Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano has come to the defense of Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, asserting that the latter’s continued absence from physical Senate sessions is driven by legitimate security concerns rather than a lack of professional commitment.
Cayetano revealed that despite a personal desire to attend, Dela Rosa remains wary of a potential arrest and extradition to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Netherlands.
According to Cayetano, the sentiment within the chamber is one of support, with members from both the majority and minority blocs encouraging Dela Rosa to return.
However, the lack of a firm government guarantee regarding his legal protections has created a stalemate.
“Everyone wanted him to enter. Senator Bato himself wanted to enter. He did not want to be absent,” Cayetano stated during an ambush interview.
Cayetano emphasized that the situation is far from a voluntary withdrawal from duty. He argued that the former police chief is essentially facing a threat to his personal liberty without sufficient state assurance that his rights would be upheld.
“There is a threat against him, with no guarantee the government can safeguard his rights,” he explained.
While Dela Rosa has not been seen in the Senate halls since November—following claims by Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla regarding an ICC warrant—Cayetano maintained that the senator’s legislative responsibilities are still being met through his staff.
“His staff is fully functional—sending memos, filing documents, monitoring proceedings,” Cayetano noted.
The Minority Leader further clarified that while Dela Rosa is prepared to face legal challenges, he is unwilling to be blindsided by a sudden deportation.
“But if the price of entering the Senate is suddenly being arrested, put on a plane, and flown to The Hague, he will fight for his rights,” Cayetano remarked.
Dela Rosa, a primary figure in the Duterte administration’s anti-drug campaign, is currently facing an ethics complaint due to his prolonged absence.
While the Senate rules do not explicitly define absenteeism as a violation, the ethics committee continues to deliberate on the matter.