SINCE the end of the presidential term of office of former President Rodrigo Duterte, talks have been rife that legal efforts to pin him down for the deaths or extrajudicial killings (EJKs) that happened during his controversial war on drugs would prosper.
These efforts are expected to emanate from two fronts — the local courts and the International Criminal Court (ICC) which has been trying to prosecute Duterte for such loss of Filipino lives during his term.
Last January, ICC judges in the Hague authorized the Office of the Prosecutor to resume its investigation into alleged crimes against humanity in the Philippines.
The probe covers alleged crimes committed from November 2011 to June 2016, when EJKs occurred in Davao City when Duterte was mayor, and extends to March 19, 2019, when the Philippines’ withdrawal from the ICC’s Rome Statute took effect during Duterte’s incumbency. Both the ICC and Duterte critics contend that although the Philippines is no longer a member of the ICC, under the Rome Statute, the court retains its jurisdiction over crimes committed prior to the country’s withdrawal.
‘There is no doubt they have a just cause, and this cause is worthy of support, but they should make an airtight case for them to succeed.’
Earlier, the Philippine government requested the court’s prosecutor to defer the investigation to domestic authorities. However, the ICC judges concluded the government failed to substantiate its assertions that it was doing enough to investigate and prosecute killings the happened in the said period.
As things stand now, it looks like Duterte’s fate and his chances of dodging the ICC depend on President Ferdinand Marcos Jr’s support, even as the Department of Justice under Secretary Crispin Remulla continues to stand by the former president. If private citizen Digong Duterte continues to be annoyingly critical of the Marcos administration, particularly its House of Representatives and current speaker, then his personal fate might turn for the worse.
Meanwhile, Duterte is unfazed by the public threat aired by former senator Leila de Lima, who was recently granted bail by the Muntinlupa court in connection with her last drugs case. De Lima said she will do all she can to help the ICC fulfill its investigative task.
On the local front, Duterte recently saw a glimmer of hope. In a recent ruling in another local case concerning EJKs, the Supreme Court said the government can’t be compelled to investigate and prosecute EJKs in connection with the Duterte’s war against illegal drugs.
In a decision promulgated on Aug. 30 and released on Saturday, the SC said the writ of continuing mandamus cannot be used to compel the government to conduct an investigation as it is only a remedy in environmental cases.
The petition for mandamus was filed by lawyers who claimed that respondents then Philippine National Police chief and now Sen. Ronald dela Rosa, the late Commission on Human Rights chairman Jose Luis Martin Gascon, and then-Justice secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II failed to adequately perform their duty to prevent violations of the right to life and to investigate and prosecute the killings.
In denying the petition, the SC said a writ of mandamus is a remedy when any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfully neglects to do a duty, or unlawfully excludes from another the use or enjoyment of a right or office.
The High Court said it was not established that the respondents neglected their duties as respective heads of the PNP, DOJ and the CHR in preventing and investigating violations of the right to life, in relation to the drug war.
This development reveals the seemingly weakness in the legal arguments being presented by lawyers who are fighting Duterte on drug war issues. There is no doubt they have a just cause, and this cause is worthy of support, but they should make an airtight case for them to succeed.
