High school teacher urges SC to affirm Senate quorum

The Supreme Court hold oral arguments for a petition. (File photo from Kathleen de Villa / INQUIRER)

A high school teacher on Friday asked the Supreme Court to affirm the legality of the Senate’s June 3 session, when senators in attendance were able to establish a quorum and reorganize the chamber after two days of absence by the majority.

Meanwhile, former leaders of the upper chamber—two of them still incumbent senators—issued a joint statement urging the Senate to focus on the “urgent work” instead of “internal maneuvering.”

READ: High school teacher asks SC to affirm quorum in Gatchalian-led session

The petition for certiorari filed by senior high school teacher Barry Tayam is the first filing in the high court over the impasse in the Senate’s work since more than a week ago on May 26.

After the minority bloc’s walkout that day—in protest of the Senate majority’s plan to introduce online participation and voting—and Sen. Jinggoy Estrada’s arrest on June 1, the majority skipped this week’s session, thus depriving the upper chamber of its needed quorum to continue its order of business.

But Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero’s appearance on Wednesday prompted the minority to declare a quorum.

Tayam, who has become a familiar presence to employees of the Supreme Court for his diligent filing of petitions covering a wide range of public issues, said he was filing his new, 20-page petition as a taxpayer and registered voter.

He noted that the high court itself “has long held that political questions do not insulate co-equal branches from judicial review when constitutional limits are breached.”

Therefore, “I trust in the wisdom of the Honorable Justices to determine whether the respondents committed grave abuse of discretion,” Tayam said in his petition, which names among its respondents Senators Alan Peter Cayetano and Loren Legarda.

Tayam cited in his petition the Supreme Court’s 1949 decision on Avelino v. Cuenco, the only case tackled by the high court involving the question of what constitutes a quorum in the Senate.

‘Fistfights, gunshot’

The court said it had no jurisdiction over the dispute in the Senate at that time. But it acknowledged the session formed by 12 senators after Senate President Jose Avelino and his allies, in an apparent effort to derail a resolution against him, left the chamber. That session also proceeded to declare vacant the positions of Senate president pro tempore and Senate president.

What distinguished that episode from the current Senate drama is the hostility then as noted by the Supreme Court itself: “Meanwhile, commotion and disorder took place in the Senate gallery. Shouts were heard from individuals of the audience, where two fistfights took place. The detonation of a gunshot was heard from outside.”

Tayam argued that even if the Supreme Court “adopts a conservative approach and includes Senator [Ronald “Bato”] Dela Rosa within the [Senate’s] active roster,” the identical outcome of 12 senators is still “legal,” he said.

Tayam also cited a May 5, 2015 Senate session, with only 12 senators establishing a quorum—because three senators were detained at that time in connection with the pork barrel scam, while the rest were on business or official trips.

Enough of ‘brouhaha’

Tayam, who teaches in a private school, said nobody is backing or sponsoring his petition.

“It’s my duty to protect the Constitution, it is my way of patriotism. I’m filing this to avoid confusion with the leadership of the Senate and so that their work, especially on important laws, finally resumes,” he told the Inquirer in a message.

Also on Friday, Senators Vicente “Tito” Sotto III and Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri issued a joint statement together with former Senators Franklin Drilon and Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III calling an end to what they call the “Senate brouhaha.”

“We urge all members of the chamber to resolve [their] crisis swiftly, within the bounds of the Constitution, the rules and the long-standing practice,” said the four, all former Senate presidents.

“The country cannot afford an untenable Senate at a time of mounting economic pressures, security threats and growing public distrust in institutions,” they said.

The primary duty of a Senate president is to “not cling to office, but to leave the institution stronger, more respected and more firmly bound to the rule of law where he or she found it,” the former Senate leaders also said.

In his post on X, Sen. Panfilo “Ping” Lacson on Friday said “Cayetano does not have Avelino’s decency and respect for the same rule of law,” as he noted that “Avelino brought his case to the Supreme Court.”

For Ateneo law school professor Evecar Cruz-Ferrer, the Supreme Court ruling in Avelino v. Cuenco explained that the seats of senators outside the “coercive jurisdiction” of the Senate may not be counted in determining the presence of a quorum.

She said “the case did not specifically define or explain what constitutes as being outside the ‘coercive jurisdiction’ of the Senate.”

“Thus, it is subject to interpretation whether the situation of Senator [Jinggoy] Estrada [who is detained] and Senator Dela Rosa [who is fleeing arrest] falls under this category, since both of them are in the country and ‘technically’ may be summoned by the Senate,” Cruz-Ferrer told the Inquirer in an email response.

The power play, however, is already interrupting the day-to-day affairs of the Senate as provided for in the Constitution, she said. —WITH A REPORT FROM ISABELLE PECHAY