JUSTICE Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla yesterday said the International Criminal Court (ICC) continues to have jurisdiction over Filipinos charged before it even as the Philippines is no longer a member of the Rome Statute.
“Ma’am, the ICC tries people for individual crimes, not states. So, the Philippines, as a state, cannot be called upon by the ICC to do something for them. But when the ICC is running after individuals who are Filipino citizens, then that obligation becomes another kind of obligation,” Remulla told Sen. Imee Marcos during the Senate foreign affairs committee’s hearing.
Marcos, as committee chairman, held the hearing motu propio to seek clarification on the involvement of the ICC, the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) and government agencies in the March 11 arrest of former president Rodrigo Duterte.
Duterte was arrested upon his arrival from Hong Kong on the basis of a warrant of arrest issued by the ICC, where he has been charged of one count of crimes against humanity for murder in relation to extrajudicial killings that were committed in the implementation of his administration’s brutal campaign against illegal drugs.
In her opening statement, Marcos manifested that the government allegedly “surrendered” Duterte to “outsiders” who will render judgment on him despite the fact that the country has a working justice system.
“Ang hustisyang ipapataw ng dayuhan ay hindi hustisya. Ito ay pang-aalipin. Ito ay pag-kontrol at mga kababayan ko, hindi tayo alipin, tayo ay Pilipino (The judgment these foreigners will hand down is not justice. This is slavery. This taking control over us. We are not slaves, we are Filipinos),” she said.
She said the government should not have served the arrest warrant and turned over Duterte to the ICC, which she said no longer has jurisdiction over the Philippines being a non-member to the Rome Statute.
Remulla said the government “did not surrender as a country, but he (Duterte) was surrendered due to a warrant of arrest issued by the ICC through the Interpol.”
He said that while the ICC no longer has jurisdiction over the Philippines as a country, “when there are individuals asked by the ICC to explain, it is another matter.”
He stressed that “a state is different from an individual… Your honor, it is not the Philippines that is under the jurisdiction. It is the individuals who are charged by the ICC (who are) under (its) jurisdiction.”
Marcos insisted Duterte’s arrest was wrong because it is clear that the ICC no longer has jurisdiction over the Philippines, which Remulla rebuked by saying that the ICC membership was not the basis when government authorities arrested the former president.
The DOJ secretary said the issue is about Duterte’s alleged violation of the International Humanitarian Law, which has a local equivalent in RA 9851, or the “Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity.”
Remulla said the logic that individuals are still under the jurisdiction of the ICC even after a country withdraws membership from the Rome Statute is that so the person charged cannot cross borders “and hide behind borders,” which is a “universal value being held by the whole world today.”
“The principles are adopted by more than 150 countries throughout the world…It is already a customary law now as we speak,” he added.
Paul Saret, officer-in-charge of the Department of Foreign Affairs Office of Treaties and Legal Affairs, said while the Philippines is no longer a member of the ICC, it is obligated under “residual jurisdiction” to heed its orders, as already ruled by the Supreme Court.
Marcos said she was “perplexed” that even when a country is not a member or no longer a member of the ICC, “we can nevertheless fall under the ICC under the generic rubric of international humanitarian law.”
“So, it doesn’t matter whether you sign or do not sign (a treaty)?” Marcos asked, to which Remulla replied in the affirmative.
NO CONSPIRACY
Also during the hearing, National Security Adviser Eduardo Año said there was no “grand plan” to arrest Duterte.
Año said there was no “core group” which planned the arrest as the government only knew about the warrant of arrest on the day that it was served on the former president.
“May I also state for the record that I am not aware of any core group nor am I a member of such group that allegedly planned and prepared for the arrest of former president Duterte. In fact, it was only on Tuesday morning, March 11, 2025 that I learned that there was already an Interpol Red Notice and that the ICC warrant of arrest would be served,” he said.
He said there was likewise “no intelligence operation” since Duterte’s presence in Hong Kong and his return to the country was public knowledge as it was reported in the mainstream and social media.
He decried it was unfair to drag him in an alleged “grand conspiracy” to arrest Duterte.
Sen. Ronald dela Rosa had earlier said the least Año could have done was to inform Duterte’s camp of the impending arrest since he is the national security adviser and served under the Duterte administration as secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government.
Dela Rosa said Año could have called someone from the former president’s camp as a “respect” even as he assured that Duterte will still return to the country to face the charges.
Año said it was only on the morning of March 11 that he knew that the warrant of arrest on Duterte was issued.
“I would like to state for the record that my role was limited to the mandate of my office to assess that the situation does not escalate into a national security concern. The implementation of the warrant is beyond my mandate and I have no part in it,” he said.
“I firmly deny any allegations of a grand conspiracy. In fact, the events in March 11 were spontaneous,” he added.
Interior Secretary Jonvic Remulla also denied that was a “grand plan” to arrest Duterte after he was seen on nationwide TV saying that he, Año, Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro, and President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. discussed the arrest of Duterte.
Remulla said: “I must state it very clear that there was no mastermind. We were discussing mainly about what the (former) president’s statements were in Hong Kong. It was based on that statement…There was no planning.”
He added that they cannot plan based on a rumor.
He was referring to a statement made by Duterte on March 9 during the “Pasasalamat kay Pangulong (Thanksgiving for President) Duterte with OFWs” event in Hong Kong that he learned that an ICC warrant has been issued against him.
At the time, Duterte just laughed off the information.
Remulla refused to reveal additional details on his meeting with Marcos and the other Cabinet officials, saying it was an “executive privilege.”
“They (the media) asked me if I had planned it. I said I did not plan it. I said we were there, and not to skirt executive privilege, it was mainly because of the statements of the former president in Hong Kong,” he said.
Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro said the AFP only provided support to the PNP since the former has no law enforcement mandate.
“The operation is clearly a law enforcement one and the Philippine National Police has the power to ask the armed forces to assist,” he said.
“EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION”
Vice President Sara Duterte, who attended the hearing via video conferencing from The Hague, insisted that her father’s arrest was illegal since he was not given the chance to question the ICC warrant before a local court, as provided for by law, for juridical determination.
“He was brought to Villamor Air Base, a military air base, detained for nearly 12 hours, and then flown out of the country on a private jet to The Hague, all allegedly because of a warrant issued by the International Criminal Court. This was patently an illegal arrest. This constitutes extraordinary rendition. A Filipino citizen — a former president — was taken into custody without a valid warrant issued by a Philippine court, without due process, and without legal basis under our laws,” she said.
“This means that for an arrest to be lawful, it must be carried out pursuant to a warrant issued by a Filipino judge, Philippine court. Nasaan po ang warrant of arrest na inisyu ng hukuman ng Pilipinas? Wala (Where is the warrant of arrest issued by a Philippine court? There is none),” she said.
The vice president said what the government did was a warrantless arrest.
even as she acknowledged that none of its elements are present, which are inflagrante delicto, hot pursuit, and that the subject is an escaped prisoner.
She said the ICC warrant “has no legal effect” in the Philippine unless reviewed and validated by a Philippine court and a violation of the Rome Statute “even assuming, without conceding that the government itself wished to recognize and enforce the ICC warrant” as provided for under Section 59 of the Rome Statute.
She said the arrest of the former president has only one objective, and that is to “demolish political opponents.”
She also questioned the “silence” of the armed forces as to why it allowed her father to be escorted out of the airport by the police when it should be the Presidential Security Command which should be in- charge of the security of the former president.
Teodoro said the AFP was only tapped to provide support to the PNP.
“The AFP was deputized to support the PNP and it is part of the constitutional duty of the armed forces to follow processes. If we were to question those orders, even under the color of law, under color of right and then it would amount that the armed forces unilaterally, on its own, which is anathema to civilian authority over the military. As we said our jurisdiction ends in providing support to the PNP,” Teodoro said.
“And with respect to the Presidential Security Command, that is a highly-secure unit and operational security is strictly followed,” he added.
Teodoro said he “made the call” for the Philippine Air Force chief not to attend the hearing since he will not allow “operational details” to be discussed in an open hearing.
The vice president also slammed the administration for recognizing the ICC jurisdiction over the Philippines after Justice Secretary Remulla said that the former president can explain or rebut the accusations in the ICC.
“Ngayon naririnig ko sinasabi ng ating secretary of justice na mabibigyan siya ng panahon na makasagot sa loob ng ICC and that is clearly the Philippine government’s position that there is cooperation with ICC. So, kinikilala na nila ngayon ang jurisdiction ng ICC na wala naman kasi talaga. Kasi this is an extraordinary case of extraordinary rendition (Now I heard that the secretary of justice said that he [the former president] will be given enough time to rebut the allegation in the ICC court and that is clearly the Philippine government’s position that there is cooperation with ICC. So, the government is now recognizing ICC jurisdiction when it really has none because this an extraordinary case of extraordinary rendition),” she said.
She also asked how the government will bring his father back to the country.
“Ang tanong ngayon ay ano ang gagawin natin para maibalik ang dating pangulo sa Pilipinas? Kasi nag-iisa ako dito ngayon para maibalik ang dating pangulo sa ating bayan (The question now is how do we bring him back to the Philippines? Because I am alone her to find ways on how to do it),” she added,
RED NOTICE
Marcos asked the resource persons as to why the government arrested Duterte when the only document shown by the Interpol was a “red diffusion” notice and not a “Red Notice” which was sent early morning of March 11, the day Duterte was arrested.
Marcos said an Interpol diffusion is different from a red notice.
“There was no red notice and what was issued was merely a diffusion… Yung diffusion hindi yan pinagtibay ng Interpol secretariat, hindi dumaan sa commissioner (The diffusion is not certified by the Interpol secretariat nor did it pass through the commissioner),” she said.
Philippine Center for Transnational Crimes executive director Anthony Alcantara confirmed Marcos’ observation but said that a red diffusion “is a wanted person notice” which has the same effect as a red notice.
According to the Interpol website, a Red Notice is a request to law enforcement worldwide to locate and provisionally arrest a person pending extradition, surrender, or similar legal action, adding that it is “not an international arrest warrant.”
A red diffusion is a document circulated to arrest, detain, or restrict the movement of a convicted or accused person.
Marcos said the government does not need to immediately act on a Red Notice or any request from the Interpol just like what Timor Leste did in the case of former Rep. Arnulfo Teves.
She said that under diffusion, Duterte should have been extradited, which will first require the approval of a local court.
She said it was also written in the diffusion letter that “after prior consultation with the government of the Philippines, who have agreed to comply with this request,” which she said means that there was prior talks for the issuance of the request.
Alcantara said he is not aware who in the government was consulted and it is just better to ask the Interpol whom it has talked to in the Philippines regarding the matter.
DOJ secretary Remulla said the government invoked Section 17 of RA 9851 when it served the ICC warrant on Duterte.
The section provides that “in the interest of justice, the relevant Philippine authorities may dispense with the investigation or prosecution of a crime punishable under this Act. If another court or international tribunal is already conducting the investigation or undertaking the prosecution of such crime, instead, authorities may surrender or extradite suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the appropriate international court, if any, or to another state pursuant to the applicable extradition laws and treaties.”
He said the diffusion is just a “form letter” and the government has the option to turn over Duterte over under RA 9851.
