Congress PH FILE

A group of law deans, legal scholars, political theorists, and church leaders has broken its silence on the growing turmoil in the Senate, warning that the ongoing standoff is creating confusion among the public and undermining confidence in one of the country's most important democratic institutions.

In a joint statement, the signatories said Filipinos are increasingly frustrated by the political wrangling that has stalled Senate proceedings. They argued that the situation has left not only the public but even Senate employees uncertain about whose directives to follow.

The legal experts focused on the heated debate surrounding the June 3 Senate session, particularly the question of whether a quorum existed despite the absence of several senators.

According to the group, the Constitution requires a majority of Senate members to conduct official business. However, they stressed that determining a quorum should not be based solely on the Senate's full membership if some members are unable or unwilling to participate.

The statement pointed to the case of Senator Ronald dela Rosa, whose whereabouts remain unknown, and Senator Jinggoy Estrada, who is currently detained. The scholars argued that counting senators who are effectively unavailable could paralyze the legislative process and allow a minority to prevent the Senate from functioning.

They cited the landmark Supreme Court case Avelino v. Cuenco, which recognized the practical realities facing the Senate when determining the existence of a quorum. The group said the ruling demonstrated that the Court has historically favored ensuring the continuity of legislative work over a rigid interpretation of numbers.

The experts also recalled a 2015 Senate session when then-Senate President Franklin Drilon declared the presence of a quorum based on the number of senators who were actually available to participate, despite others being absent or detained.

Addressing criticisms that "12 senators cannot equal 13," the signatories said the argument misses the point. They explained that the issue is not about changing arithmetic but about recognizing that unavailable members should not be used to prevent the Senate from carrying out its constitutional duties.

The statement further argued that the Avelino ruling remains relevant today because the composition of the Senate under the 1987 Constitution remains the same as it was under the 1935 Constitution when the decision was handed down.

The group also weighed in on the Senate leadership dispute, saying that if 12 of the 23 available senators support Senator Sherwin Gatchalian as Senate President Pro Tempore, it reflects the will of the majority. They maintained that leadership in the Senate ultimately depends on majority support.

In closing, the signatories urged lawmakers to set aside political maneuvering and return to the Senate's pressing responsibilities. Among the most urgent matters, they said, is the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

They called on senators whom they believe have contributed to the legislative impasse to stop obstructing Senate proceedings and allow the impeachment process to continue in accordance with constitutional principles.

The statement was signed by several prominent figures from the legal and academic community, including Archbishop Socrates Villegas, retired Supreme Court Justice Adolfo Azcuna, former UP Law Dean Pacifico Agabin, Dean Jemy Gatdula of the University of Asia and the Pacific Law School, Fr. Ranhilio Aquino of San Beda University, and dozens of other law professors, deans, and legal scholars from institutions across the country.