No Dela Rosa manhunt
‘These were not acts of inaction, but adherence to the constitutional order, due process, and the rule of law.’

‘These were not acts of inaction, but adherence to the constitutional order, due process, and the rule of law.’

TAGAYTAY CITY — Host Philippines closed out its campaign with a silver in the team senior aero dance and a bronze in…
The Philippines will need a miracle against Malaysia as the two teams face off in the ASEAN Championship at Kuala…

70 years of friendship, somehow Totoro said it better than any diplomat ever could.

The next foreign investor may not be one Manila has been watching.

Google honored the country’s most effective and creative YouTube campaigns during the YouTube Works Awards Philippines…
The Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) on Monday clarified its actions after Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa resurfaced at the Senate last week, stressing that the law enforcement agencies were following legal and constitutional directives — not refusing to act.
In a statement, the DILG said its response was guided by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s directive to await the Supreme Court’s ruling on the enforceability of the International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant on Dela Rosa, in the absence of a corresponding order from a Philippine court.
“The department emphasizes that in Senator Dela Rosa’s case, while an ICC warrant had been issued, the President directed the agencies concerned, including the DILG and the Philippine National Police, to await the Supreme Court’s resolution,” it said.
The DILG also cited Section 17 of Republic Act 9851, noting that in cases involving alleged crimes against humanity, the government may either surrender the individual to the ICC or pursue prosecution in local courts.
It added that, as clarified by Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla, there was “no order for a manhunt,” and any enforcement action remained “conditional,” given the pending Supreme Court proceedings and the Senate’s decision to place Dela Rosa under its protective custody.
The DILG maintained that its actions were not a sign of inaction but a compliance with the law.
“These were not acts of inaction, but adherence to the constitutional order, due process, and the rule of law,” the agency said, adding that it remained committed to enforcing the law within the bounds of democratic institutions.