Sen. Rodante Marcoleta on Thursday said he does not intend to move for his temporary release so he could participate once senators move to vote on the matter regarding the 16-vote conviction threshold for Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.
The need for senator-judges to vote on whether to retain or revise the 16-vote requirement arose as four senators, including Marcoleta, remain absent from the impeachment trial.
Marcoleta made the remarks after his bail hearing for plunder at the Sandiganbayan Third Division, which allowed the interview inside the courtroom.
‘No, I will not move for a furlough just to vote for the threshold,’ Marcoleta said.
A prison furlough refers to a temporary release granted to an incarcerated person.
The senator thinks the threshold should be up for a vote.
‘It’s already in the Constitution,’ he said. ‘Nobody has a right to change the Constitution.’
On Wednesday, the Senate impeachment court invited four retired Supreme Court justices as ‘amici curiae (friends of the court) in a hearing to discuss whether there is a need to revisit the 16-vote threshold needed for conviction.
Three of the retired SC justices agreed that the minimum number of votes needed for conviction is not automatically set at 16.
In a related development, Marcoleta also lamented that the Senate impeachment court did not take up his July 20 manifestation.
According to Marcoleta, he was questioning in this manifestation the legitimacy of Sen. Francis Escudero as a presiding officer of the impeachment court.
‘They did not take up. I was questioning first of all, the legitimacy of the presiding officer,’ he said. ‘The last time I checked, it should be the Senate president who will preside.’
‘If they won’t take that up, why would I participate there,’ he said.
‘They have not even discussed,’ he said, ‘they have not even debated the merits of my manifestation and request.’
Marcoleta faces a 90-day suspension for his plunder case stemming from an alleged P75 million campaign donation he received while an incumbent party-list representative.
The Sandiganbayan, however, has yet to resolve the matter regarding his suspension
Republic Act No 7080 or the Anti-Plunder Act, provides for the preventive suspension of any official facing such a case.