Pimentel opposes senator-judge inhibition in VP impeachment trial

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III has voiced his opposition to proposals urging certain senator-judges to inhibit themselves from the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, arguing that such actions could actually work in the vice president’s favor.

In a press briefing, Pimentel explained that the outcome of the impeachment proceedings hinges on how many senators vote to convict. A total of 16 votes is required to secure a conviction.

“Let the senator-judges stay until the end so that they can state their decision—guilty or not guilty—then let the people judge them according to their decision,” he said.

He further warned that inhibition could skew the results of the trial. “If someone inhibits, he or she will get away with stating his or her decision, whether guilty or not guilty. He or she will be excused and his or her absence will favor those who would vote not guilty,” he added.

Earlier, Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero clarified that any senator-judge may voluntarily recuse himself from the proceedings. Supporting this view, Atty. Christian Monsod, a framer of the 1987 Constitution, said he believes Senators Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa and Francis “Tol” Tolentino should inhibit themselves for earlier seeking the dismissal of the complaint against VP Duterte.

The ACT Teachers party-list also called on Senators Imee Marcos and Robin Padilla to recuse themselves, noting their public show of support for Duterte and their trip with her to Kuala Lumpur.

For her part, Vice President Duterte maintained that no senator-judge should be asked to recuse based solely on political leanings, adding that if that were the case, even her critics like Senator Risa Hontiveros should also be excluded.

Pimentel also questioned the Senate impeachment court’s decision to return the articles of impeachment to the House of Representatives, warning that the move could spark legal confusion and delay the proceedings further.

“Instead of simplifying the process so that it is easy for everyone to understand, not only for the public but also the parties to the case so that they can easily comply, you made it more confusing, so many people can now think of legal issues,” he said.

“So all the more it became complicated. When you detour, someone would ask where are you going? Is that still the right route? It can give rise to legal cases. If there are legal cases, you would only focus on that and not on the main issue anymore,” he concluded. TRACY CABRERA