The House prosecution panel will “sink or swim” with its evidence against Vice President Sara Duterte regardless of how the Senate viewed the constitutional ruling on the required number of votes for conviction, a lawmaker said.

Public prosecutor Rep. Keith Flores said Wednesday that they did not feel validated when it came to the stance of three out of the four amici curiae (friends of court) that were presented their interpretations of Article XI, Section 3(6) of the Constitution.

The said law establishes the sole power of the Senate “to try and decide all cases of impeachment” and notes that no public official could be convicted “without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.”

Debates on how the ruling should be viewed arose in the ongoing impeachment against Duterte as four out of the 24 senators are either detained or have been extensively absent from the proceedings.

Senator Jinggoy Estrada and Senator Rodante Marcoleta are each facing separate plunder cases before the Sandiganbayan and are currently detained at the New Quezon City Jail - Male Dormitory.

Senator Loren Legarda, on the other hand, is on her sixth medical leave while reportedly seeking medical treatment overseas though the Office of the Ombudsman has since flagged the trip due to their ongoing investigations into “ghost electricity.”

Meanwhile, Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa has not been seen since 14 May while hiding from his arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court.

Due to the developments, some lawmakers and legal luminaries including the three friends of the court have expressed that the two-thirds threshold should be interpreted in consideration of the members of the Senate that were present in the trial–20 senators.

Flores, however, similar to other members of the House prosecution panel maintained that their focus was on how they could convince senator-judges to vote for conviction to reach the threshold that would be finalized by the court.

“The discussion earlier was really more for the Senate to come to a decision on what voting threshold they will follow. We at the prosecution are just focused on how we deliver our evidence to convince at least the two-thirds to vote in our favor,” he said in a press briefing.

“For me, it’s not a question of whether or not we were validated or not. For us, we will stick to the principle that we would just sink or swim with the evidence that we’ll be presenting before the impeachment court,” he added.

The lawmaker from Bukidnon maintained that they had always “relied” on the rulings of the Senate, noting how the prosecution panel never made any actions regarding the initial ruling of presiding officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero that the required vote would be 16.

The ruling that Flores referenced came during the speech of Escudero right after being elected as the presiding officer of the impeachment last 6 July.

Escudero referenced a ruling that was made on the Supreme Court case of Bayan v Zamora wherein it was established that the Senate was composed of 24 senators in accordance with the Constitution.

Even with the seeming finality of his ruling, the senator said that any party in the trial that felt that the law should be interpreted differently was free to seek legal remedies.

“Should the Supreme Court render a different ruling on this question other than what the court stated, this court and this representation shall faithfully abide by that ruling,” he said.

Last 8 September, Senator Raffy Tulfo expressed his concern regarding the inability of some senators to vote on whether to acquit or convict Duterte due to their absence.

Treating the concern as an appeal, Escudero said that the court would enlist the help of former Supreme Court Justices in order to settle the matter.

The impeachment court is set to vote on the conviction threshold on 23 September, after hearing the presentations of the amici curiae and positions of the prosecutors and the defense.