HOWIE SEE IT: Chaos, Propaganda and Law

By Atty. Howard M. Calleja

June 3 and 4, 2026, will be remembered as a defining moment in Philippine parliamentary history. A political theater dubbed as “Senateflix,” this spectacle was not a sudden breakdown of order, but the logical culmination of a strategy designed to hold power through confusion, absence, and the deliberate distortion of truth.

On June 4, the gathering convened by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano and his allies amounted to nothing more than a performance devoid of legal consequence. It was a desperate attempt to project strength where none remained, utilizing dramatic entrances, armed escorts, and a hastily organised blue ribbon hearing. Yet in law, legitimacy follows compliance, and this rump session lacked the authority to bind the institution or alter its leadership. It was propaganda gone wrong — a show staged for optics and public consumption. In stark contrast, the session held on June 3 stands on solid legal ground. Properly convened with a lawful quorum present, it transacted business and adjusted leadership in accordance with law, enjoying the fundamental presumption of regularity that attaches to all official acts of a competent body until proven otherwise by a court.

This crisis was manufactured by Cayetano, a master of gaslighting and narrative manipulation, whose tactics have consistently prioritized control over function. It began when he maneuvered Senator Bato dela Rosa into the fold to snatch the majority from Senator Sotto. He later weaponized the dramatic shout of “Attack!” to frame opposition as aggression, and when fortunes shifted, oversaw Bato’s curious disappearance from the Senate — removed under the care of security and allies to break quorum and paralyze proceedings. When absence became his primary tactic, Cayetano tried but failed to allow virtual attendance for those physically hiding, while attempting to derail the lawful arrest of Senator Jinggoy Estrada in a bid to place the Senate above the law. Most remarkably, he abandoned the presiding chair for two straight days yet remained active on social media, effectively trying to govern through Facebook Live while the institution stood still.

Such deadlock broke only when principle finally prevailed over obstruction. When Senator Chiz Escudero joined the remaining members, completing the quorum necessary for action. With the body legally constituted, Senator Sherwin Gatchalian was elevated to Senate President Pro‑Tempore and designated Acting Senate President . Committees were reorganized to restore function, with Senator Erwin Tulfo assuming the Blue Ribbon chairmanship and scheduling hearings, signaling a return to oversight and accountability. In a last‑ditch effort to reclaim the narrative, Senator Pia Cayetano and allies — who had deliberately stayed away on June 3 — stormed the premises the next day with escorts and legal counsel, staging a chaotic hearing in the hallways and re‑enacting dramatic “staircase rushes” in the style of earlier spectacles. But for all the noise, their actions remained nothing more than a repeat performance of the same empty theater.

The legal foundation for the June 3 acts is unassailable, anchored in the landmark case Avelino v. Cuenco (1949), which clarified the critical distinction at the heart of this crisis. The Supreme Court ruled that while electing or removing a permanent Senate President requires an absolute majority of all twenty‑four members, conducting ordinary business, reorganizing, or filling temporary vacancies only needs a quorum — defined as more than half of those present. Crucially, the Court explicitly recognized that twelve Senators constitute a valid quorum to transact the regular affairs of the Senate. On June 3, twelve Senators were present and acted in accordance with the rules, quorum validly established and the Senate is now back in business.

Ultimately, this episode proved that while politics is often a battle of narratives, governance remains a matter of law. Cayetano’s playbook — disappear, obstruct, rewrite rules, and govern from afar — was a bold attempt to redefine how the Senate operates, but it collapsed under the weight of established jurisprudence. June 4 was theater; June 3 was law. The elevation of Gatchalian and the reorganization of the Senate were not acts of usurpation, but necessary measures to preserve the institution when its leader chose to abandon his post. As the Court has long held, the Senate is a continuing body; it does not cease to exist simply because some members choose to step away. On June 3, 2026, the institution did not just survive — it reaffirmed that in our democracy, procedure, principle, and the Constitution will always prevail over noise.