FORMER Senate president Franklin Drilon said the competing claims of the “new” and “old” majority blocs on who controls the chamber should be resolved by the Supreme Court, if the leadership issue is challenged.
Drilon made the remark as newly elected Senate President Pro Tempore Sherwin “Win” Gatchalian and Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano both claim the chamber’s top post.
Drilon also lamented the instability gripping the Senate as part of the political realignments taking shape ahead of the 2028 elections.
“There is chaos. There is instability. It is the expected result of political contests leading to 2028. All of that is now coming into play,” Drilon said on Thursday.
Gatchalian’s former minority bloc became the majority group after Sen. Francis Escudero on Wednesday switched to Gatchalian’s side, making him their 12th member.
They then declared all seats vacant, “ousting” Cayetano as Senate president. But Cayetano said Gatchalian’s group committed an illegal power grab and insisted that he remained Senate chief.
“With Win Gatchalian being the duly elected Senate president pro tempore, he became acting Senate president when the position of Senate president was declared vacant,” Drilon said.
“Why acting president? Because the Constitution requires the majority of all members of the Senate to elect a Senate President. That means 13 votes,” he said.
The act of declaring all positions vacant requires only 12 votes “because there is nothing in the rules requiring 13 votes for that purpose,” Drilon said.
“Let us proceed with the work of the Senate. Those who question the validity of what transpired can go to the Supreme Court. We continue working until the Supreme Court says otherwise,” he said.
However, Drilon acknowledged what he described as a “peculiar situation” under the Constitution.
While only 12 votes may have been sufficient to declare Senate positions vacant, the election of a new Senate president requires the vote of a majority of all members of the Senate, or at least 13 votes.
Drilon said the Gatchalian bloc recognized this constitutional limitation, which is why he was designated only in an acting capacity.
“In our system, there is a presumption of legality. The acts of government officials are presumed to be valid until otherwise declared by the Supreme Court,” Drilon said in an interview.
He anchored his position on the Supreme Court ruling in Avelino vs. Cuenco, which held that for purposes of determining a quorum, only senators who are available and within the coercive jurisdiction of the chamber should be counted.
He recalled that when he was Senate president in 2015, the chamber conducted business with only 12 senators physically available, while four senators were abroad and three were under detention.
“On May 5, 2015, we conducted Senate business with 12 senators and considered the membership to be 17 out of 24 because four were abroad and three were under detention,” Drilon recalled.
“There were instances where less than 13 senators were considered sufficient for the Senate to exercise its functions, and this was consistent with the ruling in Avelino vs. Cuenco,” he said.
According to Drilon, the same principle applies to the current Senate.
In Avelino, the Supreme Court held that when the Constitution mandates a majority of each chamber to constitute a quorum, the term “house” does not necessarily refer to the entire membership, but to the active and available members, excluding those beyond the Senate’s coercive reach, Drilon said.
He noted that there is no serious debate over the validity of the session in which the Senate positions were declared vacant.
“The 12 senators constituted a quorum under Avelino vs. Cuenco and declared all positions vacant,” he said.
