ICC prosecutors call for dismissal of Duterte's court jurisdiction challenge
The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) and the Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) have urged the International Criminal Court to reject former president Rodrigo Duterte's appeal regarding the international tribunal's jurisdiction over his crimes against humanity case.
On Dec. 8, the two offices filed separate 22-page filings maintaining the ICC's jurisdiction over Duterte. In November, Duterte's lawyers filed a 21-page appeal challenging the Pre-Trial Chamber 1 decision, stating that the ICC had jurisdiction to continue its case against the former president.
"The Appeals Chamber should dismiss the appeal because it fails to show any error in the decision warranting reversal," deputy prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang wrote.
"Each of the four grounds of appeal is incorrect. Consequently, the jurisdiction of the Court in this situation should be upheld, and proceedings in this case should continue."
Duterte's camp previously argued that the Pre-Trial Chamber I made errors, including finding that Article 127 of the Rome Statute is lex specialis (the principle of a special rule overrides a general rule)," treating preliminary examinations and the decision to open an investigation as the same "matters under consideration," referring to "the Court" in Article 127(2) as including the OTP, and stating that the "object and purpse" of the Rome Statute permits the opening of an investigation even after the Philippines' withdrawal.
Niang rebutted that the apeal failed to show any error in the decision warranting reversal. "Each of the four grounds of appeal is incorrect. Consequently, the jurisdiction of the Court in this situation should be upheld, and proceedings in this case should continue," he stated.
"[The] Chamber correctly found that 'the Court can exercise its jurisdiction' over crimes allegedly committed on the territory of the Philippines while it was still a State Party, because the Prosecution had commenced the preliminary examination before the Philippines had either notified its intention to withdraw or before that withdrawal became effective."
For its part, the OPCV also opposed each ground of the Duterte camp's appeal.
"In the first ground of appeal, the Defence mispresents the Impugned Decision and fails to demonstrate that the Chamber did not adhere to the lex specialis principle. In the second and third grounds of appeal, the Defence’s arguments reflect mere disagreement with the Chamber’s findings," OPCV principal counsel Paolina Massidda stated.
She added that the Chamber properly interpreted Article 127(2)—which specifies the terms of withdrawal—of the Rome Statute.
The said article states that "a State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations arising from this Statute while it was a Party of the Statute[...] Withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective[.]"
The ICC previously rejected a challenge to its jurisdiction as well as a bid for Duterte's interim release.
Duterte has been at the ICC since March 12.
He was arrested at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport on March 11 following a warrant of arrest issued by the ICC via the International Criminal Police Organization.
He has been accused of being an "indirect co-perpetrator for the crime against humanity of murder pursuant to Article 7 (1)(a) of the Rome Statute."