At a time when the strength and credibility of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is under question, the arrest of former President of the Philippines Rodrigo Duterte on a warrant issued by the ICC is a proof that the international body is needed to bring high profile politicians who have committed crimes against humanity, to book. It also becomes clear that the ICC can become effective only when there is political will in the ruling dispensation of a nation executing its arrest warrant. For, though the ICC had made a tight case for Duterte through its painstaking efforts, the arrest, as in many other cases, would not have taken place had the government of Philippines not shown the resolve to hand him over for trial and flown to The Hague for the purpose. The warrant was executed by the government headed by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., and the decision appears to be a fallout of his serious differences with Vice-President Sara Duterte, Rodrigo Duterte’s daughter who is now facing impeachment proceedings.
While the recent developments may appear swift, the case against Duterte has been meticulously constructed over seven years. In 2018, the ICC initiated a preliminary inquiry into allegations of crimes against humanity committed by Duterte. This led to a full criminal investigation in 2021. To save himself, Duterte withdrew the Philippines from the ICC believing that through that action he would be able to keep himself out of the purview of the court.
Also Read
His arrest has a highly symbolic value for the embattled court because it has been able to demonstrate that it can continue its work and fulfil its mandate while it is under significant pressure from various directions. An evidence of such pressure is the aggressive economic sanctions US President Donald Trump has imposed on the ICC and travel bans on its staff, while the chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, is himself facing an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct, which he obviously denies.
Khan, despite issuing high-profile arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu, Vladimir Putin, and the Taliban’s supreme leader, Hibatullah Akhundzada, has not yet tasted success in securing their arrests. There is pressure on Khan to deliver and the Duterte case may help. However, this process began under his predecessor and there is a team of people which has been putting its best efforts for years. As such the case is not his personal victory.
For the victims of Duterte’s actions, this is a defining moment. The former president’s brazen admissions of various crimes in his so-called war against drugs created the impression that he was untouchable – but now, he is in The Hague, awaiting trial. This also helps make the court appear effective enough though it has to rely on respective countries where the perpetrators reside for arresting them and setting in motion the trial process. It is a good sign that within days of securing the arrest warrant it acted effectively and quickly. Duterte’s arrest should serve as a warning to other leaders. They need to comprehend that their fortunes can change and they too could find themselves being flown to The Hague. However, it proves, as the Duterte case shows, that justice hinges only on the political will of a ruling party leader seizing an opportunity to take down a rival.
Also Read: Watch viral video: Dolphins give Sunita Williams stunning ocean welcome after nine months in space!
The remarkable development in the Philippines makes it clear that arrest warrants for figures such as Putin or Netanyahu may testify to the court’s resolve, but they also lay bare its limitations and impotence since there is no chance of either leader being detained in the near future. Still, Duterte’s arrest is a rare moment for the court to heave a sigh of relief and get legitimacy of its work to make perpetrators of crimes against humanity accountable. This is no mean achievement in the present day and time.
