Supreme Court asked to cite Tito Sotto in indirect contempt

Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!

Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.

Visit Suniway.ph to learn

February 13, 2026 | 6:24pm

MANILA, Philippines — A group of lawyers and a private citizen, known to support the Dutertes, have petitioned the Supreme Court to hold Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III in indirect contempt. 

The 15-page petition was filed on Friday, February 13, by lawyers Manuelito Delos Reyes Luna, Harold Respicio, Ferdinand Topacio, Virgilio Garcia and social media personality Mary Catherine Diaz Binag.

The petitioners want Sotto cited for indirect contempt over his remarks about the Supreme Court following its final resolution declaring Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment unconstitutional.

Indirect contempt involves actions outside the court that interfere with proceedings, obstruct justice, or defy court orders. 

For the petitioners, Sotto’s statements are “demeaning,” “degrading” and “disrespectful” to the Supreme Court’s integrity and should constitute indirect contempt. 

“Para po sa amin, ‘yung sinasabi ni Senate President Sotto ay lumalagpas na po sa legitimate commentary,” Topacio told reporters. (For us, what Senate President Sotto is saying goes beyond legitimate commentary.)

Remarks on judicial overreach

Sotto had earlier expressed disappointment over the high court’s decision, calling it a “judicial overreach” and an “encroachment” on Congress’s power to handle impeachment cases. 

He also suggested that lawmakers should consider amending the Constitution, arguing that the high court appeared to impose new rules on impeachment when it revised its reasoning in nullifying Duterte’s impeachment after the House’s motion for reconsideration.

“Kung ang Supreme Court pwedeng galawin ang Constitution, aba’y dapat galawin na namin sapagka’t kami ang empowered to do so,” Sotto said on January 30, voicing his support for charter change. (If the Supreme Court can amend the Constitution, then we should be able to do so as well, since we are the ones empowered to do it.)

The petitioners argued that Sotto implied the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review could be curtailed through a constitutional amendment.

Sotto, however, did not explicitly call for changes to the high court’s judicial review powers nor its composition. 

Most of his comments were more focused on the rules governing impeachment, saying the creation of a separate impeachment court may be studied in reviewing the Constitution for any amendments.

While he did say that it may take “years or several retirements” before the Supreme Court could possibly change the way it thinks, he did not directly say in the interview he had with reporters that a charter change must be done to remove sitting justices. 

Possible petition

The petition, however, also argued that Sotto’s assertion that the Supreme Court might have a “different agenda” in ruling on Duterte’s impeachment “demeans the Court” by implying that the justices, who are supposed to remain non-political, are motivated by hidden political ends.

If the Supreme Court gives due course to the petition and finds Sotto in indirect contempt, he could face a fine of up to P30,000, imprisonment of up to six months, or both.

Topacio said they are also preparing for an ethics complaint against Sotto for his statements criticizing the Supreme Court’s decision.

Sotto has yet to comment on the petition.