Two recent Supreme Court rulings have put the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) at the center of high-profile legal battles in the Philippines, highlighting the complexities of justice and accountability for both public officials and educational institutions. From the halls of the Senate to the corridors of academia, the OSG finds itself representing the interests of the state, defending legal processes, and, in some cases, reckoning with the tragic consequences of institutional failures.
On May 16, 2026, the OSG submitted a 74-page comment to the Supreme Court, urging it to reject the legal maneuvers of Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa and to allow the government to arrest the former Philippine National Police chief so he could stand trial before the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC arrest warrant, originally issued on November 5, 2025, and unsealed on May 11, 2026, named Dela Rosa as a "co-perpetrator" in the controversial drug war of former President Rodrigo Duterte. The OSG, led by Solicitor General Darlene Berberabe, did not mince words, branding Dela Rosa a "fugitive from justice" who is "manipulating the legal system to evade the ICC arrest warrant," according to the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
In its comment, the OSG opened with a chilling quote attributed to Dela Rosa: "If someone fights back, they’ll die. If nobody fights back, we’ll make them fight back. Produce blood. Instill fear." The OSG argued that this case was a masterclass in "how the powerful corrodes the rule of law," contrasting Dela Rosa’s ability to avail himself of judicial remedies with the fate of drug war victims who, as the OSG noted, "were never given a trial or choice before being permanently silenced with a singular claim, ‘nanlaban’ (fought back)."
Dela Rosa, through his counsel, had filed urgent motions before the Supreme Court, including a plea for a restraining order on the ICC warrant and requests for sensitive documents and a writ of habeas corpus should he be arrested. But the OSG dismissed these as "catch-all proceedings" that violated basic court procedures. "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," the OSG said in its filing.
The drama reached a fever pitch when Dela Rosa, under Senate protective custody for three days, reportedly slipped out of the Senate compound after a shooting incident involving the Senate’s Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms and National Bureau of Investigation agents on May 13, 2026. Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano confirmed Dela Rosa’s disappearance, and the OSG asserted, "His departure in the early hours of the morning was not incidental but a deliberate act to evade his arrest by law enforcement authorities. Flight under these circumstances demonstrates a clear intent to evade arrest and prosecution."
The OSG also took aim at arguments from Dela Rosa’s allies that only a local court’s warrant could facilitate his arrest, citing Republic Act No. 9851, the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity. Signed into law in 2009, RA 9851 gives the State discretion to surrender individuals accused of international crimes to tribunals like the ICC. The OSG pointedly noted that some of the loudest voices now protesting the ICC’s involvement were among the law’s original authors, including Senators Jinggoy Estrada, Loren Legarda, and Francis "Chiz" Escudero.
Despite the Philippines’ withdrawal from the ICC in 2019, the OSG emphasized that the country remains "legally bound to cooperate with the ICC under Domestic Law, Customary International Law, and Constitutional Principles." As the OSG explained, "While the Philippines is no longer obligated under the Rome Statute, it acts within its legal rights when it cooperates with the ICC because it is authorized by domestic law."
Legal experts echoed this stance. Lawyer Antonio Bucoy of the Free Legal Assistance Group told dzBB radio, "We must remember that we have treaty obligations which, if we fail to fulfill them, would make our country an unreliable member or an unreliable party to any treaty." Bucoy cited a 2021 Supreme Court decision affirming that withdrawal from the Rome Statute does not discharge a state party from obligations incurred as a member. The Department of Justice, meanwhile, stated that the ICC warrant would be served once the Supreme Court resolves Dela Rosa’s petitions—unless he attempts to flee abroad, in which case he would be detained.
While the OSG fiercely defends the state’s prerogatives in the Dela Rosa case, it finds itself on the opposite side of a landmark Supreme Court ruling involving the University of Southeastern Philippines (USeP). On May 18, 2026, the Supreme Court En Banc issued a decision holding USeP and several university officials liable for the tragic death of student Cheryl Sarate, who died in a fire during a university-organized beauty pageant in 2006. The court ordered the university and its co-respondents to pay Sarate’s family more than PHP 6.45 million in damages, including PHP 5 million in moral damages and PHP 1 million in exemplary damages.
According to court records, the incident occurred during a pageant organized by the Guild of English Students inside the university social hall. To create a candlelit atmosphere, candles inside paper bags were placed along a T-shaped runway. Sarate, dressed as a "snow fairy" in a costume made of cotton, feathers, and plastic cellophane, brushed against a candle, igniting her outfit. The flames spread rapidly, and Sarate suffered burns over 80 percent of her body. Witnesses testified that no faculty members actively supervised the event, and emergency response was woefully inadequate—the ambulance reportedly arrived about 30 minutes after the fire broke out. Sarate later died from cardiac arrest due to septic shock caused by her injuries.
The Sarate family’s quest for justice took years, winding through the Regional Trial Court, which initially cleared the university, to the Court of Appeals, which reinstated its liability, and finally to the Supreme Court. The high court, in a decision penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, stressed that educational institutions have a "heightened duty of care" over students in school-sanctioned activities. The ruling noted, "During the incident, it was only the students who put out the fire," highlighting the lack of trained personnel and failure to activate emergency protocols. The university’s argument that the pageant was unauthorized did not sway the justices, who held that the event remained connected to USeP because it was organized by a recognized student group and supervised by a faculty adviser.
The Supreme Court found USeP collectively negligent under Articles 2176 and 2180 of the Civil Code, holding it liable as an employer for the negligent acts of its employees. The decision stated, "There is also collective negligence on the part of the petitioner university, through its administrators and officers-in-charge, when it failed to exercise due diligence in taking safety measures."
In response, USeP issued a statement respecting the ruling and affirming that the OSG, as its legal representative, was reviewing the decision. The university called for public patience as it undergoes internal and legal discussions, emphasizing its commitment to "upholding accountability, institutional responsibility, and the welfare of the academic community."
These two cases, though worlds apart in their specifics, underscore the enduring tension between power, accountability, and the rule of law in the Philippines. Whether confronting the legacy of the drug war or grappling with the tragic consequences of institutional negligence, the courts and the OSG remain at the heart of the nation’s ongoing struggle for justice.