House lawmakers on Monday asserted that the Supreme Court’s (SC) directive seeking additional information from Congress does not constitute a legal impediment for the Senate to postpone the already stalled impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte — unless the high court issues a temporary restraining order (TRO).

House prosecutor Joel Chua and Bicol Saro Rep. Terry Ridon clarified this amid concerns raised by Mamamayang Liberal Rep. Leila de Lima that pro-Duterte senators may cite the Supreme Court’s directive as grounds to further delay the trial.

“There is no reason for the Senate to wait for the Supreme Court’s decision since no TRO has been issued yet. So for now, the trial should proceed as long as the Supreme Court does not stop it,” Chua said.

He explained that the high court’s resolution, which addresses the timeline and procedural details of the impeachment complaints, was necessary to resolve the consolidated petitions filed by Duterte and Mindanao-based lawyers questioning the legality of the process.

“It’s not just the House — the Senate is also being compelled to comply [with the SC resolution],” Chua added, noting that the House is more than willing to follow the directive. “I assure you this will not affect any pending impeachment complaint.”

The resolution requires both chambers of Congress to submit detailed information on how the four impeachment complaints against Duterte were filed and processed. One of those complaints — signed by 215 lawmakers — has already been transmitted to the Senate for trial.

The Supreme Court also directed Congress to address what De Lima described as minor procedural matters that could cast doubt on the complaint’s validity and the legislature’s constitutional role.

Ridon acknowledged De Lima’s concerns but said the Court has the discretion to review whether the legislature complied with the one-year bar rule, citing two Supreme Court rulings that established the precedent.

De Lima, who is set to join the prosecution panel along with Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno, warned of potential “judicial overreach” by the high court for appearing to challenge the House’s compliance with constitutional impeachment rules.

“My impression, again with all due respect to the Supreme Court, is that it went too far. It seems that it has the hallmarks of what we call judicial overreach,” De Lima said.