Cayetano bloc asks SC to define quorum rules ahead of Duterte trial

MANILA, Philippines — The Senate minority led by Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano urged the Supreme Court (SC) to rule on the validity of the June 3, 2026 session, saying unresolved issues could affect the upcoming impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

In a manifestation and motion dated June 29 but made public on June 30, the minority bloc said the lack of guidance from the SC could mean that massive amounts of public funds would go to waste on an impeachment trial that might later be declared illegal.

“The practical consequences of leaving this issue unresolved are even more compelling. The Senate is presently exercising one of its gravest constitutional functions against the vice president,” read the petition.

Article continues after this advertisement

“If those proceedings continue under authority or procedural rules ultimately found to be constitutionally infirm, substantial public funds would have been expended, official acts undertaken, and constitutional injury actually sustained, all before the Honorable Court has had the opportunity to determine the legality of the proceedings,” it added. “By then, the uncertainty sought to be avoided by judicial review would have already materialized.”

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

The legal battle stems from the June 3 “rump session” where 12 senators met despite the lack of a quorum and declared all leadership positions vacant, reorganized power committees, and changed impeachment rules.

The Senate majority argued that the subsequent session on June 17, which formally elected Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian as Senate president with 13 affirmative votes, effectively rendered the Cayetano petition moot.

READ: Senate row ends: Gatchalian takes helm, Cayetano yields

READ: Quorum of 12 still applies in Senate special session — Gatchalian

Article continues after this advertisement

However, Cayetano’s group maintained that later political developments do not erase the fundamental constitutional infirmities of the June 3 session.

“A subsequent political development cannot validate proceedings whose legality is precisely the issue submitted for judicial determination.”

Article continues after this advertisement

They added that the ongoing case is not merely a battle over political leadership, but a vital defense of the nation’s legal framework.

They noted that the matter concerns safeguarding the constitutional order from which all public authority derives and reaffirming to the Filipino people that no branch of government, however powerful or politically situated, is above the Constitution.

The manifestation also highlights that the disputed session was used to amend the Rules of Procedure on Impeachment Trials under Senate Resolution No. 48. The amendment allows for the election of a presiding officer in cases that do not involve the President of the Philippines, a rule change specifically enacted ahead of the vice president’s trial.

The petitioners warned that if the SC exercises judicial restraint and leaves the definition of a required legislative quorum unresolved, the entire impeachment proceeding could be built on a constitutionally infirm foundation, potentially wasting substantial public funds and jeopardizing the integrity of the process.

The senators also sought the Court’s definitive interpretation on whether detained lawmakers, such as Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, should be excluded from the constitutional denominator of “all its members” when computing a quorum.

The urgency of the situation has intensified following the Office of the Ombudsman’s announcement that it is seeking plunder charges and the arrest of another petitioner, Sen. Rodante Marcoleta, which could further alter the voting thresholds of the upper chamber.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

With the impeachment trial days away, the petitioners are urging the SC to act swiftly to prevent an irreversible constitutional crisis. /mcm