Cayetano: ‘Impeachment court does not exist in a vacuum’ amid debate over absent senators

Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano delivers his privilege speech, which he dubbed “Kontra SONA,” during the Senate plenary session at the Senate Session Hall in Pasay City on Tuesday, July 28, 2026. In his address, Cayetano responded to President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.’s fifth State of the Nation Address (SONA), presenting the opposition’s assessment of the administration’s policies and governance. Maria Tan, ABS-CBN NewsMANILA — The Senate impeachment court does not “exist in a vacuum,” Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano said Wednesday as he raised the circumstances surrounding the absence of four senator-judges in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.

Cayetano made the manifestation during oral arguments on the dispute over the voting threshold for Duterte’s conviction, stressing that the court must also account for realities outside the proceedings.

“But the reality is that this court does not exist in a vacuum. May nangyayari dito sa labas,” Cayetano said.

Cayetano pointed to Senators Jinggoy Estrada, Rodante Marcoleta, Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa and Loren Legarda, who are currently absent from the impeachment proceedings.

“Nasaan si Sen. Jinggoy? Nasaan si Sen. Marcoleta? Nasaan si Sen. Bato? Nasaan si Sen. Legarda? There are real politics happening here,” he said.

“It’s not an accident na panay na sa opposition ‘yung wala na nandito,” Cayetano added.

Cayetano said he would not make political accusations because all senator-judges had taken an oath, but said they also could not ignore what was happening outside the Senate.

“So I won’t go into political statements because we all took an oath, but I also won’t be blind to it,” he said.

“Hindi dapat gumawa ng mga akusasyon dito, pero hindi rin pwedeng bulag-bulagan dito na walang nangyayari talaga dito sa ating bansa,” he added. 

He said the oath taken by the senator-judges is tested not only inside the impeachment court but also by circumstances outside it.

“So we all took an oath but the reality is that oath is tested everyday outside this court,” Cayetano said.

Cayetano also questioned whether the four absent senators could participate in the proceedings electronically instead of having their absence affect the threshold.

He cited the experience of courts conducting hearings remotely during the Covid-19 pandemic.

“Some judges did the hearings through electronic means,” he said.

“So is there anything in our rules that will prohibit the four senators who are here now to participate electronically?”

Cayetano said the question of remote participation should be considered before the court decides whether the voting threshold should be reduced.

“Hindi ba dapat ‘yan munang tanongin bago ang threshold?” he asked.

“If we amend the rules, they can participate–the 24–walang problema.”

But he raised another practical problem: what if the rules were amended to permit online participation but the absent senators declined to join?

“Ngayon inamend natin ang rules, ayaw nila mag-participate, then baka dapat natin kuwestiyunin bakit ayaw nila mag-participate,” he said. “For all we know, Sen. Bato is willing to take his oath. We don’t know.”

Cayetano acknowledged the defense’s argument that physical presence was important in assessing the credibility of witnesses and evidence.

“The ideal talaga is to be here and tutukan ito,” he said.

But he said the court also had to deal with the actual situation.

“But the reality is we have four senators that are not here and some feel they’re in danger of being taken out of play also. So that’s the reality there,” Cayetano said.

Cayetano noted that even senator-judges who are physically present sometimes leave the session hall while continuing to watch the proceedings elsewhere.

“But for example when it takes the whole day, having coffee either in our office or in the lounge and looking at the television is sometimes even better,” he said.

Cayetano also likened the shifting number of participating senator-judges to “spaghetti” as he questioned how the threshold would be applied if senators entered or left the proceedings.

“Parang spaghetti na ang impeachment,” he said. “Pababa nang pababa, pataas nang pataas.”

He explained that if absent senators were excluded from the computation, the threshold could go down, but it could rise again if they returned.

“Kapag nawala ‘yung iba, tapos tingin natin dito sila kikiling, dito sila kikiling, bababa. Pag bumalik sila, ano? Tataas.”

Cayetano said the impeachment proceedings are serious, but warned against interpreting the rules in a way that could make the process appear absurd.

“So yes, it is a serious matter, but it becomes ridiculous if we interpret it in a ridiculous way.”

Cayetano said he hoped the evidence presented by both sides would ultimately make the threshold debate irrelevant.

“If the Filipino people hope for justice and accountability, if the prosecution hope for conviction, if the defense hopes for acquittal, I hope that the evidence will be so damning that 24 senators will convict,” he said.

“Or the evidence will be so obviously not worthy of an impeachment charge that all 24 senators will acquit.”

He said the impeachment court should ultimately be guided by the evidence rather than political considerations.

Cayetano reiterated that he had raised the threshold issue at the beginning of the impeachment proceedings because he believed the question should have been settled before the impeachment court adopted its rules.

“We should have decided this when we were passing the rules of the impeachment court,” he said.

His concern, he stressed, was not simply whether the court had the authority to decide the issue, but whether it was appropriate to do so at this stage of the trial.