Three senators on Monday, June 2, took to the plenary to present contrasting constitutional interpretations on whether the trial can lawfully continue beyond the 19th Congress.

Senate Majority Leader Francis "Tol" Tolentino warned that proceeding with the trial past June 30, 2025, the last day of the current Congress, would violate the 1987 Constitution.

In his manifestation, Tolentino stressed that the Senate, acting as an impeachment court, must conclude its proceedings before the end of the 19th Congress.

“Only 12 Senators remain after each election, insufficient to form a quorum. Thus, unlike the U.S. Senate, we cannot carry unfinished proceedings into the next Congress,” Tolentino said.

“Allowing the 20th Congress to take over this trial would be ultra vires or beyond our constitutional power,” he added.

Citing jurisprudence and Senate rules, Tolentino argued that legislative and investigatory matters, including impeachment trials, terminate with the expiration of each Congress. He cited Neri v. Senate, Balag v. Senate, and even Jefferson’s Manual to emphasize that “unfinished business does not carry over into a new Congress.”

On the other hand, Sen. Risa Hontiveros stated in her manifestation that impeachment trials fall under the Senate’s non-legislative functions and are thus not bound by the rules terminating legislative matters at the end of a Congress.

“The 1987 Constitution demands that the Senate continue with the impeachment proceedings already initiated without further delay,” Hontiveros argued.

Hontiveros cited Chavez v. Judicial and Bar Council and Pimentel Jr. v. Joint Committee of Congress, noting that the Supreme Court has distinguished legislative functions from non-legislative duties like impeachment.

“Napakahalagang mandato po ng Saligang Batas ito. Klaro at walang kalabuan (This is a very important mandate of the Constitution. It is clear and without ambiguity),” she said.

“We will be judged by the public if we fail to perform our constitutional duty,” she added.

For his part, Senate Minority Leader Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III offered a more expansive interpretation, asserting that impeachment is a sui generis process — unique in character, quasi-judicial, and inherently political.

He maintained that the trial can lawfully continue into the 20th Congress.

“There is no provision in the 1987 Constitution or in the Senate rules of procedure on impeachment trials that expressly prohibits this,” Pimentel stated.

“In fact, Rule 3 of the Senate Impeachment Rules says the trial shall continue until final judgment,” he said.

Pimentel emphasized the principle of jurisdictional continuity, likening the impeachment court to judicial bodies whose caseloads remain unaffected by changes in membership. He argued that the Senate, when sitting as an impeachment court, operates independently of legislative calendars.

“Jurisdiction, once acquired, is not lost. The impeachment docket of the Senate impeachment court continues and remains the same,” Pimentel said.

The contrasting positions highlight the legal uncertainty surrounding Duterte's upcoming impeachment trial. With only weeks remaining in the  19th Congress, the Senate faces mounting pressure to reconcile these interpretations and decide whether to push through with the trial or let it lapse.