SC justices themselves violated the Rule of Law

On Jan. 28, in a unanimous vote of all participating associate justices, the Supreme Court (SC) affirmed with finality its July 25, 2025, decision, which declared the articles of impeachment against Vice-President Sara Duterte unconstitutional.

- MUSINGS OSCAR P. LAGMAN, JR.

“The Resolution is immediately executory ...No further pleadings will be allowed,” SC spokesperson Camille Sue Mae Ting told reporters in a press conference.

The Court clarified in a press release that the initial three impeachment complaints filed against Duterte turned on the constitutional clock, even though they were not placed in the order of business within the required 10 session days.

Under article XI, section 3(5) of the 1987 Constitution, the oneyear bar rule disallows any impeachment proceedings against the same official for more than once in a year.

The Court interpreted “session days” in its plain and ordinary sense to mean any calendar day in which the House of Representatives holds a session, rather than strictly legislative session days.

Citing the landmark Gutierrez v. House of Representatives case, the Court detailed that an impeachment is deemed initiated when a verified complaint is referred to the Committee on Justice. It also pointed out that the initiation must occur within the term of Congress to be valid.

As in 2025, Associate Justices Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa and Maria Filomena Singh were on leave. As in last year, Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen penned the SC decision.

The Supreme Court decision drew mixed reactions from lawmakers, legal experts, and other stakeholders.

Here is the statement of the defense team of VP Sara: “We welcome the Supreme Court’s ruling. This unanimous Decision has once again upheld the rule of law and reinforced the constitutional limits against abuse of the impeachment process. We remain prepared to address the allegations at the proper time and before the appropriate forum”

House of Representative spokesperson Princess Abante said: “We respect the Supreme Court. But our constitutional duty to uphold truth and accountability does not end here.

“The impeachment process is not just a legal mechanism — it is a vital democratic safeguard.