House to share findings vs Du30 if asked by ICC
Despite the Marcos administration’s continuing policy of noncooperation with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the case of former President Rodrigo Duterte, House leaders are now willing to share the findings of the chamber’s recent inquiry into his bloody war on drugs—if asked by the tribunal.
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, House Assistant Majority Leader and AKO Bicol Rep. Raul Angelo Bongalon said that should the ICC request documents from the House quad committee for use in Duterte’s case, “most likely the committee will follow that subpoena.”
“Even if the Philippines is no longer a party because of [its] withdrawal, the ICC has already acquired jurisdiction over this case, [and] the testimonies of the witnesses who appeared before this committee investigations are publicly available,” said Bongalon, a lawyer.
The country’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute, the treaty binding ICC members, took effect on March 17, 2019, during the Duterte presidency.
“But if they really want the testimonies, the official transcript as well as other pieces of evidence, of course in adherence to a subpoena, probably the committee will comply,” Bongalon said.
ICC obligations
He added that the quad committee findings would “probably enlighten the judges of the ICC to have more evidence for the trial against the former president.”
The committee hearings, which ran from August 2024 to January 2025, dissected the conduct of the Duterte antidrug campaign that left thousands dead.
The 79-year-old Duterte was arrested by the Philippine National Police at the request of the Interpol on Tuesday and was flown hours later to The Hague. It marked the first time a former Asian head of state was handed over to the ICC, where Duterte is accused of committing crimes against humanity in waging the brutal, six-year antinarcotics campaign.
The House quad committee, chaired by Surigao del Norte Rep. Robert Ace Barbers, was initially averse to giving the ICC any material from its hearings, citing the Marcos administration’s policy of noncooperation in view of the 2019 withdrawal.
Deputy Majority Leader and Tingog Rep. Jude Acidre on Wednesday said the House members would defer to the decision of the chairs of the four committees that conducted the probe.
Acidre said the panel chairs would likely consider the 2021 ruling in Pangilinan v. Cayetano, where the Supreme Court affirmed the government’s continuing obligations to the ICC despite the withdrawal from the Rome Statute.
Probe findings
In December last year, Barbers presented the quad committee’s first progress report which recommended that Duterte, along with his allies Senators Christopher Go and Ronald dela Rosa, be held accountable for crimes against humanity.
According to the report, they could be charged with this crime under a Philippine law, Republic Act No. 9851, for the drug war killings.
It said the charge would be based on the conclusion that the crackdown saw “a profound and systematic violation of (the victims’) inherent rights to life and dignity.”
“It’s still up to the administration, but considering that the ICC has already acquired jurisdiction over this case and we have to emphasize that the charges filed against the former president are crimes against humanity, [over which] the ICC has jurisdiction,” Bongalon added. “And if the ICC felt that there’s no genuine prosecution of these particular allegations, then definitely the ICC would come in.”
“Even if I would have preferred a domestic court to look into the case, I have all the respect for the competence of the judges of the [ICC],” Acidre said. “I’m sure that justice will be served under their watch.”
He said it may be “uncomfortable” to defer to ICC procedures, but “you have to put it in the entire context—because during the time of the Dutertes, it was difficult to file charges, difficult to find a lawyer to defend someone.”
Damning evidence
Among the quad committee’s key findings directly involving Duterte were as follows:
• His alleged meeting with his then special assistant Go, then Davao police chief Dela Rosa, and former Cebu police official Royina Garma on how to scale up the so-called Davao model of the drug war for national application;
• The alleged existence of a rewards system for the killings and the use of “narco-lists” to target political enemies.
• Duterte’s statements before the House and a parallel Senate inquiry that he was taking full responsibility for the killings and that rewards were indeed paid. For Acidre, it was “strongest and most compelling evidence” that the ICC may consider.
• The ex-president’s claim that he killed six or seven “criminals” when he was still Davao City mayor.
In a separate statement sent to the Inquirer, Acidre further explained: “When a public official speaks under oath, every word carries weight—whether it’s a direct admission, a revealing statement, or even a slip of the tongue.’’
“His own words, spoken in an official capacity, could provide critical insight into the policies, orders, and intent behind the war on drugs, as well as its consequences.” INQces.”
