The battle for control of the Senate is far from over as a tug-of-war erupted yesterday, with the bloc of Senator Alan Peter Cayetano bringing the Senate leadership row to the Supreme Court on the same day the Sandiganbayan slapped detained Senator Jinggoy Estrada with a 90-day preventive suspension.
The Sandiganbayan Second Division’s order stemmed from Estrada’s graft case linked to the multibillion-peso flood control scandal.
In a resolution dated 16 June, the anti-graft court barred Estrada from assuming his duties as a senator and from any other public office for 90 days.
The suspension effectively secured the Senate membership at 23, reducing the majority denominator, according to former University of the East (UE) College of Law Dean Amado Valdez.
Estrada is in no position to make a decision, so reason and logic dictate a membership denominator of 23, according to Valdez. Similarly, in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, the arrested senator cannot vote to convict or to acquit, or “his absence be counted as acquittal; otherwise, his absence by virtue of his suspension will have the same effect as voting for acquittal.”
“The majority can define the new denominator,” he explained.
Aside from his graft case before the Second Division, Estrada also faces charges for a separate case of graft and plunder at the Sandiganbayan’s Fifth Division over similar allegations.
Based on the complaint filed by the Office of the Ombudsman, Estrada was allegedly the recipient of some P573 million taken from the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) infrastructure portfolio for Fiscal Year 2025.
SC intervention sought
The faction led by Senator Alan Cayetano finally brought the chamber’s weeks-long leadership row before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, asking the body to nullify the 3 June “rump session” that allowed Senator Win Gatchalian and his allies to take over the Senate.
The filing came one day before the Senate convenes today for a special session, an avenue seen as a way to break the Senate impasse amid growing speculation that some senators allied with Cayetano may switch sides and join the rival faction backing Gatchalian.
The omission of Senators Joel Villanueva and Mark Villar — both allied with Cayetano’s bloc — as petitioners further intensified the rumor. However, Villar’s office cited his currently being abroad as the reason he did not sign the document.
Aside from Cayetano, the petitioners comprised Senators Loren Legarda, Pia Cayetano, Jinggoy Estrada, Bong Go, Rodante Marcoleta, Imee Marcos, Robin Padilla and Camille Villar, and lawyer Jose Luis Montales, who was removed as Senate secretary as a result of the revamp.
The petitioners urged the SC to reverse the 3 June session, which they derided as an unconstitutional “mob rule” for justifying the leadership change despite lacking a quorum.
“To allow unconstitutional, illegal, and questionable actions that flowed from such [a] null and void rump session would surrender constitutional fiat to the whims and caprices of 12 people who have hijacked a co-equal branch of government. With all due respect, this should not be allowed,” a portion of the 87-page filing read.
The session was called to order on that day after 12 senators showed up at the session hall, despite the absence of the Cayetano bloc, who had boycotted the session since 1 June.
Earlier, Cayetano and his allies explained that the three-day boycott was in protest of what they derided as “selective prosecution,” which led to Estrada’s arrest on 1 June on plunder charges tied to the flood control scandal.
The surprise appearance of Senator Chiz Escudero, formerly allied with Cayetano, broke the impasse on 3 June and allowed senators supportive of Gatchalian to declare all positions vacant and install him as the Senate president pro tempore.
Gatchalian effectively replaced Legarda and has since acknowledged that his position as acting Senate leader has yet to be fully legalized, unless a senator from Cayetano’s camp switches allegiance and gives them the constitutionally mandated 13-vote threshold.
3 June revamp ‘no effect’
Cayetano and his allies’ petition argued that what transpired on 3 June was “unconstitutional, null, and void ab initio (from the start), and therefore “no legal effect” to the previous standing of the Senate.
“It necessarily follows that any outcome, output, and/or result flowing or resulting therefrom is inexistent and illegal,” the petition read.
As a result, Cayetano and Legarda sought to reclaim their former top positions and reinstate their allies in their respective posts and committee chairmanships.
