23/09/2026
THE CONSTITUTION CANNOT BE AMENDED BY ARITHMETIC
By: Kuya Mark Tolentino
The Senate’s decision to lower the number of votes required to convict Vice President Inday Sara Duterte is constitutionally alarming.
Article XI, Section 3(6) of the Constitution expressly requires the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate. It does not say two-thirds of those present, participating, or considered capable of voting. With a full 24-member Senate, the constitutional threshold is 16 votes.
Absence, detention, or medical leave does not automatically terminate Senate membership or create a vacancy. Removing such senators from the denominator effectively inserts words and qualifications that the Constitution does not contain.
The Senate may promulgate procedural rules, but it cannot use those rules to amend or weaken a substantive constitutional safeguard. Changing the threshold after the trial has already begun also raises serious questions of fairness and due process.
This is not about protecting anyone from accountability. The allegations against Vice President Sara Duterte must be decided according to the evidence and the Constitution. However, constitutional accountability applies equally to the accusers and the senator-judges.
If the supermajority requirement makes conviction difficult, that difficulty is intentional. It protects the people’s electoral mandate from removal by a temporary political majority.
Conviction must rest on sufficient evidence and the constitutionally required 16 votes—not on a denominator adjusted midway through the proceedings. No person, and no institution, is above the Constitution.
