MANILA – Nine senators led by Alan Peter Cayetano have filed a petition before the Supreme Court seeking to nullify the June 3 Senate session that resulted in leadership changes within the chamber.
Aside from Cayetano, other petitioners are Loren Legarda, Pia Cayetano, Jinggoy Estrada, Bong Go, Rodante Marcoleta, Imee Marcos, Robin Padilla, and Camille Villar, along with former Senate Secretary Jose Luis Montales.
The petition asks the Supreme Court to declare the June 3 proceedings void, including the installation of Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian as Acting Senate President and the reorganization of Senate leadership positions and committee chairmanships.
Named as respondents are several senators and Senate officials, including Gatchalian, Bam Aquino, JV Ejercito, Francis Escudero, Risa Hontiveros, Panfilo Lacson, Lito Lapid, Francis Pangilinan, Tito Sotto, Erwin Tulfo, Raffy Tulfo, and Juan Miguel Zubiri, as well as Senate officials Renato Bantug Jr. and retired Police Major General Alfredo Corpus.
The case was filed as a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule 65, with a request for the issuance of a Status Quo Ante Order, which would temporarily restore the situation that existed before the disputed Senate session while the case is being heard.
In a statement posted on social media, Cayetano said the petition was filed to address what he described as constitutional and institutional issues arising from the Senate proceedings. He argued that the matter concerns the integrity of Senate rules, due process, and the independence of the institution.
Cayetano said the petition seeks judicial review of the disputed actions and emphasized that questions surrounding the June 3 session should be resolved through legal and constitutional processes rather than political considerations.
As of posting, the Supreme Court has not yet issued a ruling on the petition. The respondents have also not publicly responded to the filing.
The case is expected to draw significant attention as it involves the validity of recent leadership changes in the Senate and could have implications for the chamber’s internal governance and future proceedings./PN
