11/03/2025
A discussion on the ICC Arrest of Ex-President Duterte
In the 2021 case of Pangilinan vs Cayetano, the Supreme Court held that “withdrawing from the Rome Statute does not discharge a state party from the obligations it has incurred as a member.”
The International Criminal Court is complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. According to Article 4 of the Rome Statute, it has international legal personality which means it has the legal capacity to do all acts as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. It has the power to exercise its functions and powers on the territory of any State Party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other State.
The ICC’s jurisdiction is limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. It has jurisdiction on crimes of Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes and crimes of aggression.
Citing the the ICC Warrant of Arrest No.: ICC-01/21, Dated 7th of March 2025, the ICC recognizes that while the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Statute took effect on 17th of March 2019, the Court retains jurisdiction with respect to the alleged crimes that occurred on the territory of the Philippines while it was a State party, from 1st of November 2011 up to and including 16th of March 2019. The Court reiterates that its jurisdiction and mandate is exercised in accordance with the provisions of the Rome Statute, an international treaty to which the Philippines was a party at the time of the alleged crimes for which the investigation was authorised. The prevalent provision is paragraph 2, Article 127 of the Rome Statute which 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. 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.”
In connection to Duterte’s warrant of arrest, he was charged with Crimes Against Humanity. According to Article 7 of the Rome Statute, the following acts are considered as “Crimes Against Humanity” - Widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
A. Murder
B. Extermination
C. Enslavement
D. Deportation or forcible transfer of population
E. Imprisonment or other sever deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law
F. Torture
G. R**e, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity
H. Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court.
I. Enforced disappearance of persons
J. The crime of apartheid
K. Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health
The ICC Warrant of Arrest No.: ICC-01/21, Dated 7th of March 2025, stated that Former President Rodrigo Roa Duterte is an alleged indirect co-perpetrator for murder, torture and r**e.
