Row on Senate voting rule won’t simmer down
MANILA, Philippines — Former Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo Lacson says debates on a proposed amendment to Senate rules isn’t wrong but it isn’t right either to ignore parliamentary procedures to ram down a motion.
Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano insists that there is no railroading and that changing the rules is not intended for the vice president’s impeachment trial as that will just cause delays.
Debating any proposed amendments to the Senate’s own rules isn’t wrong, but it isn’t right either to ignore parliamentary procedures in order to ram down a motion, Lacson said in post on X on Saturday.
READ: Lacson repeats earlier advice for Dela Rosa: Hide well
Lacson was responding to remarks made by Cayetano, who asked on Facebook Live on Friday whether it was wrong to talk about changing the rules of the Senate, referring to a proposed amendment from Sen. Rodante Marcoleta to allow senators to participate in the chamber’s deliberations online.
“Nothing is wrong about debating on any motion, resolution or measure,” Lacson said. “What is wrong is ignoring our own rules and parliamentary procedures by stopping the debates to railroad the adoption of a motion already referred to the Committee on Rules.”
Cayetano pushed back on Saturday during another Facebook live, accusing Lacson of “turning things around” and insisting: “There is no railroading.”
READ: Clash on Senate online voting ends in walkout
The Senate leader maintained that the proposed amendment did not violate Senate rules because a simple majority can amend them in plenary.
“What he is saying is that the rules are in the committee. But the plenary is more powerful than the committees,” he argued.
‘Force majeure’
Marcoleta proposed last Tuesday a third provision to Section 41 of the Senate’s Rule 14 governs when to postpone and convene a session. His proposed “Section 41C” would “allow a senator for justifiable reason to attend and participate in the session through teleconference, videoconference, or other reliable forms of remote or electronic means using appropriate information and communications technology.”
READ: Labor groups object to proposed online voting in Senate
Marcoleta did not specify what would constitute a “justifiable reason” for remote participation.
Remote sessions are already provided for under Section 41B of Rule 14—when there is “force majeure or the occurrence of a national emergency as determined by the majority of all the members of the Senate.”
In a post on Facebook last Thursday, majority Sen. Robinhood Padilla backed Marcoleta’s proposal, arguing that force majeure may already be invoked due to the conflict in the Middle East and the potential for the Philippines to be drawn into the China-Taiwan tensions.
It must be noted, however, that no lawmaker in the United States—which, under President Donald Trump, ignited the current Middle East crisis by attacking Iran—has called for a remote House or Senate session. Likewise, no parliamentarian in Taiwan has called for virtual sessions.
Both allies are on the frontlines the world’s most volatile regions, yet their legislative bodies are conducting business as usual, in person.
During last Tuesday’s session, the minority questioned why debates on the matter were being skipped as the majority moved to discuss Marcoleta’s proposed rule change.
Minority walkout
As minority senators walked out in protest of Cayetano’s motion to discuss the proposal, Sen. Erwin Tulfo alleged that the amendment was intended to benefit several senators who may held in detention on criminal charges.
Both Tulfo and Sen. Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan alluded specifically to Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa’s, who had been absent while evading an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court.
Dela Rosa, who surfaced on May 11 after a six-month absence to cast the crucial vote that installed Cayetano as Senate president, is accused of crimes against humanity for murder as a co-perpetrator in former President Rodrigo Duterte’s brutal war on drugs.
He sneaked out of the Senate’s “protective custody” on May 14 and remains at large.
In addition to the former national police chief, several other senators face potential criminal prosecution on various charges, including alleged involvement in the flood control scandal, by the state prosecutors.
Sen. Jinggoy Estrada has already been charged with plunder and two counts of graft in the Sandiganbayan for alleged budget insertions for flood control projects in exchange for kickbacks.
Estrada has denied the charges and vowed to use all legal remedies to defend himself. He posted a P90,000 bail for one charge of graft.
Sen. Joel Villanueva, the acting Senate majority leader, might soon be charged with the same offense, according to Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla. The senator dismissed the allegations as “ridiculous.”
Marcoleta, Escudero
Marcoleta himself is facing plunder and indirect bribery from the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for supposedly receiving P75 million in undeclared campaign donations and also absent in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth.
The senator dismissed the allegations, saying that the “donations” were made by his friends and that the law doesn’t say that “generosity becomes criminal merely because the amount is substantial.”
Also facing legal trouble is Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero, who is currently under preliminary investigation by the Office of the Ombudsman regarding complaints linked to his alleged role in the flood control anomalies. Escudero vowed to defend himself against the “malicious and false” accusations.
In his Saturday Facebook Live, Cayetano said critics were wrong in linking the proposed remote participation, which includes voting, to the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte or that these would benefit senators who may be arrested.
He said that the senators had already adopted the rules on impeachment and amending them would just cause delays.
“What we are discussing now are the Senate rules,” he said.
Court permission
Lacson earlier said there was no need to change the rules to allow any detained senator to participate in Senate deliberations or proceedings.
He said these senators needed only to apply a court’s permission to perform their duties, including as senator-judges. Once granted, they would be escorted to and from the Senate where they help form a quorum a vote.
President Marcos, who served in the Senate from 2010 to 2016, has said he disagreed with online voting, which was acceptable only during the pandemic.
If Dela Rosa wanted to vote in the impeachment trial, he should show up personally in the Senate, Mr. Marcos said in an interview on Friday with Filipino journalists who covered his state visit to Japan.
Cayetano clarified that the conditional “justifiable reason” mentioned in Marcoleta’s proposal would require consultation with the majority and minority leaders and would be on a “case-by-case” basis.
“This is not a blanket rule that would allow a senator to participate online anytime and for any reason,” he said.
Sowing distrust
He also accused the minority bloc of fueling speculation about another Senate leadership change to sow distrust among the majority senators.
Cayetano’s leadership, which was achieved through a Senate “coup,” was based on a narrow 13-11 majority.
The Senate leader dismissed rumors of a coup against him, noting that one key element of a power grab was “stealth” or secrecy, making it unusual for supposed plotters to to speak publicly about it.
“You may have noticed that every weekend, they are the ones putting out claims that someone is about to switch sides, that someone will join them, or that someone is considering it,” he said.
He said the objective of the minority was to create distrust among the 13 majority senators, to put pressure on them and to fuel speculation that some of them could be arrested.
Cayetano urged the public to “read between the lines” amid what he described as efforts to create division within the Senate.
He claimed that the reason they knew about the supposed arrests is they have allies in the Cabinet. INQ
