With the issue concerning the threshold for conviction in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, a House private prosecutor said their focus remained the same—to present evidence.

In a press conference prior to the resumption of the proceedings on Monday, 13 July, Atty. Jay Tolosa stated that their team was not particularly “engaged” in discussions concerning the matter and was instead focused on properly laying out their evidence to meet any interpretation of the threshold in accordance with the law.

“We don’t engage in vote-counting, at the end of the day our priority is to establish an airtight case, we will ensure that our case will be backed by solid evidence so after the trial regardless of the final interpretation of the two-thirds threshold we can get the required number,” Tolosa said.

“That has been the priority of the prosecution from the start, and that remains to be our priority until now,” he added.

Deliberations on the matter stemmed from Article XI, Section 3 of the Constitution, which sets the requirement that allows a public officer to be removed from office through an affirmative vote by the Senate.

However, discussions have arisen because the provision does not explicitly state a specific number of senators required to cast the vote. Rather, it provides a ratio of “two-thirds” of all members of the upper house.

“The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment…no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate,” the law read.

In the weeks leading up to the trial, the required number of votes was contested as Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa, Senator Jinggoy Estrada, and Senator Rodante Marcoleta faced criminal charges and subsequent arrest warrants.

Some solons, including House Lead Public Prosecutor Rep. Gerville Luistro and House Public Prosecutor Rep. Ysabel Zamora, have expressed their personal opinion that the threshold could be lowered to account for the inability of the said senators to participate in the trial.

On the other hand, other legal luminaries and lawmakers, including Senate impeachment court presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero, have maintained that the required number for conviction is 16 votes.

For Tolosa, while acknowledging that either perspective on the issue is valid, he reiterated that their focus remains on presenting the evidence and that there have been no formal discussions on the potential steps they would take regarding the matter.

“All of the points raised are valid but at the end of the day we’re not focusing on that and have not taken any official step with respect to this matter. We remain focused on the continued process of the trial,” he said.

Taking the matter to the Supreme Court

Speaking on potential steps that may be taken to resolve the issue, particularly bringing the matter before the Supreme Court, House trial spokesperson and former congressman Robert Ace Barbers said the prosecution would view such action as a “welcome development.”

Barbers stressed that they would respect whatever decision the high court would make on the matter.

“Well, there are many schools of thought, many opinions have come out about the threshold, and the prosecution is not involved in the political arithmetic, so to speak,” the spokesperson said.

“But if anyone raises this before the SC then it’s a welcome development, whatever the decision of the court will be, of course the prosecution will respect that,” he added.

Meanwhile, Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Adiong stated that the issue surrounding the voting threshold indicated that the impeachment of the Vice President was an important matter to the public, noting that people were likewise eager to see the proceedings move forward.

“This is really an indication that the public really want to see this trial move forward by making sure that the threshold issue be settled, it would render the Senate responsive to the current situation that they’re in right now insofar as the membership is concerned,” Adiong explained.