Remulla says gov't had no choice but to surrender Duterte, admits he cleared arrest

"Hindi tayo pwede mag-file extradition dahil nasa atin na ang tao. Ang extradition na sinasabi ng batas ay ang court o state na may warrant ang mag-file extradition sa Pilipinas. Kaya surrender lang ang option natin. Wala tayo ibang option," Remulla said.

Marcos then argued that this contradicts Article III of the Bill of Rights, which states that "no person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law."

"Ang alam po natin, pitong taong inimbestigahan itong kasong ito. Nagbigay po ng notice sa mga kinauukulan na maaari nilang kasuhan. At pinayagan silang sumagot," Remulla asserted.

"Alam ko po 'yan, na binigyan sila ng notice. May mga tanong na binigay sa kanila, pinayagan po sila sumagot," he continued. "Habang tayo ay saklaw ng ICC, binigyan na po ng due process 'yung mga tao."

Remulla further explained that extradition couldn't be done since the Philippines has already withdrawn from the ICC.

"Wala na tayong treaty with the ICC eh, nawala na nga 'yung ating membership kaya wala na pong extradition na route. Ang nangyari, surrender route na lang po ang naiwan," he said. "Kung hindi po nag-withdraw si former president Duterte, wala po tayong naging problema."

Sen. Ronald "Bato" Dela Rosa then pointed out how Duterte could have been surrendered to local courts instead, but Remulla maintained that it was their best judgment under the circumstances for the Philippines and how it was an "obligation to the rest of humanity."

Senate accused of bullying

The discussions heated up after Marcos and Dela Rosa became adamant in finding out who gave the order to arrest Duterte. When Philippine National Police Chief Rommel Marbil invoked executive privilege, the two senators fumed over his decision and questioned why he resorted to this.

Remulla then interjected and claimed that the reason why the entire Cabinet and other relevant government officials were no-shows at the panel's last hearing was because they "didn’t want to be bullied."

"I think you are trying to make people admit something that they will not admit. An executive privilege is a valid excuse not to answer any question," he said.

"If you’re trying to make a person admit something that should not be admitted, it means that there is something more to it. The clearance given by the DOJ was probably the most important part of it, to serve the warrant of arrest and to surrender the person under the law," he continued.

However, Remulla eventually admitted that he was the one who gave the clearance to serve the arrest warrant when asked once more by Dela Rosa.

"If I have to be the one, then if I am the one that is referred to, I will admit it, that I gave the clearances," he said.

"I will admit it that I gave the clearances to—number one, serve the warrant of arrest as I saw it, as I deem fit. And number two, to fly him to The Hague, to be surrendered under Section 17 of Republic Act 9851," he added.

The measure states that relevant Philippine authorities may "dispense with the investigation or prosecution of a crime" if another court or international tribunal is already conducting the investigation or undertaking the prosecution of such crime. Instead, the authorities may "surrender or extradite suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the appropriate international court."

Special envoy cited in contempt

As the panel questioned Special Envoy on Transnational Crime Markus Lacanilao, Dela Rosa expressed his dissatisfaction with the earlier's answers on the circumstances surrounding Duterte's arrest.

The senator cited Lacanilao in contempt, accusing the special envoy of lying about not knowing that Duterte was not brought to a competent court on the day of his arrest despite overseeing the matter.

"Nandoon ka the whole time. Galing sa tube hanggang doon sa Villamor, nandoon ka. 'Di mo pa rin alam na 'di siya dinala sa judicial authority?" Dela Rosa asked Lacanilao.

"Siya nag-oversee sa operation tapos hindi niya alam kung dinala o hindi?"

Lacanilao was earlier grilled by lawmakers after it was revealed that he was the one who signed the Transfer of Custody on behalf of the Philippine government, even though he was supposedly representing Interpol, along with several other documents. One of which he did not provide details regarding the date, time, and location of Duterte’s appearance before a competent national judicial authority.

Duterte's arrest

Duterte 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 Roman Statute."

Specifically, he was allegedly involved in the murder of at least 19 persons reported to be drug pushers or thieves who were killed by members of the Davao Death Squad in various locations in or around Davao City between 2011 and 2016, as well as the murder of at least 24 alleged criminals who were killed by or under the supervision of members of the Philippines law enforcement at various locations in the country between 2016 and 2019 during his term as president.

The ICC is acting based on the principle of complementarity, which means that it only steps in if a state's courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute crimes within their jurisdiction.

Though Duterte withdrew the country's membership from the ICC in 2018, which took effect the following year, the ICC said it still has jurisdiction over crimes that happened while the Philippines was still a member-state.

Duterte arrived in The Hague in the Netherlands on March 12 to face the charges against him.

He could be the first Asian former head of state to be indicted by the ICC.

His pre-trial hearing is on Sept. 23, 2025. If the charges against him are confirmed, it could be months before the case eventually goes on trial, and years before a final judgment is rendered.