Davao City 1st District Rep. Paolo “Pulong” Duterte said Wednesday that the Supreme Court should ultimately resolve questions over the interpretation of the Constitution, particularly the voting threshold for conviction in the impeachment trial of his sister, Vice President Sara Duterte.

“Constitutional questions should ultimately be settled by the Supreme Court — not by whoever happens to have the numbers inside the chamber,” Duterte said.

“If the affected party chooses to bring that question before the Supreme Court, then let the High Court decide whether the Senate’s interpretation is consistent with the fundamental law,” he added.

Duterte issued the statement after the Senate impeachment court voted to set aside Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero’s 6 July ruling that fixed the conviction threshold at 16 votes, or two-thirds of all 24 senators.

Under the new ruling, the constitutional two-thirds requirement will be computed based on senator-judges who are legally and factually capable of participating in the proceedings.

The Constitution states that no impeachable official may be convicted without the concurrence of “two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.”

Duterte argued that any change in how “all the Members” is counted raises a constitutional question rather than merely a matter of parliamentary procedure.

“If the Senate adopts an interpretation that changes how ‘all the Members’ is counted, then that is no longer simply a matter of parliamentary arithmetic. It is a constitutional question,” he said.

The issue has divided legal experts.

Former Chief Justices Reynato Puno and Artemio Panganiban told the impeachment court that the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, has the authority to determine the threshold because its impeachment powers come directly from the Constitution. Former Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna, meanwhile, maintained that the denominator should remain all 24 sitting senators.

Duterte nevertheless stressed that a majority vote by senator-judges did not by itself settle whether the interpretation was constitutional.

“At the end of the day, positions in government are temporary. The Constitution is not,” he said.

The defense team of Vice President Duterte has also said that bringing the threshold dispute before the Supreme Court remains an option.