CHR to gov’t: Face ICC squarely in respect of due process | Inquirer News

CHR to gov’t: Face ICC squarely in respect of due process

By: - Reporter / @JLeonenINQ
/ 03:51 PM March 16, 2018

The Duterte administration should just show good faith and cooperate with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in its probe into alleged crimes against humanity since withdrawing from the Rome Statute would not even stop the ICC’s investigation.

This was the statement of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) on Friday as it urged the government “to face the ICC squarely in the interest of respecting due process.”

“The call for the Philippine government is to demonstrate good faith and cooperate in the processes of the ICC, including the current preliminary examination of allegations linked to the current administration’s campaign against illegal drugs,” the CHR said in a statement.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Regard for due process also includes accepting that withdrawal from the Rome Statute does not remove the jurisdiction of the Court on crimes alleged to have been committed during the time the Philippines is still a State Party,” it stressed, citing Article 127 of the Rome Statute.

FEATURED STORIES

Article 127 of the Rome Statute 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 to the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued.

Article continues after this advertisement

Its 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, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Duterte does the inevitable, declares PH withdrawal from ICC

Article continues after this advertisement

Moreover, the CHR noted that since the ICC was a “ratified, binding instrument,” Senate concurrence is required in withdrawing or terminating treaties.

The commission cited Senate Resolution No. 289, or the “resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that termination of, or withdrawal from, treaties and international agreements concurred in by the Senate shall be valid and effective only upon concurrence by the Senate.”

Article continues after this advertisement

However, presidential spokesman Harry Roque on Thursday said “there is no obligation to do so,” explaining that the Senate resolution was not yet adopted.

“Is there anything that says that the Executive needs to consult with the Senate when we withdraw from a treaty? None,” he said.

READ: ICC to PH: Don’t quit

But the CHR stressed that ICC would not find any reason to assume jurisdiction over “what should otherwise be purely domestic affairs” if the Philippine government can ably demonstrate genuine respect for human rights.

“Regardless of any treaty, the challenge for the government is to ensure that the human rights of every Filipino is respected and protected,” the CHR said.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

“We must resist any signs that suggest encouraging impunity and continue to demand accountability for every instance of human rights violations that threaten the core of our humanity. In the end, no one is and should be above the law,” it said. /jpv
 

TAGS: CHR, ICC, Rodrigo Duterte

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.