Senator Ronald "Bato" Dela Rosa, a prominent figure in the Philippines' controversial war on drugs, has recently retreated from public view, raising questions and concerns across the nation. The catalyst? A reported arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC) in connection with alleged crimes against humanity committed during former President Rodrigo Duterte's administration. The situation has sparked a flurry of legal debates, political maneuvering, and public speculation about the fate of one of the country's most recognizable law enforcement officials.
According to Manila Standard, the arrest warrant issued by the ICC is, in fact, enforceable in the Philippines. This assertion comes from Gilbert Andres, an ICC-accredited lawyer and Executive Director of the Center for International Law (CenterLaw). In an exclusive interview published on December 11, 2025, Andres explained that Republic Act No. 9851, also known as the International Humanitarian Law Act, provides the legal foundation for surrendering suspected or accused individuals to international courts. Specifically, Section 17 of the act states, "the authorities may surrender … suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the appropriate international court, if any."
Andres emphasized that the law is clear and does not require additional implementing rules or regulations for it to be enforced. "An ICC arrest warrant is enforceable in the Philippines in accordance with Republic Act No. 9851 or the International Humanitarian Law Act," he told Manila Standard. This position counters arguments from some quarters that the absence of detailed procedures hinders the warrant's execution.
Meanwhile, Dela Rosa's legal counsel, Atty. Israelito Torreon, painted a different picture in an interview with GMA Integrated News. Torreon revealed that the senator is deliberately avoiding public appearances due to concerns for his personal safety. "His personal safety is at stake. I can only speculate because I cannot speak for him even though I am his lawyer. He is just making himself unavailable," Torreon said, as quoted by GMA News on December 11, 2025.
Torreon also highlighted the lack of a clear, established policy in the Philippines for surrendering nationals to the ICC. Unlike other ICC member states such as Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Poland, and Australia—each of which has national laws outlining the process—the Philippines has no such framework, even when it was still a member of the ICC before its withdrawal in 2019. "We are the only ones who are so desperate to surrender our national, our citizen there in The Hague, Netherlands without a clear basis and without a clear procedure," Torreon remarked. He went on to express concern over the possibility of Filipino citizens being "kidnapped," as he put it, and sent abroad without due process in domestic courts, despite the country having a "healthy prosecution service."
The legal tug-of-war is further complicated by the Philippines' withdrawal from the ICC. Former President Duterte unilaterally withdrew the country from the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC, a move that has been the subject of legal challenges. Andres pointed out that this withdrawal, despite lacking Senate concurrence, means that certain provisions of the Rome Statute—specifically Articles 88, 89, and 59—no longer have legal effect in the Philippine domestic context. "Since Mr. Rodrigo Duterte withdrew from the ICC Rome Statute, despite the absence of Senate concurrence, then Articles 88, 89, and 59 of the Rome Statute have no legal effect as Philippine domestic law, and cannot be invoked by Sen. Bato Dela Rosa in the Philippine domestic context," Andres explained to Manila Standard.
Legal precedents have also emerged. The Supreme Court previously dismissed several petitions challenging the ICC withdrawal, including those filed by the Philippine Coalition for the ICC and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, as moot and academic. The rationale was that the ICC had already acknowledged the Philippines' withdrawal. Andres suggested that, if the Supreme Court remains consistent with its jurisprudence, any new petitions—such as those potentially filed by Duterte or Dela Rosa—should also be dismissed for being moot and academic, especially if the ICC has already taken custody of the individual in question.
Despite these legal opinions, Dela Rosa's camp is not backing down. Torreon indicated that they would seek a temporary restraining order (TRO) from the Supreme Court to block the execution of the ICC arrest warrant if it is officially issued. "If the arrest warrant is actually issued, there is compelling necessity now. We will present that to the Supreme Court. There is a clear and urgent necessity on the Supreme Court to probably act on our TRO," Torreon stated, expressing optimism about their chances. He added, "But we will not preempt. We respect the Supreme Court. If that happens, the possibility that the Supreme Court will grant us a TRO is very high."
The backdrop to this legal drama is the ICC's ongoing investigation into alleged crimes against humanity committed during Duterte's war on drugs. Former Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, who filed one of the original cases against Duterte at the ICC, noted that Dela Rosa and four other high-ranking former police officials have been tagged as suspects in the probe. Dela Rosa, for his part, was the chief of the Philippine National Police during the height of the drug war, a campaign that has drawn international condemnation for its reported human rights abuses and thousands of deaths.
Interestingly, Andres urged Dela Rosa to voluntarily surrender to the ICC if an arrest warrant has indeed been issued, recalling that the senator previously stated he was ready to face the court. This call for voluntary surrender, however, stands in stark contrast to Dela Rosa's current strategy of making himself unavailable and his legal team's efforts to secure court intervention.
Adding to the uncertainty is the question of Dela Rosa's current whereabouts. Torreon last spoke with the senator before November 8, 2025, and their discussion reportedly centered on protests, not the ICC matter. Nonetheless, Torreon believes that Dela Rosa remains in the Philippines.
The entire episode has left the public, legal experts, and political observers watching closely. On one side, there is a clear legal basis, as articulated by Andres, for enforcing the ICC arrest warrant under existing Philippine law. On the other, Dela Rosa's camp insists that the lack of procedural clarity and the unprecedented nature of surrendering a Filipino national to an international court without local adjudication are serious concerns that must be addressed.
As the legal and political maneuvering continues, the case of Senator Ronald Dela Rosa serves as a stark reminder of the complex interplay between international justice and domestic law. While both sides await the next move—whether it be a Supreme Court ruling, an official warrant, or a voluntary surrender—the nation holds its breath, acutely aware that the outcome will set a significant precedent for how the Philippines navigates its obligations to international justice in the years to come.
