sa isang caucus sa susunod na linggo ang mga usapin kaugnay ng impeachment trial, ngunit hindi magiging binding ang kanilang mga pag-uusap, sinabi niya.

Muling iginiit ni Lacson ang kanyang posisyon na hindi dapat makialam ang Senado at Impeachment Court sa mga hakbang nina Senators Rodante Marcoleta at Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada upang makilahok sa impeachment trial.

“Kung kami pakukumentahin, mas magandang huwag kami magkumento kasi baka ma-misinterpret pang nagbibigay kami ng undue pressure sa Sandiganbayan pag Senate o impeachment court mismo ang magiging parang aayon sa motion o sasalungat sa motion… Mas maganda huwag makialam ang Senado, huwag makialam ang impeachment court,” aniya.

*****