ON
← Back to feed
SC dismisses raps vs critics of VP Duterte ruling
PH🏛️ PoliticsCenter2 hr. ago

SC dismisses raps vs critics of VP Duterte ruling

The Philippine Supreme Court dismissed charges of indirect contempt against political analysts and public figures who criticized its ruling on the impeachment proceedings of Vice President Sara Duterte. The court ruled that their criticisms, including accusations of judicial bias and undermining the separation of powers, fell under constitutional protections. The petitioners, represented by lawyers affiliated with the Duterte family, had accused the critics of making 'malicious' and 'offensive' remarks. The court emphasized that such political speech could only be deemed contemptuous if it posed a clear and present danger to the judiciary's authority.

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Go to the primary sources (1)

The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.

1 reports

Philippine Daily Inquirer logoPhilippine Daily InquirerIndependentCenter2 hr. ago
SC dismisses raps vs critics of VP Duterte ruling

The Philippine Supreme Court dismissed charges of indirect contempt against political analysts and public figures who criticized its ruling on the impeachment proceedings of Vice President Sara Duterte. The court ruled that their criticisms, including accusations of judicial bias and undermining the separation of powers, fell under constitutional protections. The petitioners, represented by lawyers affiliated with the Duterte family, had accused the critics of making 'malicious' and 'offensive' remarks. The court emphasized that such political speech could only be deemed contemptuous if it posed a clear and present danger to the judiciary's authority.

Bias read (Center): While the subject involves politically sensitive content regarding judicial impartiality and executive influence, the article presents the court's reasoning and the arguments from both sides without overtly endorsing either perspective. The framing remains balanced, focusing on the legal standards (

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories