From ruling on the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte to the excess funds of the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth), the Supreme Court (SC) had a busy year in 2025.
As the year comes to a close, GMA News Online looked back on the court’s top rulings.
Duterte impeachment
One of the most controversial decisions of the High Court this year involved the Articles of Impeachment against the country’s vice president.
To recall, three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected to the alleged misuse of confidential funds by the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd).
It was the fourth impeachment complaint that was endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives and was later transmitted to the Senate as the Articles of Impeachment in February 2025.
In July 2025, the SC declared the Articles of Impeachment as unconstitutional, ruling unanimously that they are barred by the one-year rule under Article XI Section 3 paragraph 5 of the Constitution.
Moreover, magistrates ruled that the articles violate the right to due process.
In August, the House of Representatives asked the SC to reconsider its decision, an appeal that is still pending up to present time.
The House argued that it should be allowed to perform its exclusive duty to prosecute an impeachable official and the Senate’s to try the case.
READ: The Impeachment Trial of Vice President Sara Duterte
PhilHealth
Another significant decision was the recent SC ruling that directed the government to return the P60 billion excess funds transferred by PhilHealth to the national treasury.
PhilHealth was initially directed to transfer P89.9 billion. It was able to remit P60 billion before the SC issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt the transfer of the remaining P29.9 billion following several petitions.
The petitions were filed by Senator Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III, the Philippine Medical Association, the 1SAMBAYAN Coalition, and Bayan Muna chairperson Neri Colmenares and others.
The High Court then held oral arguments on the petitions from February to April before issuing its decision in December.
In its decision, the En Banc declared void the provision and Finance circular that authorized and directed the transfer for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
It directed the government to return the P60 billion funds through the 2026 General Appropriations Act (GAA).
BSKE, BARMM polls
Meanwhile, the country’s top court also issued many election-related decisions this year, one of which upheld Republic Act (RA) 12232, a law that essentially rescheduled the Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan Elections (BSKE) from December 2025 to November 2026.
The SC found that the law does not “postpone” the elections but that its rescheduling is “merely incidental.”
It said RA 12232 is a “term-setting law” and that it established a four-year term and prohibited consecutive terms for barangay and SK officials.
The court also found that the law does not violate the public’s right to vote, as it neither abolishes nor indefinitely suspends the BSKE.
Another decision involving elections was the SC’s ruling which ordered the postponement of the Bangsamoro elections originally scheduled on October 13.
This was after the SC declared the Bangsamoro Autonomy Acts (BAAs) 58 and 77 unconstitutional.
The BAA 77, or the Bangsamoro Parliamentary Act of 2025, amended BAA 58 and redistricted the vacant seats in light of an SC decision excluding Sulu from the autonomous region.
In reaction, Comelec said it is now “back to zero” for the poll body as there will be no law to serve as the basis for the first-ever parliamentary elections.
Meanwhile, the SC also ruled that a candidate’s low vote count in a previous election is not enough to automatically declare them as nuisance candidates.
It said that there was not always a direct link between a candidate’s seriousness to run and the votes they garnered during a previous election.
Further, the SC found that if the Comelec is allowed to declare a candidate as a nuisance due to low votes, the poll body will be “virtually exercising that which is exclusively reserved to the voters.”
Pending petitions
This November, the SC denied Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa’s request to compel Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla to submit a copy of the alleged International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant issued against him.
Though his bid was denied, Dela Rosa’s manifestation where he asked the SC to issue a TRO that would prevent the government from implementing the warrant, is still pending with the Court.
Aside from this, the petition seeking to declare unconstitutional the P6.326 trillion national budget is still pending before the court.
Petitioners Vic Rodriguez and others argued that the GAA failed to provide mandatory funding for PhilHealth, unlawfully hiked appropriations beyond the President’s proposed budget, and prioritized infrastructure spending over education.
They also questioned the blank items in the bicameral conference committee report.
Another petition that is still pending before the court sought to declare the MIF as unconstitutional and void.
The petition was filed by Bayan Muna chairman Neri Colmenares, and former Bayan Muna Representatives Isagani Zarate and Ferdinand Gaite, and Senate Minority Leader Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III in September 2023.
The petitioners argued that MIF failed to satisfy the test of economic viability, violated the independence of the BSP, and that the presidential certification of the MIF bill in the House of Representatives and in the Senate did not comply with the requirements under the Philippine Constitution. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
