Akbayan Party-list Representative Perci Cendaña dismissed as political harassment the indirect contempt petition filed against him and political analyst Richard Heydarian by lawyers aligned with the Duterte camp.
The petition, lodged before the Supreme Court by lawyers Mark Kristopher Tolentino and Rolex Suplico, seeks to hold Cendaña and Heydarian in indirect contempt over their remarks criticizing the High Court’s decision to junk the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte. The lawyers cited Cendaña’s reference to the Supreme Court as the “Supreme Coddler” in media interviews, and Heydarian’s social media commentary highlighting that former President Rodrigo Duterte had appointed the majority of the sitting justices.
In a statement, Cendaña lashed out at the move, branding it an “obvious modus” meant to silence those questioning the Duterte family. “It’s ironic to be charged with indirect contempt by supporters of Vice President Sara Duterte and Pastor Quiboloy. The nerve to be the ones to file. They should look in the mirror first,” he said in Filipino.
The two-term lawmaker also suggested that the petition was retaliation for his criticism of Duterte’s alleged misuse of P612 million in confidential funds—an issue that prompted four separate impeachment complaints between December 2024 and February 2025.
“If I am the target of harassment by the supporters of an alleged pedophile and a mass murderer, then I am at peace — knowing that I am doing the right thing,” Cendaña declared.
The petitioners claimed that such statements undermine public trust in the judiciary, arguing that Cendaña and Heydarian sought to portray the Court as compromised under Duterte’s influence.
Meanwhile, Rep. Leila de Lima of Mamamayang Liberal came to her colleague’s defense, warning that the move could chill free speech and democratic debate. “These efforts are concerning, not only because they target individuals with strong democratic convictions, but because they risk chilling legitimate public discourse,” she said.
She added that public criticism does not amount to contempt. “The truth is, what’s being challenged here is not the dignity of the Court, but the discomfort that comes with public accountability. Public commentary is not contempt. It is conscience.”
De Lima expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would uphold freedom of expression and resist becoming a tool for political vendettas.
