PH can question ICC later, says Rodriguez
CAGAYAN de Oro City 2nd District Rep. Rufus Rodriguez on Thursday said the government can allow the investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC) into thousands of anti-drug war killings and question the tribunal’s jurisdiction later.
“The proper and only course of action of the Republic of the Philippines is to raise the issue of jurisdiction when the case is eventually filed in the ICC. Jurisdiction can be questioned at any stage of the proceedings,” he said.
The Mindanao lawmaker, a former law dean, expressed confidence that the international tribunal would eventually grant the country’s appeal for it to lay off its anti-drug war.
“When the case is brought to the ICC, we raise the issue of jurisdiction and the Philippines will surely secure its dismissal for lack of jurisdiction,” he added.
He pointed out that he agreed with the dissenting opinion of two of the five ICC judges who voted for granting the country’s request that the court stop its inquiry. Three judges rejected the plea.
Rodriguez quoted part of the two judges’ dissent:
“30. When the former Prosecutor submitted her request for authorisation of an investigation on 24 May 2021, the Philippines was no longer a Party to the Statute, its withdrawal having become effective on 17 March 2019 (The Philippines deposited a written notification of withdrawal from the Statute on March 17 March 2018).
It is further noted that the Pre-Trial Chamber issued its Article 15(4) Decision, authorising the commencement of the Prosecutor’s investigation, on 15 September 2021, more than two years after the Philippines’ withdrawal took effect.”
The dissenting opinion also cited the case of the Republic of Burundi (paragraph 33): The Pre-Trial Chamber III ruled: In the view of the Chamber, any obligations on the part of Burundi arising out of the Chamber’s Article 15(4) decision would survive Burundi’s withdrawal.
The reason is that the present decision was delivered prior to the entry into effect of Burundi’s withdrawal on 27 October 2017.
Accordingly, it cannot be disputed that, if authorized, an investigation into the situation of Burundi would commence prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.”
The dissenting opinion continued:
“34. It is our view that the Court retained jurisdiction over the Burundi Situation precisely because the former Prosecutor sought authorization and the Pre-Trial Chamber III authorized the investigation before the withdrawal became effective on 27 October 2017.”
In the meantime, Rodriguez urged concerned government officials to be calm and to study the decision well.
“There is no need for our government officials to say many extraneous comments on the decision,” he said.
