Minority senators prevented a vote on a motion to tackle in the Senate plenary a proposed amendment to its rules to allow senators to participate remotely in sessions, after they walked out.
Senate Minority Leader Sen. Vicente “Tito” Sotto III moved for a quorum call and the adjournment of the session after the members of the minority left the session hall.
With no quorum after the walkout, Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano said the majority would not object to the motion to adjourn but put on record that the members of the minority “scampered.”
The session was adjourned until 5 p.m. on Monday, June 1.
“We strongly condemn what appears to be an attempt to rush a major change in the Senate Rules, especially when several members of the minority still wanted to speak and raise serious questions on the floor,” the minority senators said in a joint statement.
The heated debate started when acting Senate Majority Floor Leader Joel Villanueva introduced to the plenary the proposal of Senator Rodante Marcoleta to amend the rules and include a provision that would allow senators to attend plenary sessions through teleconferencing.
Members of the minority questioned the move to discuss the proposed amendment. While it had been referred to the Committee on Rules, the panel has yet to be constituted since all positions had been declared vacant when the new majority moved to elect Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano on May 11.
Saying the arguments of the majority and minority have already been heard, Cayetano moved that the plenary tackle the proposal, to which the minority senators vehemently objected.
“The proposed rule change affects how senators may attend sessions, participate in proceedings, and exercise their mandate through remote means, and such a measure should be opened to healthy public debate instead of being rushed by the tyranny of the majority,” the minority’s statement said.
“We have always welcomed healthy discussions on the floor, but this should mean allowing all members to be heard, not forcing the chamber to move at the speed preferred by the majority,” it added,
It was Senator Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri who first urged other members of the minority bloc to leave the plenary session after the majority bloc insisted on dividing the house through voting.
“This is a travesty of our rules,” Zubiri told reporters in a chance interview.
As the minority senators left the Senate session hall, Senator Sherwin Gatchalian said there was no need for senators to attend the sessions via teleconference.
“There’s no pandemic,” Gatchalian said, referring to the time when Congress held sessions via Zoom because of COVID-19.
Asked about the likelihood that the majority would vote on the proposal to discuss the Marcoleta amendment, Senator Risa Hontiveros said, “They don’t have a quorum.”
With 24 members, a quorum in the Senate would require 13 senators present.
Senators Francis “Chiz” Escudero and Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, of the majority, had been marked absent from the session during the roll call.
Proposal to amend rules
To recall, Marcoleta raised a motion to amend the Senate rules and “allow a senator for justifiable reason to attend and participate in the session through teleconference” on May 11, following the leadership change in the chamber that installed Alan Peter Cayetano as Senate President.
Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, during Tuesday’s plenary session, criticized the motion and asked if the Senate Committee on Rules had already constituted and discussed the proposal.
Cayetano, in defending the motion, cited Article 136 and said constituting the committee is “irrelevant” as the motion was intended to bring the proposal to the plenary.
“The invocation of the Senate President is premised on the assumption that there was no action taken. But we took action, we referred it to the Committee on Rules so Section 24 now applies,” Lacson said.
“You cannot just ram down our throats something that numbers can dictate,” he added.
Senate Minority Leader Vicente “Tito” Sotto III backed Lacson and said the Rules Committee should be constituted before discussing the motion.
“How do I know this? Ako ang Minority Leader, hindi ako member ng rules? Ex officio, eh. Tumawag ba? Ano to binabraso?” Sotto said.
Cayetano repeatedly moved to divide the chamber and vote on tackling the issue in the plenary.
Senator Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan cited Article 136 and explained that since it can be considered a new motion, it has to be voted on by Monday, June 1.
“Why are we railroading this issue, Mr. President?…Are we now curtailing my right to speak, Mr. President? We are not able to ask questions as to why we are amending the rules,” Pangilinan said.
“We are not able to ask questions as to who will benefit from the amendment to the rule. Is this rule, Mr. President, for Senator Bato, who is not here? We would like to raise these valid questions before we go into a vote,” he added.
Senator Risa Hontiveros backed Pangilinan and said the chamber should vote on the motion by June 1.
However, Marcoleta took the floor and, without naming names, referred to someone “having no legal background”.
Senator
This prompted the chamber to suspend the session, with Hontiveros and Marcoleta figuring in a heated exchange.
Senator Erwin Tulfo likewise questioned why the majority senators were seemingly railroading the rule amendment.
“My question is, why are we in such a hurry? Why are they, the majority, in a hurry to tackle this motion and divide the House, Madam President?” Tulfo said.
“I need, we need answers in the minority. Or is it because, Madam Chair, they’re in a hurry because of news reports that probably two of our colleagues might land in jail this weekend? Is that the reason why?” he said.
“Is that the reason why they have to have this inserted, this section 41C, para makaboto po kung sino man yung makukulong dahil sa announcement ng Ombudsman na may ilalabas na po ang warrant sa ilan sa mga kasamahan natin, Madam President. That is my question,” Tulfo said.
Rule XIV, Section 41 of the Senate rules state that the Senate President “may convene and hold the session through teleconference, video conference, or other reliable forms of remote or electronic means, using appropriate information and communications technology systems, due to force majeure or the occurrence of a national emergency as determined by the majority of all the members of the Senate which may prevent the convening of the Senate or the physical presence of its members in the session hall.”
This prohibits dela Rosa, who had been hiding from the public eye again, from participating in plenary sessions and the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.
Earlier, a law expert said Dela Rosa could still attend the impeachment trials remotely provided that it would be allowed by the Senate leadership. But this could be questioned by the Supreme Court.
Dela Rosa left the Senate premises – where he was under protective custody – amid an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) over his role in the war on illegal drugs. –NB, GMA News