THE Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) has asked the Supreme Court to allow government agents to arrest Sen. Ronald dela Rosa, labeling him a “fugitive from justice” who deliberately placed himself beyond the reach of lawful process.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) last week unsealed an arrest warrant against dela Rosa, accusing him along with former president Rodrigo Duterte and other “co-perpetrators” of the “crime against humanity of murder” for extrajudicial killings during their bloody war on drugs.
Dela Rosa was Duterte’s chief drug war enforcer when he served as the chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP).
He briefly sought refuge in the Senate last week while asking the Supreme Court to stop an ongoing attempt by government agents to arrest him.
Responding to that petition, Solicitor-General Darlene Berberabe invoked a previous Supreme Court ruling that held that a person who flees to avoid prosecution loses standing to seek relief from the courts.
“By his own conduct, he has placed himself outside the protection of the law,” the government’s chief lawyer, Berberabe, said in a filing that asked the court to dismiss dela Rosa’s petition.
“Until he submits himself to lawful authorities, he must be deemed a fugitive from justice and should not be allowed to seek any relief from the courts,” said the document, dated May 16 but only made available to the media on Sunday.
The OSG argued that the ICC warrant of arrest against dela Rosa can be enforced without a separate domestic warrant under Republic Act 9851, and that the senator is not entitled to the injunctive relief he seeks.
The filing is the government’s consolidated response to dela Rosa’s petition, in which he sought to prevent the executive branch from acting on the ICC warrant.
Deliberate evasion
The OSG painted dela Rosa’s recent movements as a clear pattern of flight.
The OSG said dela Rosa had gone into hiding for six months following reports that an ICC warrant might be issued against him.
He resurfaced only on May 11, 2026 — the same day the House of Representatives impeached Vice President Sara Duterte — to cast the decisive 13th vote installing Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano as Senate president.
Shortly after the Senate placed him under “protective custody,” dela Rosa fled the Senate premises at around 2:30 a.m. on May 14, 2026, reportedly accompanied by Sen. Robinhood Padilla, the OSG said.
“The essence of being a fugitive from justice lies in the deliberate act of placing oneself beyond the reach of law enforcement,” the OSG said. “This essence is precisely reflected in Senator dela Rosa’s deliberate evasion of arrest.”
The OSG invoked the “fugitive disentitlement doctrine,” citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Vallacar Transit Inc. v. Yanson, which held that a person who flees to avoid prosecution loses standing to seek relief from the courts.
“Since a fugitive from justice has demonstrated disrespect for legal processes, he or she has no right to call upon the courts and the judicial system to adjudicate any of his or her claims,” the OSG said.
The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber unsealed the arrest warrant against dela Rosa on May 11, 2026, charging him as an “indirect co-perpetrator” of crimes against humanity — specifically murder and attempted murder — committed in the context of the country’s anti-drug campaign between Nov. 1, 2011, and March 16, 2019.
Dela Rosa had argued that any arrest based solely on an ICC warrant would violate Section 2, Article III of the Constitution, which requires a judicial determination of probable cause by a Philippine court.
The OSG rejected this outright.
“The enforcement of an ICC warrant of arrest does not require a corresponding warrant of arrest issued by a Philippine court to be enforceable within the Philippine jurisdiction,” the OSG said, pointing to Section 17 of Republic Act 9851, also known as the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity.
That provision allows Philippine authorities to “surrender or extradite suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the appropriate international court” when such court is already conducting investigation or prosecution of the crime.
The OSG also dismissed dela Rosa’s claim that he was denied due process, noting that the Rome Statute contains its own comprehensive judicial safeguards.
Under Article 58 of the Rome Statute, an ICC warrant may issue only upon a determination by the Pre-Trial Chamber that there are reasonable grounds to believe the person committed a crime within the court’s jurisdiction, and that arrest appears necessary.
“The issuance of the ICC warrant itself already presupposes judicial evaluation and independent determination by a competent tribunal, in compliance with the basic requirements of due process,” the OSG said.
The government pointed out that the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber relied on extensive documentary and testimonial evidence before finding probable cause against dela Rosa, and that the Rome Statute guarantees rights such as the right to counsel, to be informed of charges, and to challenge jurisdiction.
Extradition rules do not apply
Dela Rosa had asked the Court to apply the Rules on Extradition Proceedings by analogy, which would require an independent judicial determination of probable cause before any warrant could be issued.
The OSG rejected this as a “false equivalence,” emphasizing that ICC “surrender” is fundamentally different from state-to-state extradition.
“Extradition and ICC surrender are governed by different legal sources, animated by different institutional relationships, and implemented through different domestic mechanisms,” the OSG said.
Citing Article 102 of the Rome Statute, which explicitly defines “surrender” as delivering up a person to the court and “extradition” as delivering up a person to another state, the OSG argued that the ICC is not a foreign sovereign.
“To treat the ICC as a ‘requesting state’ would constitute a rewriting of the Extradition Rules,” the OSG said.
The rules were promulgated on April 8, 2025 — with ICC developments already in the foreground — yet remained confined to state-to-state extradition, “confirming that the rules were designed for state-to-state extradition, not ICC surrender.”
Dela Rosa had insisted that because the Philippines withdrew from the Rome Statute in March 2019, the government has no treaty obligation to enforce the ICC warrant.
The OSG countered on multiple grounds.
First, it cited the Supreme Court’s own ruling in Pangilinan v. Cayetano (2021), which held that “a state party withdrawing from the Rome Statute must still comply with this provision... whatever process was already initiated before the International Criminal Court obliges the state party to cooperate.”
Second, the OSG noted that under Article 127(2) of the Rome Statute, withdrawal does not extinguish obligations incurred while a state was a party, including the duty to cooperate in investigations and proceedings initiated before withdrawal took effect.
Third, the OSG argued that the prohibition on crimes against humanity has attained the status of jus cogens — a peremptory norm of customary international law from which no state may derogate.
The Constitution’s incorporation clause (Article II, Section 2) makes customary international law part of the law of the land.
“The Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute does not, therefore, extinguish its obligations under customary international law,” the OSG said.
The OSG urged the Court to deny dela Rosa’s prayer for a temporary restraining order, writ of preliminary injunction, or status quo ante order, arguing that the senator failed to meet all the required elements.
“There is no clear and unmistakable right that requires immediate protection,” the OSG said, noting that dela Rosa himself admitted he was able to enter the Senate, vote, invoke senatorial protection, and file multiple pleadings before the Court.
“These circumstances negate, rather than establish any actual or consummated deprivation of liberty,” the OSG added.
The government also pointed out that the CIDG subpoena, which dela Rosa had complained about — claiming it was a “surrogate arrest mechanism” — had already been recalled by the police.
“As such, there is no surrogate arrest mechanism to speak of at this point,” the OSG said.
Parliamentary immunity not a shield
Dela Rosa had invoked parliamentary immunity from arrest under Section 11, Article VI of the Constitution, which protects senators and representatives from arrest for offenses punishable by not more than six years’ imprisonment while Congress is in session.
The OSG noted that the ICC warrant charges dela Rosa with crimes against humanity, which under the Rome Statute carry imprisonment of up to 30 years or life, and under RA 9851 carry reclusion temporal (14 to 20 years) or reclusion perpetua.
“By any measure, whether under the Rome Statute or Republic Act No. 9851, the crime attributed to petitioner is punishable by imprisonment far exceeding six years,” the OSG said.
The OSG also cited Section 9 of RA 9851, which provides that official capacity as a member of parliament “shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility” for crimes against humanity.
Finally, the OSG invoked the equitable doctrine that “he who comes into equity must come with clean hands,” arguing that dela Rosa’s conduct disqualifies him from seeking injunctive relief.
“Senator dela Rosa evaded legal process for six months. Then, he returned to the Senate not to comply with the law, but to vote in a politically significant leadership election,” the OSG said.
“His flight, coupled with the fact that he had previously gone into hiding, is not merely incidental but is a deliberate act to avoid accountability. His conduct places him squarely within the definition of a fugitive from justice.”
The OSG said that granting dela Rosa’s plea would send a “chilling message” that the law’s protections are strongest for the powerful and weakest for the victims of the drug war.
“The rule of law is not a convenience to be embraced in moments of protection but discarded in moments of accountability,” the OSG said.
Dela Rosa’s current whereabouts were unknown after he discreetly left the Senate building on Thursday.
The Justice Department said Friday the ICC warrant would only be served once the Supreme Court resolves Dela Rosa’s petition — unless he tried to flee abroad, in which case he would be detained.
The court made no immediate comment.
The ICC prosecutor launched an examination of the Philippine drug crackdown in 2018.
The bloody campaign, launched by Duterte after being elected president in 2016, left thousands dead, many of them drug users and low-level narcotics peddlers, according to human rights monitors.
Duterte was arrested in March last year, flown to the Netherlands on the same day, and is detained in The Hague awaiting trial.
