The Senate impeachment court's jurisdiction over the trial of Vice President Sara Duterte now stands on firmer legal footing after the Supreme Court dismissed as moot petitions challenging the House of Representatives' impeachment proceedings, a Senate official said Thursday.

The consolidated petitions, filed by Duterte supporters, sought to stop the impeachment proceedings while the complaint was still pending before the House earlier this year.

Following the ruling, Senate impeachment court spokesperson Reginald Tongol said the Senate proceedings are effectively insulated from any procedural issues that may have arisen during the House's handling of the impeachment complaint.

Tongol explained that because the Senate was not a party to the petitions before the Supreme Court, the impeachment court does not "inherit" legal disputes stemming from the House proceedings.

His remarks came after Duterte's defense earlier sought the dismissal of the impeachment case, arguing that the complaint was constitutionally defective and that the Senate impeachment court lacked jurisdiction.

Tongol maintained that the impeachment court functions independently of the House, which serves as the accusatory body, and is not bound by its actions.

"Because the impeachment court is fully insulated from whatever happens in the House of Representatives, the impeachment court begins with a blank slate in this adjudicatory phase," he said.

"The impeachment court now holds the sole and exclusive power to try and decide this case. The jurisdiction of the impeachment court is now absolute," he added.

Challenge to presiding officer

In early July, a group of lawyers led by Israelito Torreon asked the Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order halting the impeachment trial presided over by Sen. Francis "Chiz" Escudero.

Torreon was also among the petitioners in the case that the Supreme Court dismissed on Wednesday on grounds of mootness. He has likewise filed several petitions before the high court in recent years seeking to stop Duterte's impeachment on various constitutional grounds.

While the Supreme Court's ruling settled issues arising from the House proceedings, the petitioners argued that the legality of the Senate trial remains unresolved because of the question over its presiding officer.

Torreon and his fellow petitioners contended that Escudero had no authority to preside over the trial because he was not the elected Senate president.

Although the 1987 Constitution expressly provides that the Chief Justice shall preside when the President is tried in an impeachment case, it does not specify who should preside when the respondent is another impeachable official.

The petitioners argued that the impeachment proceedings should be suspended until the Supreme Court resolves who is constitutionally authorized to preside over the trial.

Senate President Win Gatchalian and his allies have rejected the argument, saying the Senate validly amended its impeachment rules on June 3 to allow senators to elect a presiding officer other than the Senate president.