The Senate minority bloc staged a walkout during Tuesday’s plenary session, accusing the majority of forcing through an amendment to chamber rules without proper deliberation and while minority members still sought the floor to speak.
The walkout followed a heated debate on a motion that would allow senators to participate in plenary sessions online. In a joint statement, minority senators said the move appeared designed to benefit Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, who has been a fugitive from an International Criminal Court arrest warrant and is currently unable to attend sessions in person.
“Minamadali ba ang rule change na ito dahil gusto nilang maka boto si Senator Bato? At ngayong may mga ulat na may mga majority senators na maaaring arestuhin?” the minority said in their statement, raising the question openly and calling for a public airing of the debate.
Senator Panfilo Lacson has said the proposal is unlikely to prosper under existing Senate rules, which only permit virtual attendance during force majeure or national emergencies. He noted that the chamber allowed remote participation during the COVID-19 pandemic precisely because lockdowns physically prevented senators from attending — a condition that no longer applies today.
Senator Kiko Pangilinan, who signed the joint statement, was among those who accused the majority of railroading the rule amendments. The minority’s objection went beyond the substance of the proposal. They argued that at the time the motion was taken up, no Committee on Rules had been formally organized under the new Senate leadership, and no Majority Leader had yet been elected — meaning the standard process for amending Senate rules lacked its required institutional foundation.
“How could there have been any action or discussion before the Committee on Rules when no Committee on Rules has been organized to date?” the minority said, adding that the majority’s assurance that no rule had been violated did not settle the deeper procedural question.
After the majority pressed forward over minority objections, the opposition senators walked off the floor, questioned the quorum, and moved for adjournment. The statement defended that action as a constitutional duty: “We walked out because what happened on the floor looked less like orderly deliberation.”
Dela Rosa had been under Senate protective custody following a confrontation between NBI agents and Senate security personnel who tried to serve him with an ICC arrest warrant, before he slipped out of the Senate premises in the early hours of May 14. The Supreme Court, voting 9-5-1, later denied his request for a temporary restraining order that would have blocked local authorities from acting on the ICC warrant, ruling that Dela Rosa “has no clear and unmistakable right to be protected.”
The minority closed their statement by insisting the proposed rule change — if it has merit — must follow the proper legislative route. “If the proposal is truly defensible, then let it pass through the proper route,” they said.
