DISCLAIMER: Infrawatch PH invites analysts and experts to share opposing ideas on the most important issues of the day. Unless expressly stated, the views in guest essays do not represent the views of Infrawatch PH and its officers.
With a semblance of finality, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has said that he is ending the Philippine government’s involvement in the International Criminal Court (ICC) after tribunal rejected the its appeal to suspend its probe into “drug war” killings.
The President said, “We essentially are disengaging from any contact, from any communication with the ICC.”
He added, “We cannot cooperate with the ICC considering the very serious questions about their jurisdiction and about what we consider to be interference and practically attacks on the sovereignty of the Republic.”
This statement practically ends all participation by the Philippine government with the ICC under the Marcos government.
ICC withdrawal
To further understand the difficult relationship between the ICC and the Philippine state, it is helpful to return to the time of former President Rodrigo Duterte, who definitively ended the Philippines’ membership to the ICC.
Mr. Duterte severed ties with the ICC due to his view that ICC officials are undertaking an unfairly and unjustly persecuting him and other members of the Cabinet implementing his drug war.
He also said that the Philippine government had enough mechanisms in place to ensure that the justice system functioned properly, as the basis for ICC proceedings to commence includes the unwillingness and inability of local courts to prosecute crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction.
To a certain extent, victims of Mr. Duterte’s drug war are getting justice, as various local courts have been convicting policemen involved in the extrajudicial killing of suspected drug personalities.
This fact may be the most important proof that local courts are working to prosecute crimes under ICC jurisdiction. However, it bears stating that no local proceeding has yet to prosecute Mr. Duterte and other high-level implementors of the drug war.
Interference
On the other hand, Mr. Marcos has reiterated the view of former President Duterte that ICC proceedings in the Philippines are nothing but an attack on Philippine sovereignty.
In truth, if local courts are able to undertake proceedings on crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction, allowing ICC proceedings to continue can only be viewed as an outright interference into the internal affairs of the country.
Victims of the drug war and human rights advocates can prosecute not just local policemen directly involved in the killing of their kin, but they can also undertake proceedings to prosecute Mr. Duterte’s culpability for the drug war. After all, his presidential immunity has already lapsed, and he can now be charged with cases which may relate during his time as President.
Double standard
At the international level, various international groups have also decried the ICC for its double standard in the prosecution of cases.
No less than Amnesty International and its Secretary General, Agnes Callamard have decried the ICC’s inaction on atrocities in various countries such as Afghanistan, Nigeria and others. Ms. Callamard was previously the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council.
Amnesty International gave an example –
in 2020 the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) decided not to investigate war crimes by UK forces in Iraq, despite its own finding that these crimes had been committed. This was followed by a decision in 2021 to deprioritize an investigation into war crimes in Afghanistan by US and Afghan national forces, with Prosecutor Karim Khan citing viability and budget constraints. But just six months later, the Prosecutor launched his office’s largest ever investigation in Ukraine, for which he had sought ‘voluntary’ financial assistance from member states – much of which was ‘earmarked’ by states for the Ukraine investigation.
It added that the ICC “has appeared to veer off course in recent years, with recent decisions by the ICC Prosecutor raising concerns that the court may be heading towards a hierarchical system of international justice.”
The current concerns on the ICC should certainly give the Philippines some pause in even considering reviving its cooperation at this time. The ICC should return to the real basis of its creation, which is to prosecute grave crimes undertaken by actors in unwilling or unable states. It should not allow itself to be used as a party by any international actor to advance narrow geopolitical interests.
More importantly, President Marcos should remain steadfast in his refusal to cooperate with the ICC. Because if he does not, the President may also find himself on the tribunal’s crosshairs.