Skip to playerSkip to main content
"WHEN THE LAW IS CLEAR, THERE'S NO ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION"

Defense Atty. Michael Poa begins oral arguments in response to the prosecution’s threshold-voting argument during the 29th day of VP Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Article II on Wednesday, September 23.

The Defense team repeated their position that 16 votes should be the threshold to convict in the impeachment trial. Poa explained that when the law is clear, it should be applied as written, not interpreted. He said the Constitution is straightforward on this issue, and the answer to the conviction threshold is simple: 16 votes. (Video courtesy of Senate of the Philippines)

Subscribe to the Manila Bulletin Online channel! -
https://www.youtube.com/TheManilaBulletin

Visit our website at http://mb.com.ph
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/manilabulletin
Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/manila_bulletin
Instagram: https://instagram.com/manilabulletin
Tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@manilabulletin

#VPSaraOnTrial
#ManilaBulletinOnline
#ManilaBulletin
#LatestNews

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:00Your Honours, the Supreme Court has reminded us time and time again that when the law is clear, there is
00:08no room for interpretation.
00:10There is only room for application.
00:14Now, with those words in mind, perhaps, Your Honours, we should not complicate what the Constitution has made simple.
00:23The issue confronting us today boils down to one question.
00:27How many votes to convict?
00:30The answer of the defense is straightforward and simple.
00:3416.
00:35Bakit po 16?
00:37Simulan po natin sa procedural aspect.
00:41Last July 6, 2026, on the very first day of trial, the presiding officer ruled that the voting threshold to
00:49convict is 16.
00:52At that time, no senator judge objected.
00:55No senator judge sought reconsideration.
01:00No senator judge appealed.
01:02Your Honours, that was over two months ago.
01:07Thereafter, witnesses were able to testify.
01:11Evidence was presented.
01:21So, bago po natin pag-usapan yung nilalaman ng saligang batas, marahil, dapat rin po natin itanong, tama pa bang
01:31buksan muli ang issue na ito at pagbotohan?
01:34Because, Your Honours, reading the rules on impeachment, under Rule No. 6, wala nga pong nilagay na time frame within
01:44which a motion for reconsideration can be considered.
01:48Naturally, because that should have been brought up at the earliest opportunity, after mabigay po yung ruling.
01:56Pero hindi po nangyari yun.
01:59Masahin rin po natin yung mga rules that have suppletory effect to these proceedings.
02:06For example, yung Senate rules po.
02:09Rule 33 gives a senator two session days within which to seek reconsideration for a measure that has been approved.
02:18Obviously, legislative po yung function na yun.
02:22Pero kahit ipilit po natin yung rule na yun dito sa impeachment proceedings, lumipas na po yung two session days.
02:31Pasong-paso na po.
02:33Now, let's look at the rules of court, for example, where parties are generally given 15 calendar days to file
02:39a motion for reconsideration.
02:42Kahit po yun, matagal na pong lumipas.
02:45Pasong-paso na rin po.
02:46And forgive me for going into the more technical aspect.
02:51Even if we were to consider the ruling of the presiding officer as an interlocutory order which the court may
03:00modify upon a finding of sufficient grounds.
03:04Para po sa depensa, hindi na rin po applicable yun dahil wala naman pong sufficient ground.
03:11Wala pong supervening event.
03:13Ang punto po namin, wala naman pong nagbago mula July 6, 2026 hanggang ngayong araw.
03:21Yung mga sinasabi po natin na mga senador na hindi nakapag-participate, of course, with the exception of Senator Legarda,
03:30ay hindi na rin po nakapag-participate noong July 6 bago pa na issue yung ruling.
03:35So one thing is clear, nothing in the rules suggests that the ruling of the presiding officer may be challenged
03:44indefinitely or modified arbitrarily.
03:48Because, Your Honors, kung ganun ang ating magiging panuntunan, eh di pati po yung ruling doon sa pag-issue ng
03:56subpina sa mga bank records ay pwede pa rin palang buksan muli at pagbotohan.
04:02Yun palang mga ruling ng presiding officer sa bawat objeksyon ay pwede pa rin balikan.
04:08Your Honors, that should not be done because the parties must be able to rely on the rulings of the
04:16presiding officer.
04:18Otherwise, Your Honors, that will run contrary to the basic principle of what is an orderly conduct of a fair
04:27trial.
04:28Now, more significantly, kung ibababa po natin yung voting threshold, when trial is already underway, in fact, nasa kalagitnaan na
04:40po tayo,
04:41Your Honors, that will go beyond the procedural.
04:44That will already raise questions if the respondent vice president is being afforded due process guaranteed by the Constitution.
04:55Due process, which according to the Supreme Court in Duterte v. H.O.R., must be present in every stage
05:04of the proceeding.
05:06At kahit isang tabi muna natin yung mga procedural concerns na iyan, pareho pa rin po yung sagot namin, 16.
05:14Let's now proceed to the substantive aspect, and we will be raising five quick points.
05:32Thank you very much.
Comments

Recommended