It was Marcoleta who proposed the amendment of the rules on May 11, the same day Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa returned to the Upper Chamber, to elect Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano.

He proposed an addition in the Senate rules regarding plenary sessions as Section 41-C, which seeks to "allow a senator for justifiable reason to attend and participate in the session through teleconference, videoconference, or other reliable forms of remote or electronic means using appropriate information and communications technology."

Senator Joel Villanueva, who's the acting majority floor leader, returned Marcoleta's motion to the floor for plenary action.

Cayetano cited Sec. 136 of the rules, stating that the Rules may also be amended by means of a motion which should be presented at least one (1) day before its consideration, and the vote of the majority of the Senators present in the session shall be required for its approval.

But Senator Panfilo "Ping" Lacson argued that the Committee on Rules has not yet been constituted, saying "The committee on rules has no members because we vacated.

Yet, Cayetano stated that this is no longer relevant because the proposal was already given back to plenary, a matter Lacson shot down. 

"You cannot ram down our throat something number can dictate," Lacon said.

Senate Minority Leader Vicente "Tito" Sotto III supported Lacson's argument.

"Ano to? Binabraso? (What is this? Are they coercing us?)" he said.

Senator Risa Hontiveros also supported Lacson's view, expounding on Sec. 24 of the Senate rules, which states that committees shall hold meetings to discuss, decide, and submit a report on all matters transmitted to them.

Senator Francis "Kiko" Pangilinan also pointed out that they have to take into consideration of the one-day rule before this new motion can be acted on, which is Monday, June 1.

"Why are we railroading this process?" Pangilinan asked.

To this, Cayetano insisted that since there's an objection, they should divide the House and vote if the proposal should be considered.

Things heated up when Marcoleta spoke after Hontiveros, stating, "Ito po ang mahirap kasi kung wala po tayong legal background dito (This is difficult because we don’t have a legal background in this matter)."

Sen. Erwin Tulfo did not take Marcoleta's remarks lightly, questioning the latter's actions and the majority senators as a whole in railroading the motion. 

He particularly reprimanded Marcoleta over his pronouncements: "Point of order! Ad hominem! It is not right to say that his colleague knows nothing about the law."

"Madam President, my question is, why is the majority in such a hurry to tackle this motion--this allowing a senator for justifiable reasons to attend and participate in the session through teleconference, whereas in Rule 14, Section 14 under B, (it says) "It is convenient to hold a session through teleconference, video conference, or other reliable forms of remote or electronic means using appropriate information and communications technology system due to force majeure, Madam President, or the occurrence of a national emergency."

"I guess, Madam President, this justifiable reason, what is that? Does that fall under force majeure or does it fall under national emergency? My question is, why are we in such a hurry? Why are they, the majority, in a hurry to tackle this motion and divide the house, Madam President?" Tulfo reiterated.

"I need, we need answers in the minority. Or is it because, Madam Chair, they're in a hurry because of news reports that probably two of our colleagues might land in jail this weekend? Is that the reason why? Is that the reason why they have to have this inserted, this Section 41-C, para makaboto po kung sino man yung makukulong dahil sa announcement ng Ombudsman na may ilalabas na po ang warrant sa ilan sa mga kasamahan natin (so anyone from our colleagues who are about to be arrested based on the Ombudsman's announcement can vote because it is soon to release a warrant against them)? That is my question, Madam President," he pointed out. 

Earlier this day, Ombudsman Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla on Tuesday, May 26, said the Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) is now readying the filing of plunder charges against Sen. Jinggoy Estrada and Sen. Joel Villanueva in connection with the flood control anomalies. 

In a formal statement released after their walk out, the Senate Minority Bloc said they "strongly condemn what appears to be an attempt to rush a major change in the Senate Rules, especially when several members of the minority still wanted to speak and raise serious questions on the floor."

"We walked out because what happened on the floor looked less like orderly deliberation. The proposed rule change affects how senators may attend sessions, participate in proceedings and exercise their mandate through remote means, and such a measure should be opened to healthy public debate instead of being rushed by the tyranny of the majority."

"We have always welcomed healthy discussions on the floor, but this should mean allowing all members to be heard, not forcing the chamber to move at the speed preferred by the majority."

"At the time the motion was taken up, there was no duly constituted Committee on Rules and there was not even an elected Majority Leader who could properly guide a rules amendment through the regular process."

"How could there have been any action or discussion before the Committee on Rules when no Committee on Rules has been organized to date?"

"The timing raises a question that the public deserves to hear debated openly. Kaya pinili naming tumayo at iwan ang majority sa plenary. Kaya kami nagdesisyon to question the quorum and call for adjournment."

"If the proposal is truly defensible, then let it pass through the proper route."

"We owe it to the people who voted for us to do our mandate. This is why we want more time to discuss this further," the minority senators reiterated.