Delays in dela Rosa’s ethics case threaten Senate accountability

By Adrian H. Halili, Reporter

DELAYS in the Senate Ethics Committee’s handling of the complaint against Senator Ronald M. dela Rosa risk setting a damaging precedent, which could undermine accountability and signals tolerance for erring lawmakers, analysts said.

Dennis C. Coronacion, chairman of the University of Santo Tomas Political Science Department, said that the panel’s failure to act may set a poor precedent and encourage further inaction against erring senators.

“It’s not going to set a good precedent,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat. “Future members of the Senate will be using the ethics complaint against Senator dela Rosa as an example should they choose not to take any action against an erring [member].”

The Ethics committee, which has stalled hearings for several months due to a lack of members and approval of its updated rules, is expected to deliberate on six ethics complaints against incumbent senators, which includes Mr. dela Rosa’s case.

It was only last week that the panel approved its updated rules and provided its members time to determine whether complaints are sufficient in form and substance.

Mr. Coronacion added that senators should not sacrifice accountability to protect an erring colleague.

“The bad thing about it is that they are public officials. As such, they should be setting a good example for the public and avoid engaging in self-serving politics,” he said.

Anthony Lawrence A. Borja, an associate political science professor at De La Salle University, added that the committee’s inaction could be perceived as condoning neglect and undermining the Senate’s duty.

“If it ends up being dismissed or dead on the water, then the Senate will appear to the public as either protecting its own ranks or thoroughly ineffective,” he said via Facebook chat.

Mr. Borja added that if the complaint reaches an appropriate punishment, then it would signal that occupying high public office must be tied to equally high professional standards.

“If not, then it condones unprofessional neglect,” he said.

A civil society group filed an ethics complaint against the senator, last month over his continued failure to return to his duties in the Senate, constituting a clear dereliction of duty and a “grave abuse of the privilege entrusted to him by the Filipino people.”

The group also noted that the senator’s absence from committee hearings risks disrupting proceedings and pending legislative measures.

Hansley A. Juliano, a political science lecturer at Ateneo de Manila University, said that the case may set a precedent over the handling of senators who disappear due to domestic or international legal issues.

“The Senate would be keen on ensuring that their precedents set here do not only blow back on them in the future, but it also projects that the Philippines respects international law,” he said in a Messenger chat.

Mr. Juliano said that the senator’s absence showed a clear abandonment of responsibility to the Senate and the people who voted for him.

“Losing all his remaining committee posts is just a matter of time unless he resurfaces, which will give further ground for the ethics complaint,” he added.

The senator has not attended a single Senate session since Nov. 11, 2025, when reports first surfaced about a possible warrant against him by the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The tribunal had named him along with Senator Christopher Lawrence “Bong” T. Go as co-perpetrators in former President Rodrigo R. Duterte’s bloody anti-illegal drugs campaign. The ICC had not yet issued arrest warrants against them.