The camp of Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa pushed back against the Philippine National Police–Firearms and Explosives Office (PNP‑FEO) after it revoked his license to own and possess firearms and ordered the surrender of 117 registered guns.
Lawyer Israelito Torreon, dela Rosa’s counsel, argued that the police agency misapplied the law when it cited Section 4(g) of Republic Act 10591 (Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act) as the basis for revocation.
“Section 4(g) is not a revocation ground,” Torreon said, stressing that the provision only outlines qualifications for obtaining a license, not conditions for losing one.
Torreon explained that the PNP confused two separate sections of the law:
Section 4 – “Standards and Requisites for Issuance and Obtaining a License,” which governs who can get a license.
Section 39 – “Grounds for Revocation,” which specifies when a license can be taken away.
He emphasized that dela Rosa has not been convicted by any Philippine court, nor has any judge issued an order to disarm him.
“Section 39 has ten grounds. Pending criminal case before any court? Not one of them. The only criminal-law grounds are conviction under Section 39 (b), and a court order under Section 39 (j). Senator Dela Rosa has been convicted of nothing. No Philippine court has issued any order against him,” Torreon pointed out.
The PNP‑FEO revoked dela Rosa’s firearms license on May 26, citing his status as an accused under the International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for crimes against humanity linked to the Duterte administration’s drug war.
The agency argued that pending criminal proceedings call into question a person’s fitness to safely possess firearms.
But Dela Rosa’s legal team insists that only a domestic conviction or court order can justify revocation under Philippine law, making the PNP’s action “statutorily flawed.” (Martin Sadongdong)
