Sen. Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa at the pro-Duterte rally at the Liwasang Bonifacio

MANILA, Philippines – Sen. Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa echoed the assessment of a constitutional expert who said there was indeed an infringement of the constitutional rights of former President Rodrigo Duterte when authorities surrendered him to the International Criminal Court (ICC). 

“Binulag ng pulitika ang pamantayan ng pamahalaang ito sa pagkilala sa garantiyang ibinigay sa bawat Pilipino- dating presidente man o hindi— ng konstitusyon. Hindi lang mga taga-suporta ni dating Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte ang mismong nagsabi na may paglabag sa karaparatan ng ating kapwa Pilipino sa pagsuko kanya sa ICC,” Bato said. 

“Dapat maaala, hindi lamang ni Justice Secretary Boying Remulla at mga gabinete ni Presidente Bongbong Marcos, kundi ng buong sambayanang Pilipino na kaya nakapiring ang simbulo ng hustisya dahil dapat walang kinikilingan pagdating sa pagpapatupad at pagsunod sa batas,” Bato said. 

Bato made the remark after the hearing of the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs where the supposed legalities where the government based its arrest of the former president was opposed by Atty. Alexis Medina, a law professor and author of various constitutional law books. 

Among the biggest controversies in the Duterte arrest was not bringing him before a Philippine court despite his plea, before surrendering him to a foreign tribunal. Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla defended that the ICC had jurisdiction over the former president by virtue of the International Humanitarian Law.

The law, according to Remulla, was the government’s basis to pursue executive action of surrender that justifies flying the accused out of the country right away without bringing him first to domestic courts. 

This was opposed by Medina who said the constitution demands a lawful court order if a person is to be expelled from the Philippine territory by whatever means.

Medina explained that surrendering a person arrested to an international body is only valid if the subject has already voluntarily surrendered to the national government, negating the need for extradition process— or if the subject is a foreign national. 

“To expel a person from his country of residence without a lawful court order, by excluding the judicial process, might amount to a violation of the liberty to abode,” Medina said. 

“That is guaranteed by Section 6 of the Bill of Rights. The liberty of abode cannot be impaired without a lawful order of the court. That is the text of the constitution. Now, this constitutional protection is a barrier for any government action that would simply force, compel, an individual, to change his residence,” he added. 

Medina made it clear that he is non-partisan and only came as a resource person and that he is coming from the detached point of view of an academic. 

“My view that the arrest and the detention and explusion of the former president may have infringed several constitutional guarantees in favor of the former president,” Medina said. 

RELATED STORIES:

Bato says he might hide if arrest warrant comes, won’t surrender to ICC 

Escudero: Senate won’t allow arrest of Bato inside its premises

Bato to Torre: Huwag sana tayong magpakalasing sa power

Bato revives death penalty push for drug traffickers

ICC-tagged Bato slams drug ‘resurgence’ like street candies

House Quad Comm recommends filing criminal raps vs Du30, Bato, Go, former top cops