I could not, for the life of me, understand why some senators insist they can proceed with the impeachment trial against the Vice President despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Senate did not acquire jurisdiction over the said case and, therefore, could not constitute itself as an impeachment court.

The decision is clear and certainly not ambiguous. By declaring that the Articles of Impeachment are null and void, the Court is ipso facto prohibiting the august chamber from further taking cognizance of the case. In fact, those senators who contend otherwise and would still continue may actually be cited in contempt. Why? Because if the Court says its decision is immediately executory, it is mandatory that everyone observes and complies.

The problem is that some intrepid legal luminaries assert that since impeachment is sui generis — meaning, unique or constituting a class alone — only the Senate has exclusive authority to decide on matters relating to it. In fact, this is the view taken by some solons opposed to the decision.

Honestly, I don’t know what their legal basis is for saying this. But clearly, it is blatantly misplaced. To begin with, the Supreme Court considers impeachment cases as sui generis, not because they are outside the ambit of the Court’s jurisdiction, but because they are legal on the one hand, but political on the other. Hence, to say only the Senate has the sole authority to try impeachment cases without interference indubitably disregards the authority of the Court as the final arbiter.

A few weeks back, those who want Sara Duterte to get convicted lambasted the Senate for its decision to remand the case back to the House of Representatives so the latter could certify that it did not violate the rules and that it remains willing to prosecute. Those opposed to this move quickly pointed out that only the Highest Tribunal could settle this and that the Senate could not arrogate to itself that uniquely judicial power.

But considering the Supreme Court has finally spoken, these same people are now saying the judiciary has no right to rule on the matter since exclusive authority belongs to the Senate. Despite its decision, they ironically push the upper chamber to still proceed with the trial. In fact, this seems to be the position taken by both Senators Bam Aquino and Kiko Pangilinan and some other legislators who want to prevent the Vice President from running in 2028.

While I understand where they are coming from, such a ploy, if pursued, may result in a constitutional crisis. Under the expanded jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, it has the power to intervene in cases where there is a grave abuse of discretion or a lack of jurisdiction. In keeping with the separation of powers doctrine, it has the final say to maintain checks and balances.

At any rate, if the opponents of the Vice President still want to prosecute her, the prudent thing to do is to file another complaint next year.

They still have time to convict her if they have the numbers. In the case of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, it took them six months to perpetually disqualify him from office.

In the meantime, they should respect the Court’s decision. There is a reason why it is deemed supreme and why public trust in the judiciary matters.