EDITORIAL - Reasonable basis

The International Criminal Court has not yet started a full-blown investigation of possible crimes against humanity in the Philippines under President Duterte. Instead the ICC is still in the process of completing a “preliminary examination” to determine if there is “reasonable basis” to proceed with an investigation.

When the ICC formally notified the Philippine government about the preliminary examination, administration officials expressed confidence that the court would not find that “reasonable basis.” Apart from insisting that drug-related deaths were part of legitimate law enforcement operations, government officials stressed that legal remedies for human rights abuses continued to function in the country, which means the ICC has no reason to step in.

Those points are simple enough to explain to the ICC. The government can cite cases filed against police officers in connection with drug killings, and congressional inquiries into the deaths. A formal complaint filed against Duterte by a self-confessed member of a death squad that allegedly operated in Davao cites executions that occurred when Duterte was still mayor of the city. Administration officials not only deny the accusations but also stress that the ICC cannot have jurisdiction over alleged incidents that occurred long before Duterte became President.

The government maintained that defending the President and his drug war before the ICC would be a walk in the park. Instead, however, the President has decided to walk away from the preliminary probe, bringing along with him the country and its ratification of the Rome Statute.

While the Philippines is not the first country to withdraw from the ICC or signify its intent to do so, the circumstances of the withdrawal inevitably create the impression that the President is not as confident of his defense as his mouthpieces paint him to be, and he is simply trying to evade a full-blown probe.

The preliminary examination will continue, as stipulated under Article 127 of the Rome Statute, which specifically states that it will take a year before a state’s withdrawal can take effect. A withdrawal also does not automatically discharge the state from its obligations under the statute, or from cooperating with criminal and other investigations launched before the withdrawal was initiated.

If the government is confident that it is doing the right thing and it has nothing to hide, it should be able to defend this before the ICC. Having the court officially declare that there is no basis for a formal probe, or that it has no jurisdiction over the country, is the best validation of the government’s position.