SC rejects Bato plea seeking copy of ICC ‘arrest warrant’
The Supreme Court rejected Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa’s very urgent motion seeking to compel the Ombudsman to produce the warrant reportedly issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for his arrest.
In a full-court session on Tuesday, the justices denied Dela Rosa and former President Rodrigo Duterte’s motion asking that Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla immediately submit the alleged ICC warrant “which he publicly admitted having in his possession on his personal mobile phone.”
The high court instead directed the respondent government officials to comment on a separate manifestation also filed by Dela Rosa and Duterte, which seeks to compel the Department of Justice and Department of Foreign Affairs to submit written certifications either confirming or denying the existence of any ICC-related warrant.
They were also ordered to comment on the petitioners’ prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop the government from enforcing any ICC order.
‘Coperpetrator’
“Acting on these submissions, the SC denied the Very Urgent Motion seeking to compel the production of the alleged ICC warrant. It directed respondents to comment on the Very Urgent Manifestation, through personal service and filing, within a non-extendible period of 10 days from notice,” the spokesperson said.
The motion and manifestation separately filed last week stemmed from the main petition challenging Duterte’s arrest and turnover on March 11 to The Hague in the Netherlands, where he is facing charges of crimes against humanity over his brutal antidrug campaign.
Dela Rosa, who has been accused as a coperpetrator in the case, turned to the Supreme Court on Nov. 12, a few days after Remulla disclosed that he had obtained a copy of the ICC arrest warrant against the senator.
The lawmaker argued that the former justice secretary’s pronouncement constituted a “confession of possession of evidence” material to the main case, particularly on issues raised such as “actual, imminent, and credible threat of arrest,” whether Republic Act No. 9851 allows arrest or surrender, and whether Manila remained bound by the Rome Statute, the treaty establishing the ICC.
Reason not indicated
The Supreme Court did not indicate the reason why it denied Dela Rosa’s very urgent motion.
But according to lawyer Israelito Torreon, they will ask the high tribunal to reconsider its decision.
“As a lawyer and an officer of the court, [Remulla] should be made to explain as to why he has a copy of the alleged warrant, from whom he secured the same and under what authority was his source able to secure a copy of the warrant,” Torreon said in a statement on Tuesday.
Kitty’s separate plea
In a related development on Tuesday, the counsel of Veronica “Kitty” Duterte, one of the daughters of the ex-president, filed an urgent motion before the Supreme Court seeking the immediate resolution of the pending habeas corpus petitions that asked to compel the government to facilitate her father’s return from The Hague.
The Panelo Law Office urged the tribunal to “urgently resolve” the consolidated petitions and direct Philippine government officials to bring Duterte home from the ICC.
Two other Duterte children, Davao City Rep. Paolo Duterte and Davao City Mayor Sebastian Duterte, separately filed habeas corpus petitions a day after their father was arrested and turned over to the ICC on March 11.
Veronica cited the more than 200 days of “inaction” from the Supreme Court, noting that despite the parties’ compliance with the tribunal’s directives, its last action on the case was on April 8 when it “merely noted” the motion to set the case for oral arguments.
“Such prolonged inaction does not only amount to a denial of the very liberty the writ seeks to protect, it also diminishes public faith in the judiciary’s role to provide effective relief against Executive violations of fundamental rights,” her motion read.
