After Senate minority's walkout, Senator Cayetano defends majority's call for vote

Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano defended the Majority’s decision to put to a vote whether a proposed Rules amendment regarding remote participation could be tackled on the floor.

Cayetano's defense came after the procedural dispute in the Philippine Senate on May 26 culminated in a walkout by members of the Minority bloc.

The proceedings ended abruptly following the exit of the Minority senators from the plenary.

This prompted Senate Minority Leader Vicente Sotto III formally moved for adjournment.

Addressing the incident, Cayetano said, “they scampered out and left the Minority Leader instead of discussing the rule. We are not even discussing the rule yet. And then ganon na y’ung allegation nila.”

“You do not make that kind of statement here in the Senate because you assume good faith from everyone,” he added, reacting to accusations from Minority members who described the move as “railroading” and “strong-arming.”

The controversy arose from a proposal filed by Senator Rodante Marcoleta seeking amendments to Senate Rules that would permit senators to participate in sessions remotely. Cayetano clarified that what the chamber was deciding on was not the proposal itself, but merely whether it could already be taken up in plenary.

Citing Section 136 of the Senate Rules, Cayetano argued that the Senate could act on motions to amend the Rules even without prior endorsement from the Committee on Rules.

“If you look at Section 136 of our Rules, you do not need the endorsement, nor the forwarding of the Committee of Rules for the amendment of the rules… right now that’s irrelevant because we have given back to the plenary the proposal,” he said.

Senate Pro Tempore Loren Legarda, who was presiding over the session at the time, agreed with the interpretation and remarked, “Very clear. Thank you, Senate President.”

Still, Senators Panfilo Lacson and Francis Pangilinan objected, insisting that under Section 24 of the Rules, the proposal should first be referred to committee for deliberation before reaching the plenary floor.

In response, Cayetano stressed that the issue being voted upon was procedural and not yet connected to the merits of Marcoleta’s proposed amendment.

“We’re talking about a motion to amend the rules… the plenary is more supreme over the committee. So we didn’t disregard the committee,” he explained.

He also noted that the proposal had already been introduced earlier on May 11 and that its referral to the Committee on Rules was simply intended to allow senators time to review it.

As debates continued, Cayetano called for a division of the house to settle the procedural dispute through a vote.

“In this democratic institution, when we disagree, we vote. When we have rules, we follow the rules… So why are we using unparliamentary language to express or try to provoke the kind of argument we don’t want between the Majority and Minority? How do we resolve that? By voting,” he stressed.

Responding directly to Pangilinan, Cayetano again emphasized that the Senate had not yet entered discussions on the substance of the proposed amendment.

“We are not discussing the merits yet of the amendment. No one’s curtailing your rights because wala pa tayo doon eh. Ang pinagbobotohan natin ngayon ay kung pwede i-take up sa floor or hindi. And the arguments have already been laid out,” he said.

Despite the tensions and eventual walkout, Cayetano maintained that the Majority merely exercised the Senate’s authority to decide procedural matters through voting in accordance with parliamentary rules.

-Paraluman News