Impeachment respondent Vice President Sara Duterte has three close relatives in the House of Representatives who could go all out during plenary session Monday, May 11 to argue against the articles of impeachment against her, if they want to.

“Well, there will be debate after the sponsorship speech. And I think everybody will be given the opportunity to participate in the debate,” House Committee on Justice Chairperson Batangas 2nd district Rep. Gerville "Jinky Bitrics" Luistro said over the weekend.

Luistro will sponsor in plenary on Monday afternoon, May 11 Committee Report (CR) No. 261, which contains the four articles of impeachment.

“I’m quite sure about that, the interpellation. But with respect to the explanation of vote, siguro iko-consider din ng rules kung ilan ang (perhaps the rules committee will consider how many of the) House members who are interested to explain their vote,” she added.

The House leader had this to say when asked whether or not Davao City 1st Rep. Paolo “Pulong” Duterte, Davao City 2nd district Rep. Omar Duterte, and PPP Party-list Rep. Harold Duterte, would be allowed to participate in plenary discussions on the impeachment case.

Rep. Paolo is the Vice President's brother, while Reps Omar and Harold are her cousins.

While the right to explain one’s vote is available to House members, Luistro noted that those who wish to challenge the findings may be better heard during the interpellations, where the justice panel can respond directly to their arguments.

“This is actually a privilege which is given to the House members, but of course, kino-consider din, ilan ba ang gustong mag-explain ng kanilang position about the impeachment (the number of solons who want to explain their respective postions on the impeachment is also a consideration),” Luistro pointed out. After all, there are 318 House members.

“Perhaps if they wish to participate, it’s better to participate in the interpellations so that the Filipino people will hear their arguments, which the Justice Committee will definitely respond,” she underscored.

Luistro also clarified that she was not engaged in vote-mapping or private counting ahead of the plenary vote. She said her attention remained on defending the committee’s findings and the report that will be presented before the full House.

Asked whether her party or group had discussed estimates on who would vote for or against the impeachment, Luistro rejected the suggestion and maintained that the final decision belongs to each House member.

“I never preempted as to who will be voting in favor of the impeachment and who will not be voting in favor of the impeachment,” she said.

“As to who will be voting to affirm the same, we’re leaving that up to the exclusive judgment of the members of the House of Representatives,” added the lawyer-legislator.

Luistro likewise rejected the notion that she was campaigning for votes among lawmakers before the plenary proceedings.

“No, I’m not campaigning. I’m not campaigning in the sense that I don’t reach out to House members, I don’t call them, I don’t talk to them,” she continued.

She explained that her appearance before the plenary would be the proper venue to present the committee’s findings to all House members, rather than through private lobbying or separate appeals.