00:00I'd like to make a manifestation, and perhaps a motion now.
00:05The prosecution has forgone several witnesses in its list,
00:09even those who were recently subpoenaed by the court.
00:13Our calendar keeps changing with the effect of expediting the proceedings.
00:20Some of our members have said that the goal is to end trial before Christmas season.
00:27Yesterday, Counsel for Respondent has hinted in the possibility of not presenting its case.
00:34These developments, Mr. Presiding Officer,
00:39could bring the court to the final question sooner than expected.
00:45The present reality, however, is that some of our members
00:50are beyond the coercive power or jurisdiction of the Senate.
00:56One is on medical leave abroad, with the date of our return still unknown.
01:03The other is in hiding.
01:06Two are under the custody of the Sandigan Bayan or the Bureau of Jail Management.
01:15My question as a presiding officer is this.
01:19Considering the changing calendar and expedited proceedings,
01:22if we were to cast our votes
01:26two or three months from now,
01:29or next month,
01:30or even tomorrow,
01:32who among our members
01:34can validly cast their votes
01:37on the final question?
01:39Remember, Mr. Presiding Officer,
01:41we have two of our colleagues who are not here.
01:45My question is,
01:48are we going to allow them to vote?
01:51Are we going to accept their votes
01:53even though they're not attending this trial?
01:56Or
01:58is it automatic we'll say that their votes will be no?
02:03I am aware that the ruling of the presiding officer
02:06rendered on day one of the trial
02:08while the presiding officer cited the orbiter dictum
02:12in the case of Bayan Muna v. Zamora
02:16on the use of the total rather than actual membership
02:19as the voting base.
02:22This body
02:24has consistently relied on Avellino v. Cuenco,
02:28which considers only those members
02:30within the coercive jurisdiction
02:32of the Senate
02:33for purposes of determining the base
02:36and existence of a quorum.
02:40Ladies and gentlemen,
02:41Mr. Presiding Officer,
02:42I'm not seeking to lower the requirement.
02:45My question now is very basic.
02:48When we refer to all members,
02:52who exactly are we counting?
02:59I fear that if we interpret the provisions literally,
03:04we might not do so to the point of absurdity,
03:09frustrating the mandate of the Constitution
03:12to exact accountability from public officials,
03:16while we claiming to strictly uphold
03:19that very same Constitution.
03:21Was it really the intention of the Constitution
03:24to render the impeachment provision
03:26a dead letter law
03:28simply because some members of the Senate
03:31for one reason or another
03:33are beyond the reach of the impeachment court
03:34and cannot participate
03:36like what we are experiencing now?
03:39Four of us are not here.
03:41Yet they are still a member of this Senate.
03:46I recognize that impeaching an official
03:48was deliberately made difficult
03:50and this intention should be respected.
03:53However, difficulty is not the same
03:55as impossibility.
03:57Let me take this to the extreme.
04:01What happens if nine or more senators
04:04are unable to vote
04:06because they are beyond the coercive reach of the Senate
04:10during the day that we have to cast our votes
04:13for one reason or another?
04:15Halimbawa, may sakit po yung isa sa kasama natin
04:18na present po ngayon.
04:21Suspendido.
04:22Nagbitaw para tumakbo sa mas mataas na posisyon.
04:24Namatay, nagpagamot sa ibang bansa.
04:28Nakakulong, nagtatago.
04:30If we insist that the voting base is fixed at 24
04:35regardless of the evidence presented,
04:38regardless of the vote of the senators
04:40who are able to listen to the testimonies,
04:43the absence of those senators,
04:44whether we like it or not,
04:46will result in an acquittal by default.
04:50The question is not whether we should make conviction easier.
04:53What we should ask ourselves this time,
04:57Mr. Presiding Officer,
04:59Mr. Senate President,
05:01and my fellow Senator Judges,
05:04should the Constitution,
05:08constitutional design of making impeachment difficult,
05:12override the equally important constitutional demand
05:15for accountability?
05:17This is something that the body needs to discuss
05:20and decide on
05:21sooner than later,
05:23Mr. Presiding Officer.
05:25I move that we do so in earnest
05:28because it seems like we're running out of time.
05:32The prosecution,
05:33or yet the prosecution,
05:36keeps on changing their strategy.
05:41Several of their witnesses are not,
05:43they don't want to appear anymore
05:45and we've been asking some of them.
05:47So we have to make a decision,
05:48Mr. Senate President,
05:49I mean,
05:50Mr. Presiding Officer,
05:51Ano ho ba talaga?
05:53Ano ho ba talaga?
05:54Pinag-uusapan,
05:55ang gulo-gulo,
05:56pati mga kababayan ho natin,
05:58hindi po alam.
05:59To be fair for everyone po,
06:01even to the person being impeached,
06:06I'm sure she wants a fast and fair trial.
06:12So I will leave that to your decision,
06:14Mr. Presiding Officer,
06:16and to our Senator Judges,
06:19to our colleagues.
06:20Thank you very much.
