“If the President can accept that abuses were committed, then that should be a signal and an incentive to act”
The International Criminal Court investigations of the anti-drug war waged by the Duterte administration continues to bedevil the country.
This is because, by the looks of it, the ICC is nearing the end of its investigations or may have already finished it and is about to make its findings public.
The expectation is the issuance of arrest warrants is imminent to former and current public officials who were directly involved in the anti-drug campaign.
The DOJ has even advised the former President and Senator de la Rosa not to travel to any country that the ICC has strong influence as if it is a given that the two will be issued arrest warrants.
In times like this, sometimes the better thing to do is wait, prepare and avoid saying more than what is necessary.
Issuing warnings left and right is not helpful.
Announcing that ICC officials who will come here to conduct investigation will be charged with usurpation of authority after saying that no ICC official will be allowed into the country will also just make us look ridiculous.
Can you imagine the reaction of the international community if we will indeed arrest and charge these ICC officials that we allowed into the country?
Since the DOJ has stated it is still open to talks under certain conditions, the wise move is to continue talking or keep the communication lines open.
Completely shutting the door will not end our worries and, furthermore, it may not the best course of action to take.
We also have to ask the question why we allowed this issue to reach a point wherein the ICC may now have to issue arrest warrants.
Could the government have prevented the problem from reaching this stage?
Were the steps taken the right ones?
Let us look at some of the bones of contention that have brought the issue to this point.
First is the issue of jurisdiction.
The government is always saying since the country has withdrawn from the Rome statute, the ICC no longer has any jurisdiction to investigate the country.
This is true if the ICC is investigating complaints filed after the country withdrew in 2019.
The ICC, however, is saying the investigation is over cases that happened before the country’s withdrawal and we are, therefore, still obligated to cooperate.
Even our own Supreme Court agreed with this in a decision promulgated in 2019.
This is something the government cannot explain nor deny.
The second is the government’s contention that we have a perfectly functioning judicial system and we should be left to deal with the problem.
True enough, but it is also true that our judicial system has many problems and is not perfect. Although we Filipinos are so familiar with our system and take everything in stride like alleged judicial corruption, judicial independence and court cases that last forever, it is hard for foreign observers to accept or understand it.
A good example of this is the case of former Senator Leila de Lima who has been in jail for more than six years without any resolution in sight that the Supreme Court had to intervene and ordered the case must be resolved before the end of the year.
Outside observers take the De Lima case which has been so internationalized as an example of a politicized justice system.
Third is the stalled and slow conduct of investigations.
The DOJ has always wanted all complainants to go the agency so that an investigation can be conducted.
This invitation was again renewed last week with assurances of protection to complainants. Since the DOJ must be in possession of information regarding all of the so-called suspicious police operations, the better step is to start the investigations to show good faith.
After all, the DOJ can initiate an investigation on its own even without the initial presence of the complainants.
And if the victims will see the sincerity of the investigations, then perhaps they will go to the DOJ.
The problem why many of the complainants chose to go to cause-oriented groups for assistance instead of the police was because of their belief they will not be given a fair deal.
Proof of this as far as they are concerned is that only two of the cases have ended in convictions.
The several hundred cases being reviewed are still in limbo after all these years.
It is no wonder the complainants went outside the system to seek justice.
A new approach is needed.
The fourth is the issue of sovereignty.
The country signed and ratified the Rome statute voluntarily without any outside coercion.
By that action, we agreed to abide by all the articles of the treaty.
To say now that this violates our sovereignty when we knew exactly what we were getting into when we signed the treaty is, therefore, disingenuous.
Could there be another reason the government just does not want to admit?
The better approach for the DOJ is to forget the confrontational rhetoric and fast track the investigation and filing of cases in court to convince local and international skeptics including the ICC that we are capable of dispensing justice as we are claiming.
The ICC is not the whole and only problem.
Part of it is our slowness and refusal to accept that there were indeed abuses committed during the anti-drug campaign that needs investigating.
Even PBBM accepts this.
If the President can accept that abuses were committed, then that should be a signal and an incentive to act.
As they say, the truth will set us free.
