Senate President Vicente Sotto III slammed a petition seeking to cite him for indirect contempt as a “publicity stunt,” insisting that his disagreement of the Supreme Court ruling on Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment does not amount to disrespect of the judiciary.

The petition was filed by Duterte supporters, including lawyers Manuelito Luna, Ferdinand Topacio, Harold Respicio, Virgilio Garcia, businesswoman Cathy Binag, and former lawmaker Michael Defensor.

They cited Sotto’s remarks that the Supreme Court’s ruling—that the impeachment complaint violated the one-year bar—constituted judicial overreach and judicial legislation.

In a statement on Saturday, Sotto dismissed the move, saying it “has no legal or factual basis” and highlighted that Topacio, a lawyer, should be aware that simply expressing disagreement with court decisions is protected speech.

“Simply expressing a disagreement or the mere act of criticizing the decision of the courts cannot constitute indirect contempt. As a lawyer, Atty. Topacio should know this,” Sotto said, adding that Taopacio “has a long record of publicly criticizing court decisions that are unfavorable to his clients.”

Sotto likewise said that indirect contempt requires actions that “actually tend to impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice.”

He stressed that his statements were protected under Article III, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution and cited past Supreme Court rulings, including In re: Kelly and Estrada v. Desierto, affirming that courts are not immune from criticism and that dissent is essential in a democratic system.

Sotto said he will formally respond to the petition when officially asked by the Supreme Court, maintaining that his comments were simply an exercise of his right to free expression and not an attack on the judiciary.

“The recent petition for indirect contempt filed against me by Atty. Topacio is a nuisance suit. It has no legal or factual basis. It is a mere publicity stunt,” he stressed.