MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court (SC) dismissed the indirect contempt case filed against Senator Vicente “Tito” Sotto III over the latter’s statement related to Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment in 2025.

“The Supreme Court has dismissed the petition for indirect contempt against Senator Vicente ‘Tito’ Sotto III over his public criticism of the Court’s ruling on the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte (G.R. Nos. 278353 and 278359, Duterte v. House of Representatives et al.), holding that his statements are protected by the constitutional freedoms of speech and expression,” said the SC, based on the ruling penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen.

Under Philippine laws, indirect contempt is a type of contempt or violation against a tribunal committed out of the court’s presence. The punishment varies, but penalties may include a fine. Rule 71, Section 3(D) of Rules of Court states that conduct that impedes or obstructs the administration of justice may be punished with indirect contempt.

Duterte v. House of Representatives was the High Court’s 2025 ruling that dismissed the first impeachment complaint against the Vice President. There, the High Court, through Leonen, ruled that the articles of impeachment or the allegations from the House of Representatives were unconstitutional.

After this ruling, Sotto aired several remarks where he questioned the SC decision and even said that the ponente or Leonen “was unfamiliar with congressional rules and that the decision effectively amended the Constitution.”

Lawyer Manuelito Luna and others then went to the High Court and asked the SC to cite the senator for indirect contempt, claiming that the lawmaker’s remarks were disrespectful to the Court.

But in the current ruling, the SC said Sotto’s statements did not violate the indirect contempt rule. The Leonen ruling said that “freedom of speech and expression enjoys the highest constitutional protection, particularly when the speech involves political matters.”

The Court explained that when the alleged contemptuous speech involves speech, the tribunal must also consider the constitutional protections of free speech and expression in its ruling. In assessing situations like this, the SC said courts must also consider not only what was said, but also “how, when, where it was expressed, and who spoke it.”

“Citing Tolentino v. Heydarian (G.R. Nos. E-01742 and E-01747), also penned by Senior Associate Justice Leonen, the SC reiterated that the Judiciary, like the other branches of government, remains subject to public scrutiny and criticism,” said the High Court.

“Under the doctrine of fair comment, statements concerning public officials in the performance of their duties are protected. Such statements do not automatically become punishable simply because they are false, harsh, or offensive. As the Court explained, ‘the guarantee of free speech was enacted to protect not only polite speech, but even in its most unsophisticated form’,” it added.

As said by the SC, this is the latest impeachment-related contempt case that was dismissed by the High Court. In July, the SC en banc unanimously dismissed the petition for indirect contempt filed by lawyers Mark Tolentino and Rolex Suplico against Akbayan Representative Perci Cendaña and political analyst Richard Heydarian.

Duterte is currently in the middle of her impeachment trial after the failed proceedings in 2025. The House prosecution team had finished presenting its evidence against Duterte over alleged grave threats, misuse confidential funds, and unexplained wealth.

“The Court regards Senator Tito Sotto with the greatest respect and understands his frustration with some of our Decisions, or even with one member of the Court. Courts must be receptive to all forms of
criticisms,” said the SC. “Democracy is founded on respect. With this decision, we double down not only on freedom of expression but on full respect for the respondent.”

Sotto welcomed the High Court ruling, saying that his disagreement with one of its decisions “does not mean I have lost respect” for the SC.

“I have always held it in high regard as an institution, and I return the respect it has shown me in its decision,” said Sotto in a statement.

“Freedom of speech and expression is one of our strongest safeguards against tyranny. When people are free to question those in power, in any branch of government, power is kept in check. This decision protects the right of every Filipino to speak freely on issues that affect the nation,” he said. – Rappler.com