The Supreme Court has dismissed petitions seeking to cite Akbayan Party-list Rep. Percival Cendaña, Presidential Adviser for Poverty Alleviation Larry Gadon, and political analyst Richard Heydarian in indirect contempt over their public comments on the Court's ruling involving an earlier impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte.

In its decision, the High Court stressed that the Constitution strongly protects freedom of speech and expression, including statements concerning the judiciary and matters of public interest.

The Court said it carefully balanced the need to preserve judicial independence with its constitutional duty to uphold free expression.

It noted that protection for free speech traces its roots to the 1899 Malolos Constitution and has been reaffirmed under the present Constitution.

The Court also emphasized that judges must exercise restraint in punishing statements related to public affairs or the official acts of government officials, including members of the judiciary.

It said a higher threshold applies before criticism directed at public officials may be penalized, adding that those seeking sanctions must prove not only that the statements were false but also that they satisfied the legal requirements for restricting constitutionally protected speech.

The petitions arose from separate complaints filed by lawyers Ferdinand Topacio, Mark Christopher Tolentino, and Rolex Suplico, who sought to hold Cendaña, Gadon, and Heydarian liable for indirect contempt over their reactions to the Supreme Court's ruling on an earlier attempt to impeach Vice President Duterte.

In dismissing the petitions, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that criticism and public commentary on judicial decisions involving matters of public concern remain protected under the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression.