INQUIRER.net FILE PHOTO / Jerome Cristobal
MANILA, Philippines — The Philippine government has asked the International Criminal Court (ICC) to reject the requests of both the relatives of drug war victims and the court’s independent Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) to appear before the tribunal.
In its March 3 submission to the appeals chamber, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) said both requests “fall foul of procedural and substantive requirements which are necessary in these proceedings before the appeals chamber.”
The government’s petition came after relatives of drug war victims invoked their right to object formally to the government’s effort to halt the ICC prosecutor’s investigation of the thousands of drug suspects killed during the term of former President Rodrigo Duterte.
The appeal was signed by some 90 family members and their legal representative whose names were redacted in the copy furnished to the government.
The OSG said the application also removed what the applicants wished to comment on.
Given those missing details, there was no way to discern “who the legal representative is, whether they have authority to represent all 90 applicants, and if so, whether all 90 applicants had been subject to a preliminary assessment,” the OSG said.
“As the appellant, the Philippine government cannot effectively exercise its rights if it is precluded from scrutinizing the submissions of all other participants,” it added.
‘Not a prior participant’
As for the OPCV’s request to appear before the court and represent the victims’ views, the government argued that it has had “no role or involvement in the collection or presentation of the views and concerns of victims.”
Before this, the victims filed their comments with the court’s Victims Participation and Reparations Section (VPRS), which is a separate office, back when the court first sought out the victims’ comments on whether they wanted a full investigation of the charge of crimes against humanity against Duterte.
The VPRS primarily acts as a reference point between victims and the court, while the OPCV may in certain circumstances act directly as legal representative for victims.
The Philippine government argued that the OPCV “fails to establish which specific victims [it] seeks to advance the views of,” adding that there was “no compelling reason nor procedural basis to grant the office leave to participate in proceedings where it was not a prior participant.”
“As such, there is no basis to regard the OPCV as participants in the broader proceedings and no concrete reasons are provided as to why the interests of those victims … should now be represented by the OPCV,” it added.