Golden Globes
Golden Globes Winners & Nominees: The Names Shaping This Awards Season
Tap to view
👁
Mixed
Your support keeps independent commentary alive.
☕ Buy us a coffee and keep the conversation going

The Supreme Court of the Philippines, voting unanimously en banc, has DENIED WITH FINALITY the motion for reconsideration seeking to revive the impeachment case against Sara Duterte.
This is not a pause.
This is not a setback.
This is constitutional closure.
In plain terms: game over.
No second motions
No re-filing under the same facts
No procedural workaround
No political pressure can reopen the issue
The ruling is executory, binding, and immutable. The Court is done. Period.
No—and that distinction matters.
The Court did not rule on guilt or innocence. It ruled on constitutionality.
The issue was never who was impeached.
The issue was how the impeachment was done.
Because impeachment is not a political free-for-all. It is a strict constitutional process.
Under Article XI, Section 3(5) of the 1987 Constitution, the one-year bar rule is clear:
No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year.
The House attempted to proceed despite:
Prior impeachment complaints already filed
Violations of the one-year rule
Due process concerns at the House level
When Congress exceeds constitutional limits, judicial review is not optional—it is mandatory.
Absolutely not.
This is the Supreme Court doing exactly what the Constitution commands:
✔ Checking excesses of a co-equal branch
✔ Enforcing constitutional boundaries
✔ Protecting the integrity of impeachment
This is separation of powers working, not collapsing.
A unanimous en banc ruling means:
No internal disagreement
No legal ambiguity
No room for political spin
This was not a divided Court.
This was institutional certainty.
This ruling protects institutions, not personalities.
Today it is VP Sara.
Tomorrow, it could be anyone else.
Political accountability must still obey constitutional discipline.
Impeachment is powerful—but it is not lawless.
The Supreme Court did not choose a side.
It chose the Constitution.
And in a constitutional democracy,
that choice must always prevail.



Disclaimer: This site uses publicly available images and materials for news, satire, and commentary. All rights belong to their respective owners. No copyright infringement intended.
© 2025 Politikanta Minute. All Rights Reserved.
Political Commentary • Satire • Faith-Based Reflection
Some visuals may be AI-generated for satire and illustration. Not real footage unless stated.
Disclaimer: This site uses publicly available images and materials for news, satire, and commentary. All rights belong to their respective owners. No copyright infringement intended.
© 2025 Politikanta Minute. All Rights Reserved.
Political Commentary • Satire • Faith-Based Reflection
Some visuals may be AI-generated for satire and illustration. Not real footage unless stated.