Complaint filed vs Cayetano, Padilla, Aplasca over Dela Rosa ‘escape’

[Updated June 3, 2026, 7:17 p.m.]

MANILA, Philippines — A coalition of political parties and civil society organizations on Wednesday filed a complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman against Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano, Sen. Robin Padilla, and suspended Senate sergeant-at-arms (SAA) Ma O. Aplasca in connection with Sen. Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa’s departure from the Senate premises last month.

Tindig Pilipinas said Cayetano, Padilla, and Aplasca are liable to be charged of obstruction of justice under the Presidential Decree No. 1829.

“The complaint seeks to hold public officials accountable for actions that allegedly impeded the implementation of lawful processes and undermined the administration of justice,” Tindig Pilipinas said in a statement on Tuesday.

The complaint said the actions of Cayetano, Padilla, and Aplasca “appear to have obstructed, impeded, or frustrated the enforcement of legal process and the performance of legal functions.”

“We are constrained, as citizens and taxpayers, to file this complaint for Obstruction of Justice under P.D No. 1829,” the complaint said. 

Specifically, they said the respondents are liable under the for Section 1(c) of the P.D. No 1829, which prohibits ”harboring” or “concealing” accused persons.

The move of Cayetano to put Dela Rosa under Senate custody, Padilla’s act of transporting Dela Rosa away from the Senate premises, and Aplasca’s move to “obstruct” NBI access that “created an environment that enabled Senator Dela Rosa to leave the Senate premises and escape law” makes them liable under Section 1(c) of the P.D. No 1829, according to the complainants.

Meanwhile, the affiants said the antigraft body has a jurisdiction in the case despite Cayetano and Padilla being senators.

They noted that the parliamentary immunity is only limited to speech or debate in Congress or in any committee there, as provided by Section 11, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution. 

And the noted that Under Section 13, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, the Office of the Ombudsman has the power to investigate, on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public official, employee, office, or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient.

“Accordingly, Respondent Cayetano and Respondent Padilla cannot invoke parliamentary immunity to defeat this complaint at the outset. Their status as Senators does not shield them from investigation for acts that are not speech, debate, or legitimate legislative deliberation,” the complaint said. “Jurisdiction over this Complaint, therefore, properly pertains to the Office of the Ombudsman.”

Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla ordered Aplasca’s suspension on May 15 after he created a team to look into the shooting incident between SAA personnel and National Bureau of Investigation agents on May 13, two days after Dela Rosa showed up at the Senate after being in hiding for over six months.

On May 11, armed with the ICC warrant, NBI agents tried to arrest Dela Rosa when he surfaced in the Senate.

But the senator managed to elude them and get “protective custody” from the chamber, which was granted by the then-newly installed Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano.

Aplasca admittedly fired the warning shot, which prompted the NBI to also fire back.

After the tension, Dela Rosa went back into hiding after leaving the chamber’s premises with Padilla aboard the latter’s vehicle in the early hours of May 14.

Criminal Investigation and Detection Group Director Maj. Gen. Robert Alexander Morico II said Dela Rosa’s escape “would not happen without” Padilla. /gsg /atm /mr