FACT CHECK: No SC ruling yet on indirect contempt case against Sotto

Claim: Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III has been convicted and jailed following a Supreme Court (SC) ruling on his indirect contempt case.

Rating: FALSE

Why we fact-checked this: On February 14, the YouTube channel “Pinas News Insight” uploaded two videos carrying the claim.

The first was titled: “Big news! Bilis ng karma! Sotto sobrang napahiya, Korte kumilos na, naglabas ng ultimatum sa Senado?”

(Big news! Karma is swift! Sotto deeply humiliated, the Court acted and issued an ultimatum to the Senate?)

The second video was titled, “Just in: Kakapasok lang! SP Sotto kinakarma matapos bastusin ang korte?”

(Just in! Senate President Sotto faces karma after disrespecting the Court?)

Both videos, posted a day after an indirect contempt petition was filed against Sotto before the SC, pushed the same narrative, with thumbnails stating: “Hinatulan si Sotto, yare! Korte kumilos na, tinapos si Sotto? Bilis ng karma” (Sotto convicted, it’s over! Court acted, Sotto finished?) and “Kulong si Sotto? Kaso sinampa na, nasampolan sa korte? Iyak ka ngayon” (Sotto jailed? Case filed, made an example in court? Cry now.)

The comments section shows that many viewers appeared to believe the claim, with some praising the SC for the supposed ruling and others calling for Sotto’s arrest.

As of writing, the two videos have amassed more than 59,000 views and 3,100 likes combined. 

The facts: While a petition seeking to have Sotto cited in indirect contempt has been filed with the High Court, the SC has not yet issued any ruling on the matter.

On February 13, lawyer Ferdinand Topacio and other petitioners asked the SC to cite Sotto in indirect contempt after his public criticism of the Court’s decision to declare the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte as unconstitutional.

However, the Court has not given the petition due course. The videos’ titles and thumbnails reframe the filing of the petition as the ruling, which is not the case. The filing of a petition only initiates proceedings and does not amount to a finding of guilt.

Basis for the complaint: On January 29, the Supreme Court denied with finality the motion for reconsideration filed by the House of Representatives, which sought to reverse the SC’s 2025 decision that found the impeachment complaint against the Vice President as having violated the one‑year bar rule under Article XI, Section 3(5) of the Constitution.

Sotto described the ruling as “judicial overreach” and characterized the prospect of impeaching an official as an “impossible dream.” These remarks later served as the basis for the contempt petition against him, with the petitioners saying Sotto’s statements went beyond legitimate commentary and undermined the High Court’s credibility.

The Senate president, however, has dismissed the indirect contempt petition against him as a “nuisance suit” and a “publicity stunt,” questioning Topacio’s motives in filing the case. 

In response, Topacio issued a statement branding Sotto as the “real nuisance,” accusing him of tarnishing the Senate’s reputation and eroding the principle of comity among government branches.  

Fact-checked: Rappler has debunked several false claims about Sotto, including allegations that he had been removed from his post as Senate president:

• FACT CHECK: Sotto not ousted as Senate president
• FACT CHECK: Quote card of Sotto accusing Dutertes of orchestrating Co’s videos is fake
• FACT CHECK: Video of Tito Sotto proposing 50% tax for content creators is AI-manipulated
• FACT CHECK: Tito Sotto still Senate president, not replaced by Alan Peter Cayetano 

– Cyril Bocar/Rappler.com

Efren Cyril Bocar is a journalist from Llorente, Eastern Samar who graduated with a degree in English Language Studies at the Visayas State University. Cyril is also a graduate of the Aries Rufo Journalism Fellowship of Rappler for 2024. 

Keep us aware of suspicious Facebook pages, groups, accounts, websites, articles, or photos in your network by contacting us at factcheck@rappler.com. Let us battle disinformation one Fact Check at a time.