ICC denies PH request to suspend investigation

This Week in Media (March 27 to April 2, 2023)

THE PHILIPPINE government has been consistent in its response to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) investigation of drug-related crimes. Stated repeatedly and with slight variations on the theme, the position is to ignore and sideline the call for justice on behalf of families of drug war victims. 

The Department of Justice (DOJ) in the previous and present administrations has been the quickest to dismiss the need for the ICC to investigate the cases of alleged extrajudicial killings, saying the system is working and will ensure delivery of justice. And yet, there has been little evidence of these proceedings. The official count of drug suspects killed during police operations and vigilante raids linked to police casualties is over six thousand, but only three drug cases have so far led to convictions. There is little else to suggest that more cases will be taken to court, and media have not tracked how many are already pending resolution.

On February 3, the Philippine government through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a Notice of Appeal with the ICC, which notified the Court that the government will challenge the decision of the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber to continue the investigation in an appeal brief. In filing the Notice, the OSG petitioned that the investigation be suspended, pending the actual filing of the appeal brief and the resolution of the appeal.

The OSG then submitted the appeal brief on March 13, which called for the reversal of the ICC decision to investigate. The OSG argued that the ICC has no jurisdiction over the Philippines, because the government had already withdrawn from the Rome Statute which established the ICC. On March 27, the ICC’s Appeals Chamber denied the request to suspend filed in February, saying the Philippines’ failed to give “persuasive reasons” for the suspension. 

To report this development, journalists this week resorted to quotes mostly of officials who had something, anything to say about the ICC’s decision. The cacophony of comments dominated news pages and programs. 

Speaking to ANC on March 28, Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla wished the ICC luck, saying the court “cannot enter our country to impose a rule of law different from ours.” Sen. Ronald dela Rosa, the chief implementor of the Philippine National Police (PNP) for the first three years of the drug war, said he would avoid traveling to countries that he perceives to be “loyal” to the ICC, adding he tapped the services of fellow senator Francis Tolentino as legal counsel. Media checked Dela Rosa’s plan by pointing out that he had to have Senate clearance. Frontline Tonight, CNN Philippines, Rappler, Inquirer.net and Daily Tribune noted the Philippine laws prohibited government officials from exercise of their professions during their term in office. These reports also pointed out that only lawyers listed with the ICC can serve as counsel and that Harry Roque, former spokesperson for Duterte, is the only Filipino that list. 

Sen. Robinhood Padilla repeated his false claim that the ICC has no jurisdiction and he would volunteer to join Dela Rosa in jail.  Presidential sister, Sen. Imee Marcos called the ICC a “caricature of international justice” for failing to investigate crimes against humanity committed by Western countries; and former president Rodrigo Duterte dared the ICC to “catch” him, claiming he would be dead in two years.

President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. himself had questioned the ICC’s jurisdiction in February, while resolutions from both the House of Representatives and the Senate were filed last month seeking to “shield” Duterte from the investigation. Responding to the rejected appeal for suspension, Marcos announced to reporters covering a March 28 PAG-IBIG event that the Philippines would “disengage from any contact and communication” with the ICC. 

The statement was picked up by TV, print and online media, prompting Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra to clarify that the actual appeal to stop the investigation entirely is still pending – the exchange itself suggesting that all is not clear about what government is doing. Marcos’ remark showed a lack of awareness about the finer points of the process.  Guevarra added however that the country is “not legally and morally bound” to cooperate with the ICC.

Online media accounts like Rappler and InterAksyon republished a Reuters explainer which noted that even without government cooperation, the ICC can continue its probe by gathering information from other relevant sources. This crucial fact was lost as media fixated on recording what officials had to say, even those who hardly had any credentials to comment meaningfully on the ICC’s position.

Similarly, media did not pick up on the obvious lack of a real plan on the part of government. Despite reiterating that it will not cooperate, it seemed at a loss about any other way to halt the international investigation. 

In his March 6 column, retired Supreme Court Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban had suggested that the “best way to stop the ICC’s investigation and prosecution” is to form a credible, competent and independent panel similar to the Agrava board, which Marcos’ father formed in response to public outcry over the assassination of then Sen. Benigno Aquino, Jr. Forming an independent panel would be a challenge; but what other action can government take given the sorry state of its own investigation? 

The simple point seems lost on reporters as well. Coverage has been taken up as breaking news, as officials capture media attention just by uttering words, no matter how meaningless. 

So far, media have not found any resource persons who could broaden the discussion about the cases that the ICC pursued in the past. The failure reflects on the blind spots of journalistic reports. Are the media as uncaring about the quest and need for justice for the victims and their families? 

Only three reports gave airtime to families of drug war victims who have been closely following ICC-related developments and who consider the international court as their only hope for justice. 

TV Patrol’s March 28 report led with an interview with a wife of a drug war victim, who expressed newfound courage to continue the quest for justice. On March 30, 24 Oras and The World Tonight reported on a special stage presentation by members of Project Paghilom. This project is led by priest Flaviano Villanueva, who had been working with families and facilitating transfers of victims’ remains from public cemeteries to columbaria. The two accounts noted how the activity served as an outlet for healing and a reminder that in the eyes of the victims, Philippine justice has been elusive. 

This elusive justice has a long history in the country’s culture of impunity. The uneven and unequal application of the judicial process has just been demonstrated in the speedy resolution of the drug case filed against Juanito Remulla, the son of the Justice Secretary. Journalists cannot be blind to the real reason why the ICC has decided to investigate. 

The press should feel obliged to tell the truth so more Filipinos can understand the need for such a global institution. The Philippines is not alone in this failing. There are many who gain power and agency in countries where offenders cannot be held accountable for the crimes. And that is when the ICC can step in and do the job.