Former Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) and constitutional law expert Atty. Domingo "Egon" Cayosa stated on Saturday that the Senate may choose to move forward with the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, even if the Supreme Court ruled the Articles of Impeachment unconstitutional and flawed.

Cayosa made this assertion in a radio interview, explaining that the legislative branch may assert its "exclusive power" in impeachment matters.

He said the next step would depend on the senators' actions and whether they have enough support to proceed with the trial.

“The legislative branch may decide to defer to that ruling, or if they have the political will and numbers, they can go ahead with the impeachment trial. The Constitution is clear that, in matters of impeachment, the legislative branch holds sole authority,” Cayosa explained.

On Friday afternoon, the Supreme Court voted 13-0, declaring that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte are barred by the one-year rule and found them in violation of the right to due process.

While the SC's decision is immediately executory, a motion for reconsideration may be filed.

Asked if the Senate and House of Representatives could choose not to comply with the SC ruling, Cayosa said, "They can do that if they assert their exclusive power in the impeachment process. Of course, others suggest deferring to the Supreme Court. But the Constitution is clear that the Senate decides on impeachment, and that is the Senate impeachment court."

Cayosa also noted that, despite concerns about judicial overreach, the Senate could disregard the SC ruling and move ahead with the trial.

He pointed out that the Senate impeachment court is sui generis, meaning it operates uniquely and independently.

“They have all the leeway. So we understand they can proceed with that. But it all depends on whether they have the political will and numbers to move forward,” Cayosa added.

After the SC ruling on Friday, senators expressed differing views.

Senator Bam Aquino called for an immediate caucus to discuss the decision, asserting that the ruling "ignored" the Senate's constitutional duty.

Senator Vicente "Tito" Sotto III, on the other hand, said he was still studying the SC decision and seeking advice. As a member of the impeachment court, he said he would first consult with the House of Representatives, adding that a legal expert told him the Senate could disregard the SC decision.For his part, Senator Vicente "Tito" Sotto III said that he is still studying the SC decision and is seeking advice on the matter.

            He said that being a member of the impeachment court, he would rather hear what the House of Representatives has to say, adding he was just told by a legal luminary that in the said situation, they can disregard the SC decision, thus he will study the said advice.

                                                            --30--