MANILA, Philippines — The Department of Justice (DOJ) has yet to issue a resolution on the obstruction-of-justice complaint against Sen. Robin Padilla over his alleged role in helping fellow senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa leave the Senate amid an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant.
DOJ spokesperson Prosecutor Atty. Raphael Niccolo “Polo” Martinez confirmed that the complaint remains under preliminary investigation, contradicting an earlier indication from National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Director Melvin Matibag that the investigation may already have been completed and a resolution could be forthcoming.
The latest development means the case against Padilla has not yet reached a final determination of probable cause, and no criminal charge has been formally filed in court based on the DOJ complaint.
How the controversy began
The case stems from the dramatic events at the Senate in May, when authorities attempted to serve Dela Rosa an ICC arrest warrant.
Dela Rosa, who was under Senate protective custody, later left the Senate premises aboard a vehicle driven by Padilla on May 14.
Padilla has maintained that Dela Rosa merely asked to hitch a ride and that he subsequently dropped him off in Makati. He has denied helping Dela Rosa evade arrest.
The PNP-Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG), however, reached a different conclusion.
In May, the CIDG alleged that Dela Rosa’s departure was not simply a spontaneous ride but a “highly coordinated, pre-planned logistical maneuver” intended to avoid detection. The police subsequently filed an obstruction-of-justice complaint against Padilla and other individuals with the DOJ.
DOJ sent the complaint back for additional evidence
The case did not immediately proceed to a resolution.
In June, Justice Secretary Fredderick Vida said the DOJ had returned the complaint to the CIDG for further investigation and requested additional documents and statements from concerned individuals.
By July, the DOJ said its case buildup was continuing. Prosecutors had conducted an ocular inspection of the Senate premises and requested relevant evidence, including CCTV footage and other materials that could help establish what happened during Dela Rosa’s departure.
Then, in August, the DOJ confirmed that a new PNP complaint had been filed on August 11 and was undergoing evaluation to determine whether it should proceed to a preliminary investigation.
Justice Undersecretary Ian Norman Evaristo Dato said the department and law enforcement agencies had exchanged information under Department Circular No. 20 and had reached the view that there could be sufficient basis to move toward a preliminary investigation. However, the DOJ initially declined to identify the respondents because subpoenas had not yet been issued.
Padilla also faced a separate Ombudsman complaint
Adding another layer to the controversy, Padilla was separately named in an Ombudsman complaint filed by civil society groups over the same Dela Rosa episode.
The Ombudsman ordered Padilla, Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano and former Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Mao Aplasca to submit counter-affidavits.
Cayetano eventually submitted his response, while Aplasca was granted an extension. Padilla, however, did not submit a counter-affidavit within the period set by the Ombudsman, according to Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla.
That proceeding is separate from the DOJ’s criminal investigation, meaning developments in one case should not automatically be interpreted as a finding of guilt in the other.
What happens next?
For now, the DOJ’s latest position is straightforward: the investigation is still ongoing.
That means there has been no final DOJ finding that Padilla committed obstruction of justice, nor has the department announced that he will be charged in court.
The preliminary investigation is intended to determine whether the evidence provides sufficient basis to proceed against the respondents.
The central question remains whether Padilla’s role in transporting Dela Rosa amounted to an unlawful act intended to obstruct the enforcement of the ICC arrest warrant—or whether, as Padilla has maintained, he simply gave a fellow senator a ride without violating Philippine law.
And with the DOJ still reviewing the evidence, the next resolution could determine whether the controversial Senate escape moves from a high-profile investigation into a formal criminal case.
Why this matters
The case has attracted intense public attention because it involves an incumbent senator, an ICC arrest warrant and one of the most politically charged incidents to take place inside the Senate this year.
Dela Rosa is wanted by the ICC in connection with allegations of crimes against humanity linked to the Duterte administration’s anti-drug campaign. Authorities have continued efforts to locate him.
For Padilla, meanwhile, the immediate legal question remains unanswered: Will the DOJ eventually find sufficient evidence to pursue an obstruction-of-justice case, or will the complaint ultimately fail to establish probable cause?
For now, the DOJ is not ready to make that call.
Leave a Reply