Kier James Hernandez, Tricia Mari Abad, News, ݮƵCampus Journalists
The ݮƵCollege of Law, in coordination with the ݮƵCollege of Law Student Council and ݮƵCollege of Law Research Corps, conducted an academic forum titled “Justice Beyond Borders: An Academic Forum on the Constitutional and International Law Perspectives on the Arrest of Former President Rodrigo Duterte.”
Held at the Silid Lakan Dayang, University Library on March 31, it discussed the legality of the arrest on Former President Rodrigo Duterte. The forum focused on the importance of harmonizing the Philippine Constitution, Domestic Laws, and International Laws, especially on cases like Duterte.
Duterte’s arrest is legal The former president was arrested on March 11 for crimes against humanity of murder committed between November 2011 and March 2016. He was then surrendered to the ICC at The Hague, in the Netherlands on March 12. He is waiting for the scheduled confirmation of charges to begin on September 23. The recent arrest of the former president draws clamor from its supporters, citing that the ICC has no jurisdiction in the Philippines since 2019, thus compromising the country’s sovereignty due to the interference of foreign entities. However, Atty. Evecar B. Cruz-Ferrer, an International Humanitarian Lawyer and professor at the ݮƵCollege of Law, emphasized that the arrest of Duterte is legal.
Atty. Cruz-Ferrer, in her topic “International Law Perspectives Surrounding The Arrest of Former President Duterte,” stated that international laws are part of the Philippine laws as stated in Article 2, Section 2 of the country’s Constitution, thus needing harmonization of the two.
She then presented Article 127 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Rome Statute to reiterate the validity of the arrest, saying that the withdrawal to the ICC does not affect jurisdiction over crimes committed before the withdrawal date. For context, the country was with the ICC from November 2011 until March 2019—well within the timeline where that event happened.
Affirming the validity of the said article, Atty. Cruz-Ferrer cited Pangilinan v. Cayetano’s case, where the Supreme Court ruled the petition as “moot,” provided that the Philippines’ withdrawal from the ICC was accepted and acknowledged.
Moreover, on the question that can the Philippines surrender Duterte to the ICC, the speaker presented Section 17 of Republic Act No. 9851, a law stating that when an international tribunal is already undertaking the prosecution of an accused of crimes, the Philippines, in the interest of justice, may dispense with its own investigation or prosecution and surrender the person to the appropriate international court.
Atty. Cruz-Ferrer concluded the discussion by pointing out that the country did not give up its sovereignty by surrendering Duterte to the ICC because, according to her, the right to enter into agreements, like joining the ICC, is part of exercising sovereignty, thus validating the former head of state’s arrest.
On due process and constitutional supremacy Another topic discussed in the forum is “The Imperative for a Constitutional Paradigm on the arrest of Former President Duterte” presented by Atty. Alex F. Medina, another College of Law professor, and Political Law expert. He emphasized on his topic that on the arrest of the former president, the manner of compliance with the constitution is the real issue.
Atty. Medina said that the Philippines should comply with international obligations through the three rules of validity: arrest, detention, and surrender. He stressed that the presidency cannot ignore or disregard the Constitution and must ensure due process, emphasizing that international cooperation must align with it.
When asked about the possibility of sending the former President back to the country, he pointed out that the judgment and authority of the ICC should be followed for the time being.
In the context of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Article 59 addresses “Arrest proceedings in the custodial State” and describes how a state can arrest a person wanted by the ICC. Atty. Medina said that whether it is surrender or deportation is up to the international court’s decision.
Atty. Medina’s focus on constitutional supremacy concludes his perspective that the actions involving the arrest of former President Duterte must be aligned with the Philippine Constitution first, even in cooperation with international tribunals like the ICC.
In the latter part of the forum, the moderators, Atty. Anna Margarita Malonzo and Tonisito M.C. Umali opened the panel discussion with the speakers to further respond to the inquiries of the PUPians and reiterated their stances regarding the legality of Duterte’s arrest and the jurisdiction of the ICC.
The University remains an important space for academic discussion and deeper insights into public issues that may often be viewed as controversial and polarizing. Such forum shows the University’s support to building knowledge and strengthening democratic pillars through civil discourse.
Please click/tap the appropriate link to help you in your navigation of our services
Applicant Student Faculty Member or Employee Researcher or Extensionist Alumni Campus Life Back to Homepage