SC asked to hold hearings on habeas petition for Duterte release

THE three children of former Philippine President Rodrigo R. Duterte asked the Supreme Court (SC) to set oral arguments on the consolidated petitions for habeas corpus, seeking the release of the patriarch currently detained at The Hague, in the Netherlands.

In a 14-page petition filed by Veronica A. Duterte through her lawyer, former Presidential Spokesman Salvador S. Panelo, the Duterte siblings said there are “compelling grounds” for the SC to conduct oral arguments, citing “exigent constitutional issues.”

This includes questions on whether Mr. Duterte’s constitutional rights were violated after he was arrested without a warrant issued by a Philippine court, as provided for by the 1987 Constitution.

The petition also noted the separation of powers may have been violated upon recognizing the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

According to the youngest Duterte, oral arguments would enable the SC to directly question the parties on these constitutional questions, and “on the balance between the Executive’s discretion in foreign affairs and the Judiciary’s role in safeguarding constitutional rights and checks and balances.”

She said this could set a precedent for future cases, involving “individual liberties, the jurisdiction of foreign tribunals, and international cooperation.”

Following Mr. Duterte’s arrest on March 11, his children filed separate petitions for habeas corpus before the top court, challenging its legality and questioning ICC’s jurisdiction. They sought his immediate release, asserting his arrest violated constitutional rights and due process.

Moreover, Ms. Duterte questioned whether the Philippine government could bypass the SC’s authority to issue a writ of habeas corpus by merely relocating an individual to another country.

“Oral arguments would allow this Honorable Court to probe the jurisdictional limits of a writ of habeas corpus and the enforceability of its writ on respondents within this Honorable Court’s jurisdiction, even when their actions extend beyond our national borders,” she added.

The government earlier claimed the petitions were moot as it can no longer produce Mr. Duterte’s body because he is already in the Netherlands.

Ms. Duterte again cited ICC’s jurisdiction, challenging the legality of the Philippine President’s move to recognize or confer jurisdiction to the ICC, adding the oral arguments could address whether this could be tantamount to making the Rome statute effective without Senate concurrence or not.

Mr. Duterte was arrested at the request of the ICC for alleged crimes against humanity, linked to his controversial anti-drug campaign.

Government data showed the deadly drug war resulted in over 6,000 deaths, but human rights groups estimate the toll could be as high as 30,000.

The ICC’s warrant asserts that there are reasonable grounds to believe Mr. Duterte is responsible for murder as a crime against humanity, committed between Nov. 1, 2011, and March 16, 2019. This period encompasses his tenure as both Davao City mayor and President of the Philippines.

Following his arrest, Mr. Duterte was transferred to The Hague, where he remains in ICC custody awaiting trial.

The tough-talking leader has consistently denied the allegations, maintaining that his actions were aimed at protecting Filipinos and upholding national sovereignty.

He has questioned the ICC’s jurisdiction, citing the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2019, under his administration.

Meanwhile, the SC on Tuesday directed lawyer Raul Lambino to show cause within ten days after he falsely claimed the SC issued a temporary restraining order against the arrest of Mr. Duterte.

The SC noted Mr. Lambino’s false claim caused “public confusion and misled the people about the SC’s actions,” according to a press briefer.

EXPERTS NEEDED
Also on Tuesday, the Palace urged Senator Maria “Imee” Imelda R. Marcos to seek the help of more international law experts amidst the Senate’s continuing probe into the legality of the arrest of Mr. Duterte after the lawmaker questioned details provided by Cabinet members on the incident.

“It would be better — this is just a suggestion since it was asked, not an order — to invite more international law experts to shed light on the matter,” Presidential Communications Office Undersecretary Clarissa A. Castro told a news briefing.

“Perhaps, through the opinions of other international law experts and lawyers, she may not need other Cabinet members to draft laws.”

Senate President Francis G. Escudero on Sunday said officials and Cabinet officials would be attending the third Senate hearing on the arrest after some of them opted to skip the previous hearing.

Executive Secretary Lucas P. Bersamin earlier invoked executive privilege for the officials invited to the probe.

Reelectionist Senator Marcos has earlier withdrawn from administration-backed Alyansa Para sa Bagong Pilipinas, citing differences in the administration’s actions regarding the arrest of the tough-talking leader.

Ms. Castro had denied officials hid information about Mr. Duterte’s arrest before the Senate probe, adding that officials had providing the “necessary information.” — Chloe Mari A. Hufana and John Victor D. Ordoñez