Photo credit: Congress PH

A law professor from the University of the Philippines on Friday criticized Senator Robin Padilla’s attempt to expand the definition of force majeure to justify remote voting in the Senate, calling the proposal legally flawed and deeply concerning.

The controversy erupted as the Senate remains stuck in a political deadlock over proposed rule changes that would allow senators to vote online during plenary sessions and even in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

In an interview with DZMM Teleradyo, UP Assistant Professor Michael Tiu Jr. said Padilla’s interpretation of force majeure stretches the legal concept far beyond its intended meaning.

“Sa tingin ko, hindi uubra o hindi pwede, kasi bakit naman kung talagang force majeure ‘yung mga bagay na ‘yan, bakit mga senador lang ang maaapektuhan at hindi makakapunta at bumoto? Paano naman ‘yung buong Senado, ‘yung staff nila at ‘yung mga committee staff?” Tiu questioned.

“So kung ang punto ay may force majeure at hindi sila makakapasok, makapag-convene ng Senate, parang weird naman na senador lang ang maaapektuhan ng rule na ‘yan,” he added.

Padilla had reportedly cited events such as La Niña and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East as possible grounds for invoking force majeure. But Tiu argued that such situations would need to broadly affect the public—not just a select group of lawmakers—for the legal principle to apply.

He pointed to the COVID-19 pandemic as an example of a legitimate force majeure situation, saying the nationwide lockdowns and health crisis genuinely prevented people from physically reporting to work, including lawmakers.

“Sa konteksto na kanyang ginagamit ay mali, hindi tama. Kasi pwede mong masabi na ‘yung mga events, mga pangyayari na ‘yun ay hindi mo mahulaan o kung mahulaan mo ay hindi mo maiwasan. Pero ang purpose ng force majeure ay bilang excuse na hindi mo magawa ang kailangan mong gawin,” Tiu stressed.

“In the same case, dahil hindi siya makakaapekto, it’s not relevant to their duties like COVID-19 and the pandemic was a force majeure kasi ‘yun talagang nakapagpigil sa mga tao na magpunta sa kanilang mga opisina because of the health situation,” he added.

Tiu went further, describing the proposal as ridiculous and warning that redefining force majeure simply to accommodate a few senators could weaken a long-established legal principle.

The Senate has been in turmoil since the minority bloc walked out of Tuesday’s session, effectively breaking the quorum and halting discussions on the proposed amendments.

Minority senators argued that the proceedings had become disorderly, claiming the majority was pushing through with the rule changes without proper committee resolutions or structured deliberations.

The proposed amendments gained urgency following the fugitive status of Senator Ronald dela Rosa and the looming arrest threats against two other senators facing plunder and graft complaints linked to the alleged flood control corruption scandal.

Without dela Rosa and two other allies, the 13-member majority bloc risks losing the numbers needed to pass key measures and maintain control of Senate proceedings.

The chamber has struggled to regain stability following the recent leadership shakeup, with legislative work slowing down and several committees still left unorganized.

Meanwhile, pre-trial proceedings for Duterte’s impeachment case are expected to begin on July 6, shortly after Congress resumes session from its break.