Another heated exchange unfolded in the Senate plenary between Senators Robinhood Padilla and Francis "Kiko" Pangilinan when the former raised concerns over alleged “unparliamentary” conduct during a previous session.

Padilla returned to the floor to formally address what he described as a breach of decorum during a prior session, invoking Section 93, Rule 34 of the Senate rules on unparliamentary acts and language.

A day before, Padilla accused Pangilinan of shouting at him when the latter raised a point of order against Padilla’s manifestation regarding the arrest warrant issued against Dela Rosa, arguing that the issue should be tackled at the committee level rather than on the floor to save time for other concerns.

As Padilla attempted to interject, Pangilinan raised his voice to assert his right to speak.

"I still have the floor!" Pangilinan emphasized.

Padilla argued that this violated standards of respect in plenary debates. While acknowledging that senators may speak passionately, he maintained that shouting at a colleague crossed the line of acceptable conduct.

He also stressed that, as a neophyte senator, he expected guidance and example-setting from more senior colleagues. Padilla added that he found the incident personally offensive and called for an acknowledgment of wrongdoing in the record, citing the importance of accountability under Senate rules.

He further said he did not want his family to read accounts of him being “shouted at” in the plenary, and urged that the matter be formally removed from the record.

In an earlier statement, Pangilinan said this is the first time that he will encounter an ethics complaint in the Senate because a senator shouted or raised his voice at a colleague, something that usually happens during plenary debates in the Upper Chamber.

“Huwag maging balat sibuyas. Walang legal na basehan at walang kwenta ang ethics case complaint na yan. Hintayin na lang natin yung reklamo niya (Don't be an onion-skinned. That ethics case complaint has no legal basis and is worthless. Let's just wait for his complaint),” he stressed.

He responded by proposing that the matter be elevated to the Senate ethics committee, saying the chamber should focus on more pressing legislative concerns.

He noted that an ethics complaint was reportedly being considered, and suggested that the appropriate venue for discussion of the issue would be the committee level rather than extended plenary debate.

In a subsequent intervention, Padilla questioned whether a public apology from a veteran senator would be too much to ask, reiterating his position that the matter should not be treated lightly if Senate rules were to be strictly enforced.

He also asked whether addressing the concern should necessarily escalate to an ethics case, emphasizing that the issue, for him, remained rooted in Senate rules on decorum.

Senate Pro Tempore Loren Legarda eventually moved to suspend the session amid the exchange.

It's unclear how the situation was resolved.

After the session was suspended, Sergeant-at-Arms Mao Aplasca stated that the two almost came to blows but there was no physical altercation that occurred. 

"Nung papunta na sila sa lounge, alam niyo naman maliit kasi ang daanan sa likod. Siguro nagkatabi, siguro nagkasagutan...Nagkasagutan lang nang konti (When they were on their way to the lounge, you know the passage at the back is quite narrow. They probably ended up side by side, and maybe had a brief exchange… just a short argument)," he added.