THE COURT VOTED 13–1 TO CHANGE THE CALCULATION

Thirteen senator-judges supported Erwin Tulfo’s appeal to overturn the July 6 ruling requiring 16 votes. Presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero cast the lone vote against it, while six senators did not participate.

Earlier, the court rejected Alan Peter Cayetano’s attempt to stop the threshold vote. Thirteen senators rejected his challenge, six supported it, and Mark Villar abstained.

Those were different questions. The first cleared the way for a decision; the second changed the rule used to calculate the votes needed for conviction.

THESE WERE THE 13 WHO VOTED FOR THE CHANGE

The senators were Bam Aquino, JV Ejercito, Sherwin Gatchalian, Risa Hontiveros, Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, Lito Lapid, Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan, Vicente “Tito” Sotto III, Erwin Tulfo, Raffy Tulfo, Joel Villanueva, Mark Villar, and Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri.

Escudero voted against the change. He nevertheless said he would give effect to the court’s majority decision.

Mark Villar’s position needs a clear explanation: he abstained in the earlier procedural vote, then voted for the change in the main vote. Reporting only his earlier abstention would leave readers with the wrong account of his final vote.

SIX DID NOT PARTICIPATE; FOUR OTHERS WERE ABSENT

Alan Peter Cayetano, Pia Cayetano, Christopher “Bong” Go, Imee Marcos, Robin Padilla, and Camille Villar did not participate in the main vote. All six had supported Cayetano’s earlier challenge.

The four absent senators were Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, Jinggoy Estrada, Loren Legarda, and Rodante Marcoleta.

That accounts for all 24 Senate seats: 13 for the change, one against, six who did not participate, and four absent. The six nonparticipants should not be recorded as six votes against the ruling.

TWO-THIRDS STILL APPLIES. FOURTEEN DEPENDS ON THE VOTING BASE

The Constitution requires the agreement of two-thirds of all Senate members for conviction. Today’s dispute concerned which senators should be counted when some cannot legally or physically perform their duties.

Under the new ruling, the court must determine, using evidence, which senators remain legally and factually able to participate when the verdict is reached. The calculation will use that group, with any fraction rounded up.

If the court determines that 20 senators belong in that group, conviction requires 14 votes. Two-thirds of 20 is 13⅓, so 13 would fall short.

The ruling does not automatically settle the final number today. It applies to Duterte’s current trial and does not bind future impeachment courts.

THIS COULD CHANGE HOW MANY VOTES THE PROSECUTION NEEDS

With a voting base of 20, the prosecution would need two fewer votes than under the previous fixed requirement of 16. That could affect the outcome when senators eventually decide the charges.

Supporters argue that senators who cannot perform their duties should not prevent the court from reaching a verdict. Duterte’s defense maintains its objection to changing the earlier ruling and says it will pursue available legal remedies.

Today’s result therefore leaves two decisions ahead: who will be counted in the final calculation, and how those senators will vote after considering the case.