Sen. Imee Marcos, Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla and Sen. Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa. Photos: Senate of the Philippines / Facebook 

MANILA, Philippines – Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa and Sen. Imee Marcos clashed yet again with Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla on the legality of the Philippine government’s surrender of former President Rodrigo Duterte to the International Criminal Court (ICC) when the diffusion notice issued against him only asked for extradition. 

“Bakit hindi natin hinintay na mag-initiate ng extradition laban kay Pangulong Duterte, bakit binyahe na kaagad natin doon sa Interpol. Wala naman sinabi dito na kailangan natin i-surrender,” Bato asked Remulla during the third probe of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on Thursday, April 10 over the arrest of the former president. 

Remulla, just like the first time, repeatedly defended that the action of the executive was lawful as it is pursuant to section 17 of RA 9851 or the law penalizing violations of the International Humanitarian Law (IHL). 

Section 17 of RA 9851 specifically states that “authorities may surrender or extradite suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the appropriate international court, if any, or to another State pursuant to the applicable extradition laws and treaties.” 

Remulla explained that an extradition process requires an active extradition treaty with the extraditing state. However the former president’s unilateral withdrawal from the ICC in 2019 voided this option, hence the government’s “best judgement” to go for surrender. 

“May treaty po na kinakailangan para magkaroon ng extradition, eh wala pong treaty eh. Kasi nga nag-withdraw na tayo sa ICC,” Remulla told Bato. 

Reiterating his position, Remulla said, “extradition will fail sir kasi nga wala ho tayong treaty.”

Bato meanwhile countered Remulla’s use of RA 9851 with stipulations in the diffusion notice which cited extradition as the only means of seizure of the former president. 

“Malinaw naman dito sir oh, extradition lang ang hinihingi bakit natin pinilit na i-surrender,” Bato repeatedly asked Remulla. 

“Kasi po ‘yun ang sinasabi ng batas eh, may surrender. The law may be harsh but it is the law,” Remulla said. 

Imee: That’s not what Interpol asked for 

Marcos, who chairs the committee, interjected and supported Bato’s argument and slammed the government for not waiting for a red alert notice before proceeding with the arrest. As defined, a red alert notice is an official request to law enforcement worldwide to locate and provisionally arrest a person pending extradition, surrender, or similar legal action.

Answering back Bato, Remulla reasoned that surrender was an option the law accords the executive. 

“Pero hindi ‘yun ang hinihingi ng Interpol,” Marcos said, citing yet again the phrase, “with a view to extradition.” 

Remulla: Surrender was our best judgment; Imee: PH still has no obligation to ICC 

Remulla defended that in the unavailability of an extradition, surrender was an option left by the law for the government. The justice secretary said the government believes the move was their “best judgement” for the sake of the country under the circumstances then. 

“‘Yun po ang best judgment namin, ‘yun po ang tingin namin na mabuti po sa ating bansa. Ito po ‘yung amin paningin na pinaka mabuting gawin under the circumstances for our country. ‘Yun po ang aming tingin at tama naming ginawa,” Remulla said. 

Marcos did not accept it and continued to argue that the Philippines, being a non-member, holds no obligation to follow ICC orders, let alone honor an arrest warrant issued by the foreign tribunal. 

“Nakakabigla naman na sinasabi ninyo na wala na nga tayong ICC di wala tayong obligasyon,” Marcos said. 

“Sumugal tayo sa surrender pero hindi ibig sabihin na may obligasyon ang Pilipinas,” she said. 

PH laws prevails above all

Marcos maintained that Philippine laws prevail above any and all international laws.

“Ang dinidiin lang natin tulad ng sinabi mo nung umpisa, na nangingibabaw sa lahat ang ating Saligang Batas. Kahit ano pang batas ‘yan, kung ano mang tratado ‘yan, mangingibabaw lahat ng Bill of Rights, lahat ng Karapatang pantao eh mangingibabaw sa lahat,” Marcos said.

“Kaya nagulantang na lang kami, eh meron naman palang options eh, bakit pinili ninyo ‘yung labag sa batas,” Marcos said.  

Lawyer and International law expert Alex Medina during previous hearings ruled out very narrow circumstances that allows surrender as a means of taking a subject of a warrant into international custody. 

According to Medina, surrender would only be legal if the subject of the warrant voluntarily surrenders or is an alien. None of these, he said, applied to the case of the former president. 

Medina said there may have indeed been a violation of Duterte’s constitutional rights when he was arrested and brought to the ICC at The Hague, Netherlands. 

RELATED STORIES:

Palace urges Imee to invite more int’l law experts on Duterte probe 

Kitty Duterte seeks oral arguments on dad Rody’s habeas corpus case in Supreme Court 

Palace blinks, now allows 11 gov’t execs to attend Duterte probe 

Bayan Muna launches ‘White Ribbon: Duterte Panagutin’ campaign 

Imee on CIDG chief’s arrest bluff on Duterte lawyers: Shouldn’t Torre be liable for grave threats? 

Senate panel initial findings see ‘glaring violations’ of Duterte’s constitutional rights during arrest 

Imee: ICC officials arrived in PH, probed Duterte in 2024 

Duterte probe empty; senators slam executive privilege, sub judice excuse of gov’t execs to justify absence

Imee dismayed over Palace order to ignore Apr 3 Duterte probe: ‘Pag ‘di sumisipot, ang duda ng tao may tinatago’

Imee reveals Bersamin’s letter: gov’t execs will no longer attend Senate hearing on Duterte arrest