Bato dela Rosa’s vanishing act
Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa’s surprise return to the Senate floor on Monday, May 11 was not without incident. Within just three days of his resurfacing, the following took place: a game of tag between Dela Rosa and a few National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) agents; a Senate coup that led to the ousting of Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III; a shooting incident inside the Senate building; and dela Rosa’s sudden escape just hours following said shooting.
Simply put, incidents unheard of in our recent history that threaten both the sanctity and stability of our political systems all happened without warning. But as infuriating as these are—as with all tricks—don’t let these distract from what truly matters. It’s all smoke and mirrors.
Just in time
On the same day that the House of Representatives voted 257 to 25 to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte, thus transmitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate for trial, then-Senate President Tito Sotto was unceremoniously impeached by 13 out of 24 senators.
According to an Impeachment Primer prepared by the UP College of Law, the Senate must convene as an impeachment court once the House succeeds in impeaching an official. “To result in conviction, it is enough that at least two-thirds (2/3) of all the members of the Senate vote guilty on one article. However, if not a single Article received the required number of votes, the impeached official is acquitted.”
Impeachment then results in both removal from and the disqualification to hold office. Not to mention, an impeached official can also be tried criminally after removal without the protection of double jeopardy (this implies that an individual cannot be prosecuted twice for the same offense).
Meanwhile, the Impeachment Primer, citing the Senate Rules of Procedure on Impeachment Trials, also indicates that senators are sworn to political neutrality regardless of party affiliation or preference in the event of an impeachment court. However, with both the majority and newly-elected Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano—allies of the Dutertes—neutrality seems highly unlikely.
A two‑thirds majority vote, or 16 out of 24 senators, is required for a conviction. With 13 already likely to vote in favor of the vice president, this puts them at an early advantage.
Birds of a feather
While the sudden Senate coup put into question the stability of the legislative branch, Sen. Ping Lacson was quick to assure the public that ongoing investigations, most notably the flood control probe, would not go to waste.
“Our findings would not go to waste. First of all, we already contributed to the preliminary investigation of the Department of Justice and Office of the Ombudsman, through testimonial and documentary evidence,” shared Lacson in an interview with DZMM radio. Lacson, who heads the Blue Ribbon Committee, did not vote in favor of ousting former Senate President Tito Sotto.
However, according to the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ), “eleven of the 13 senators behind the Senate coup are facing active or unresolved investigations.”
“Six of them—Jinggoy Estrada, Chiz Escudero, Joel Villanueva, Mark Villar, Camille Villar, and Bong Go—are tied to ongoing flood-control corruption probes,” it notes.
That said, the Senate majority has already proven the lengths it will go to protect its own, like in the case of dela Rosa. What more for the rest?
What truly matters for our political elite
Despite his six-month absence, an animated dela Rosa said on Monday that he returned to the Senate floor out of shame and duty. When asked if he merely showed up to bolster numbers for the ouster, he explained: “Lahat ‘yan trabaho ng senador.”
And what work did he exactly do? Sing in front of the cameras, cry victim, beg for due process, only to escape from prosecution. It’s clear that at least for dela Rosa, the roles and responsibilities of a senator only matter when it’s invoked for personal gain. But what about those who rely on the Senate for their advocacies and livelihoods?
Case in point: the farmers. According to farmer advocate chef Waya Araos-Wijangco, on May 11, farmers gathered to appear before the Senate Committee on Agriculture to talk about the various challenges they’re currently facing—including rising fertilizer costs, imported vegetables undercutting local produce, and transport costs due to the oil crisis. However, despite making the journey to Manila from their provinces, their supposed dialogue was unceremoniously canceled in place of senseless politicking.
Araos-Wijangco says, “Our farmers came prepared with lived experience, practical solutions, and dignity. The Senate responded with cancellation notices and political theater. The senators have shown us clearly who they represent: themselves, their dynasties, their ambitions, their interests.”
Forget dela Rosa for a second; Sen. Robin Padilla also exemplifies this selfishness. In a separate discussion in the Senate, both Padilla and Sen. Kiko Pangilinan got into a heated exchange when the former kept intruding on Pangilinan’s turn to talk. The veteran senator then raised his voice, to which the actor-turned-politician cried foul and later claimed he would file an ethics complaint against him.
During the next day’s session, Pangilinan said there are more pressing matters than Padilla’s petty ethics complaint—to which the latter claimed there is nothing more important than discussing it. It seems that hurt feelings matter more than hearing out the plight of the Filipino people.
As it is, dela Rosa remains an “indirect co-perpetrator” in the nationwide drug war during his stint as Philippine National Police chief that led to the deaths of many Filipinos. This week’s fiasco only proves what the prosecution has been saying at The Hague—that the Philippine justice system, when left to its own devices, will not hold wrongdoers accountable for their crimes.
We simply saw the brazenness, the shamelessness—to what end they will go to avoid prosecution. The Senate just showed who they’re truly for. And it’s not us Filipinos.
