Marcos says govt ‘disengaging’ from ICC
BY RAYMOND AFRICA and JOCELYN MONTEMAYOR
THE Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has denied the request of the Philippine government to stop its investigation into the alleged extrajudicial killings related to the enforcement of the bloody campaign against illegal drugs of the former Duterte administration.
In an eight-page decision signed by Judge Marc Perrin de Brichambaut dated March 27, 2023, the Appeals Chamber said the Philippine government “did not include any reason and arguments in support for the Request for Suspension Effect in its Notice of Appeal.”
Thus, it ruled, “(t)he Appeals Chamber rejects the request of the Republic of the Philippines for suspensive effect of the aforementioned decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I.”
Reacting to the decision, President Marcos, Jr. said the rejection marks the end of the country’s engagement with the foreign legal, saying the Philippines will now “disengage from any contact and communication” with them.
The President, in an interview on the sidelines of the Pag-Ibig Fund Chairman’s Report held at the Mall of Asia Complex in Pasay City, reiterated the ICC has no jurisdiction over the Philippines following its withdrawal from the Rome Statute.
“We cannot cooperate with the ICC considering the very serious questions about their jurisdiction and about what we consider to be interference and practically attacks on the sovereignty of the republic,” the President said.
“We don’t have a next move. That is the extent of our involvement with the ICC. That ends all our involvement with the ICC because we can no longer appeal. The appeal has been — the appeal has failed,” he also said in mixed Filipino and English.
“In our view, there is nothing more that we can do in the government. And so, at this point, we essentially are disengaging from any contact, from any communication I guess with the ICC,” he added.
The ICC is a court of last resort that can exercise jurisdiction if states are unable or unwilling to investigate crimes. The Philippines has repeatedly argued its own institutions are capable of prosecuting crimes.
As international criticism mounted against his government’s bloody war against illegal drugs, Duterte unilaterally withdrew the Philippines from the ICC’s founding treaty in 2018.
But while the Philippines is no longer a signatory to the Rome Statute, the treaty, however, stipulates the ICC can still investigate crimes that took place while a country was a member.
The court in January this year granted its prosecutor’s request to reopen an investigation into the killings, having suspended the probe in November 2021 at Manila’s request after it said it was carrying out its own investigations.
Duterte has repeatedly said he gave no instruction to kill, other than in self-defense. He has said he is willing to go on trial over his drugs war, but only in a Philippine court.
The decision of the ICC Appeals Chamber was reached two weeks after the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) requested the international court to suspend and reverse its ruling that allowed the resumption of investigation by the ICC Prosecutor.
The Philippine government argued that if the ICC would continue investigations without jurisdictional basis, “its mandate would be adversely affected due to the implications such acts would have for those affected by the Court’s operations, in particular suspects, witnesses, and victims.”
It likewise raised the issue of jurisdiction.
But the ICC said: “The Appeals Chamber notes that while the Philippines provides its supporting arguments with respect to the absence of the Court’s jurisdiction in the Philippines situation under the first ground of appeal, it fails to explain how the alleged absence of jurisdictional or legal basis for the resumption of the Prosecutor’s activities pending the resolution of the appeal would ‘defeat its very purpose and create an irreversible situation that could not be corrected.’”
It also said its investigation is grounded on the fact that it is probing crimes which happened while the Philippines was still a member of the ICC.
“As regards the suspensive effect of an appeal under Article 82 (3) of the Statute, the Appeals Chamber has consistently held that ‘the decision to order that an appeal has suspensive effect is discretionary,’ and that when examining a request for suspensive effect, ‘it will consider the specific circumstances of the case and the factors it considers relevant for the exercise of its decision under these circumstances,” the ICC said.
PH JUDICIAL SYSTEM
Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra said the rejection of the ICC of the Philippine government’s appeal is an indictment of the country’s judicial system.
He said the ICC ruling will have “serious and far-reaching consequences to the Philippines.”
“It places us in the same class of rogue nations where the rule of law is not respected… It’s an indictment against our entire legal and judicial system, and it encroaches on our sovereignty as an independent and law-abiding nation,” Guevarra said.
“It tends to humiliate us in the eyes of the international community, and this affront is irreversible and incorrectible even if we eventually win on the merits of our appeal,” he added.
He said the Philippines is not legally or morally bound to give its cooperation with the ICC.
Guevarra also said the ICC should have first decided on the appeal made by the Philippine government for its Appeals Chamber to reverse the authorization issued by the court’s Pre-Trail Chamber for its prosecutors to resume investigation into the war on drugs of the Duterte administration.
Guevarra, like Marcos, said the Philippines is no longer required to cooperate with the international court.
He also said the ICC has been “quite unfair” to the Philippine government as it never gave the government the opportunity to see the complaints filed against the accused even if the government has been cooperating with the international court by giving “all those bits of information that they need yet they rejected all of them.”
“So, that’s a go signal to the ICC prosecutor to start his investigation. So, how is he going to do it? Bahala na siya. But on the part of the Philippine government., the President himself stated that the government will not cooperate unless and until itong (these) issues on jurisdiction, admissibility and etc. are finally settled…That’s why I am saying the ICC cannot expect any cooperation from the Philippine government at this stage.
‘GOOD LUCK’
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla wished the ICC “good luck” as he echoed the President’s and Guevarra’s argument that it no longer has jurisdiction over the Philippines, therefore, has no authority to take any action against it.
Remulla said the ICC cannot enter the Philippines to conduct its probe on the war on drugs or impose a different rule of law.
“Right now, we are telling them we can do it. Give us your complaint, we can do it… If they insist on doing it, well, good luck to them because they cannot enter our country to impose a rule of law different from ours, and our rule of law here is done by Filipinos,” Remulla said in an interview with ABS-CBN’s Headstart.
Remulla said the ICC cannot compel the Philippine government “to act in any manner” since the country is no longer under the ICC’s jurisdiction.
He even dared the ICC to arrest Russian President Vladimir Putin to set an example of what it can do.
The ICC on March 17 issued warrants of arrest against Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, Russian Commissioner for Children’s Rights, after they allegedly unlawfully deported and transferred children during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
“Also if they want to arrest Putin, I’d like to see them do that because they’re big on words but let them do it first so we will believe that they can really do what they’re saying,” he added.
Sen. Ronald dela Rosa, who was one of the accused in the killings due to the war on drugs, earlier said he is not bothered if the ICC issues an arrest warrant against him since the country’s law enforcement agencies will not heed the Court’s request.
Sen. Francis Tolentino said: “The Appeal made by the Philippines was a courteous assertion of our sovereignty. Its denial has no binding effect. It will not clothe the ICC with jurisdiction , as there was none in the first place. ICC should recognize the fundamental pillar of the international legal order, which is sovereignty.” — With Reuters
