The Supreme Court (SC) has dismissed petitions that sought to cite Akbayan Partylist 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 earlier ruling involving the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte.

The SC stressed that the Constitution strongly protects freedom of speech and expression, even when statements concern the judiciary and matters of public interest.

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

It noted that protection for free expression dates back to the 1899 Malolos Constitution and has since been reinforced under the present Constitution.

High standard applies

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

The ruling said a higher standard applies before speech criticizing public officials may be penalized. Those seeking sanctions must prove that the statements were not only false but also met the legal requirements for restricting protected speech.

The petitions stemmed 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 VP Duterte.

The SC, by dismissing the petitions, reaffirmed that criticism and commentary on judicial decisions involving matters of public concern remain protected under the constitutional guarantee of free expression.