PH rejoining ICC? Nothing is impossible, solons say

[Mike J]

The whole "will the ICC issue an arrest warrant for Duterte" issue seems to be building.  There are also reports that ICC personnel have been allowed into the Philippines.  I don't see how the Philippines could rejoin the ICC without somehow addressing the Duterte issue.

https://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/other/ph-rejoining-icc-nothing-is-impossible-solons-say/ar-BB1m63NL?cvid=73867da164254a76f46bd1d67b974294&ei=22

MANILA, Philippines — Nothing is impossible with the Philippines’ possible membership to the International Criminal Court (ICC), as a lawmaker noted that the government can rejoin the Rome Statute just like how former president Rodrigo Duterte withdrew from it.

Isabela 6th District Rep. Faustino Dy V said on Thursday that while it will be up to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on whether or not the country will rejoin the ICC, based on his appreciation of the briefing from the Department of Justice (DOJ), he is sure Marcos would meticulously review possibilities.

“I think our beloved President needs to know the situation, what is the information (surrounding ICC) that would be given by the DOJ in its briefer, and then the President can decide on what to do with this piece of information. One thing is certain, our President will decide — he is very meticulous — based on information and options given to him,” Dy told reporters in a briefing.
“Our former President [Duterte] has unilaterally withdrawn from the Rome Statute.  There’s also a possibility that we can unilaterally enter into that same statute if we’ve unilaterally withdrawn from it before. So, definitely, nothing is impossible. So, it’s up for our President BBM to decide on how to proceed once he has all the information,” he added.

Dy said this after the DOJ on Wednesday said it was preparing a briefer for the President so he could weigh in on several options in case the ICC issues a warrant against Duterte and his former officials facing complaints before the international court.

Related video: Marcos stance on ICC remains unchanged—Palace (Dailymotion)

Duterte and several past administration officials are facing crimes against humanity complaints due to the drug war, and progressive groups and relatives of victims believe that human rights were abused in implementing the program.

READ: Gov’t prepares briefer in case ICC issues warrant vs Duterte, others

Manila 1st District Rep. Ernesto Dionisio Jr. also said that nothing is impossible now with regard to ICC membership.

“Well, for me, just like how it was reported — that the Department of Justice is preparing — I think this is just a study for our President to read.  [But] nothing is impossible, in my humble opinion.  It’s basic logic that if you see a valid reason for change, I think this can happen,” Dionisio said.

“But as of now, nothing has happened. I think the President will be stern with this previous statement regarding his previous stand regarding the ICC,” he added.

President Marcos has been adamant that the Philippine government would not extend any help to the ICC and its prosecutors, adding that former President Duterte would not be turned over to the international court.

Marcos maintained in the past that the ICC must only come into the Philippine scenario if the justice system is no longer functioning.

However, the Chief Executive also said in November 2023 that the Philippines is still studying options and a possible return to the ICC.

READ: Bongbong Marcos: Gov’t studying possible return to ICC

It was Duterte who pulled out of the Rome Statute — the treaty that created the ICC — in 2018.  The withdrawal took effect a year later.

According to the former leader, there seems to be a “concerted effort” between the United Nations special rapporteurs and the ICC special prosecutor to paint him as a “ruthless and heartless violator of human rights who allegedly caused thousands of extrajudicial killings.”

Despite the withdrawal, the ICC maintains that they have jurisdiction over the complaints filed against Duterte and his allies, because they were filed, and covered a period before the withdrawal from the Rome Statute.

 

[scott h]

1 hour ago, Mike J said:

rejoin the ICC

I find this remarkably laughable and two faced.

The Philippines continually files complaints against China in regard to the WPS situation and demands that the international community support them but decries as interference when the international community wants to look into human rights issues.

[BrettGC]

16 minutes ago, scott h said:

I find this remarkably laughable and two faced.

The Philippines continually files complaints against China in regard to the WPS situation and demands that the international community support them but decries as interference when the international community wants to look into human rights issues.

Australia does the same when it suits them, particularly when it comes to sovereign territory.  There's an ongoing dispute with the ICC specifically there's members of the Australian SAS The Hague would like to have a chat to but Australia says no.  That may change since the ICC no longer applies the death penalty - Australia abolished the death penalty in real terms 1973 but it hadn't been implemented since 1967.

The US often cries foul of human rights violations in war but isn't a signatory to the IHL's Law of Armed Conflict but is signatory to other IHL treaties.  

There's countless other instances of countries obeying treaties only when it suits them but yes, this specific example here in PI is a little beyond the pale and I have no doubt that if it does go ahead it will only last as long as "protected" persons aren't directly affected.

[JJReyes]

13 hours ago, scott h said:

I find this remarkably laughable and two faced.

The Philippines continually files complaints against China in regard to the WPS situation and demands that the international community support them but decries as interference when the international community wants to look into human rights issues.

Philippine politics.  President Duterte knew he could face criminal charges with the ICC after leaving office.  The solution was to make his daughter run for the presidency.  While she was a strong candidate, there were no assurance Sarah Duterte would win.  The compromise was to make her vice-president with Marcos, Jr. in exchange for a deal that included honoring Duterte's withdrawal from ICC and stopping any attempts to arrest him.  Another deal was the Marcos camp would support Sarah Duterte's candidacy for the presidency in six years.  The Marcos camp then changed their mind.  They now want a political dynasty.  The first step is to cut Sarah Duterte's power as Secretary of Education by removing access to her intelligence fund -- billions of pesos for potential use in political campaigns.  The fight is on.  

[scott h]

7 hours ago, JJReyes said:

his daughter run for the presidency

The one problem with your theory JJ is that Sarah hates her father as much as cold boiled mutton. Has done so since he divorced her mother. This has been long standing chismis here.

[BrettGC]

36 minutes ago, scott h said:

The one problem with your theory JJ is that Sarah hates her father as much as cold boiled mutton.

Very true.

[JJReyes]

15 hours ago, scott h said:

The one problem with your theory JJ is that Sarah hates her father as much as cold boiled mutton. Has done so since he divorced her mother. This has been long standing chismis here.

Family is family.  You did not choose them.  Sarah also has ambitions, and she needs her father.  Setting aside petty squabbles is no big deal.  

[Jack Peterson]

10 minutes ago, JJReyes said:

Family is family.  You did not choose them. 

 Exactly, and these days they can be Cumbersome

[Viking]

23 hours ago, JJReyes said:

Family is family.  You did not choose them.  Sarah also has ambitions, and she needs her father.  Setting aside petty squabbles is no big deal.  

I actually never understood some peoples obsession with family. Sure, a nice family is great but me personally would NEVER defend a family member who is doing the wrong thing.

Why is it so important for some to support your family even when it's obvious that they are the one at fault?

The attached picture make more sense to me.

[JJReyes]

2 hours ago, Viking said:

I actually never understood some peoples obsession with family. Sure, a nice family is great but me personally would NEVER defend a family member who is doing the wrong thing.

In most Western societies, you are taught to be independent starting at a young age.  It is not uncommon to kick someone out of the home upon reaching the age of 18 years.  Philippines and other countries are different.  They believe inter-dependence is important, also known as helping each other.  Family relationships are very important.