Political analyst Ronald Llamas said statements made by senators themselves have contradicted claims that a proposal allowing online voting in the Senate was not intended to benefit Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa.
In an interview, Llamas questioned arguments made by some lawmakers defending proposals to allow remote participation and voting by senators, particularly remarks suggesting that Dela Rosa should be allowed to vote online because of the mandate he received from voters.
Llamas said electoral support does not exempt elected officials from legal processes or Senate rules.
“Sen. Robinhood Padilla should study our laws and our Constitution,” Llamas said. “The issue here is not how many votes a person received, but the rule of law.”
The former political adviser also criticized efforts to justify online voting through force majeure provisions, arguing that such measures were adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic under extraordinary circumstances and applied to the entire Senate rather than a single lawmaker.
According to Llamas, Senate rules require proposals of this nature to undergo deliberation at the committee level before reaching the plenary for debate and voting. He said the move to immediately push discussions on online voting raised questions about the urgency behind the proposal.
“The rules are very clear. Online participation was allowed during the pandemic because that was a force majeure situation, an act of God or natural disaster,” he said. “The whole Senate went online, not just one senator.”
Llamas also disputed explanations that the proposal was merely intended to modernize Senate procedures. He pointed to public statements made by Padilla, which he said indicated that discussions about online voting were connected to Dela Rosa’s situation.
He further cited Dela Rosa’s interview with broadcast journalist Jessica Soho, saying the senator’s own remarks contradicted explanations previously given by Senate President Allan Peter Cayetano.
“Sen. Bato himself admitted that in his interview with Jessica Soho, contrary to Allan Peter’s explanation,” Llamas said. “They are contradicting one another through their own statements.”
Llamas also rejected claims that denying online voting would deprive Dela Rosa of his right to vote in Senate proceedings. He argued that if the senator wanted to cast his vote, he could physically attend Senate sessions.
“If he wants to vote, then he should go to the Senate,” Llamas said.
