Ayaw ng Marcos administration na pumasok ang International Criminal Court para papanagutin ang mga promotor ng Duterte drug war. Suggestion ni SolGen Menardo Guevarra, bumuo ng isang independent panel na mag-iimbestiga. Uubra naman kaya ito?

Video Transcript / Subtitles:( AI generated. About AI subtitles » )

* AI ("Artificial Intelligence") subtitles on Tagalog.com are generated using "Whisper" by OpenAI (the same company that created ChatGPT and DallE2). Results and accuracy may vary.
* The subtitles do include errors occasionally and should only be used as a tool to help with your listening practice.
* You can request this website to create a transcript for a video if one doesn't already exist by clicking the "Request AI Subtitles" button below a video. Transcribing usually takes 30-40% of the length of a video to complete if there are no other videos in the queue. For example, a 21 minute video will take 7-8 minutes to transcribe.
* Running a super fast cloud GPU server to do these transcriptions does cost money. If you have the desire and financial ability, consider becoming a patron to support these video transcriptions, and the other tools and apps built by Tagalog.com

No lies. No distortions. Just the facts. And the truth about issues that matter.

Facts Verse with Christian Esguerra.

Good evening guys. Welcome to tonight's episode of Facts Verse. Ako po si Christian Esguerra.

Monday. Welcome po sa inyong lahat. Start of the week. At sana ay maging maganda po yung buong linggo para sa ating lahat po. Okay?

Ngayong gabi pag-uusapan po natin yung development po dito sa International Criminal Court. Okay?

So nag-resume na po yung formal investigation ng International Criminal Court. Ito po yung nakabase sa The Hague, sa The Netherlands.

Doon po sa conduct ng drug war. Noong panahon po ni dating Presidente Rodrigo Duterte.

Ngayon dito po sa Pilipinas, hindi po alam natin kung ano po yung gagawin pagdating po doon sa response.

Kasi ginegate po ng Marcos administration officials na hindi sila magko-cooperate doon sa investigation ng ICC dahil ang claim nila ay sovereignty issue daw po ito.

At meron daman daw po silang ginagawa or pwedeng gawin dito at hindi daw kailangan pumasok ng International Criminal Court.

At kamakailan meron po isang panayam sa CNN Philippines I think, si Solicitor General Minardo Guevara.

Ang kanya pong proposal ay magtayo po ng isang independent panel para investigahan itong mga nangyaring pagpatay doon po sa kaugnay po sa drug war ni dating Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte.

Pero ang sagot naman po doon ni Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, hindi daw po siya pabor doon. Okay?

So mag-usapan natin ano ba pwede natin mapaladyan kung sakali matuloy man yung independent panel investigation at magiging credible kaya yan.

Makakasama natin ngayong gabi si Atty. Gilbert Andres ng Center for International Law. Magandang gabi sir and thank you for joining us again dito po sa Facts Verse.

Good evening Christian and good evening to our viewers sa Facts Verse.

Sir medyo mahina po yatan dati nyo. Pwede ba nating lakasan?

Hello? Hello? Okay na ba?

Sa akin medyo mahina yung dating. Sa mga nakikinig medyo mag-comment kayo kung natin dinig niyo si Atty. Gilbert Andres.

Hello? Atty. Mas okay na ba?

Parang ganun din. Pero sige turin natin. Ano ba yung mga nanonood sa atin? Malino ba sa inyo? Okay sige turin natin.

Inga sir ano ba ang tingin nyo rito? May mapupura ba tayo dito sa kung sakali matuloy man yung independent panel na pinapropose or actually since last year pa rao, ito yung proposal ni Sir. Gen. Minardo Guevara?

Well it would be problematic for the government kasi may mga negative implications ito. Ano yung mga negative implications for the government?

Number one, it means that our system is really not working and it means that there was really no investigation.

An investigation that will mirror the investigation that the ICC is conducting. Kasi yun naman talaga yung point ng ICC decision to reopen the investigation.

Number two, is the Philippines mirroring yung mga investigation na the ICC will do? Ano ba ibig sabihin na the Philippines is mirroring?

In the first place, is the Philippines investigating yung mga high level public officers who might be responsible for crimes against humanity?

And is the Philippines actually investigating to the point that it will lead to criminal prosecution?

So ang i-imply actually ni Sol Gen Guevara is that it didn't happen under the Duterte administration. Because if there's a need for an independent commission, so meaning to say wala, walang nangyayari ng Duterte administration na investigation that mirrors the ICC investigation.

Okay. So ito yung binabanggit siya na dapat high level yung investigation na ginagawa. Ibig sabihin na high level yung mga opisyal na dapat covered nung investigation.

Pero ito may argument na ganito. Eh kasi tinutumbok naman talaga rito sa drug war na ito si dating Pangolong Rodrigo Duterte.

So reasonably, how could you expect the previous administration to conduct such a high level investigation kung ang pasimuno ng drug war sa mata ng mga biktima at marami ay yung presidente mismo?

Well, understandable. But if there's really an honest to goodness investigation during the Duterte administration, it should at least start with the PNP hierarchy.

Because in fact, the PNP admits that there were more or less 6,000 people killed during their police drug war operations.

So at least yung PNP hierarchy at the time. Who was that? Well, the PNP, Dela Rosa for example. And then the commands, NCRPO.

And then the civilian, the hierarchy like the ILG secretary.

So even if there's an immunity against it for the president at that time during the Duterte administration, it's no excuse. Kasi pwede yung high level or civilian officers who might be responsible for those crimes against humanity.

Siguro ang tanong din Atty. Although si Sgt. Guevara na rin yung gagsabi, iniintay pa niya yung signals coming from the current administration, from the current political leadership,

talagang bibigyan ng go signal itong kanyang proposal na magkaroon ng isang independent panel. Actually naka-draft na nga ro executive order.

Pero yan, sakali matuloy ito, would it make any difference at this stage na nag-iimbestiga formally ang ICC?

Well, it won't make any, wala siyang effect dapat sa ICC investigation. Bakit? In the first place, the investigation should have happened noong time ng Duterte administration.

Kasi in fact, yun yung mga reasons ng ICC pretrial chamber to reopen. Kasi walang investigation at that time that mirrors the investigation that the ICC is conducting.

So dapat, it should be reckoned at that time. So kailan ba yun? When? 2021, if I'm not mistaken. I think sometime September or October 2020.

That's when the ICC actually authorized the office of the prosecutor to make an investigation into the Philippine situation. So dapat noong time yun.

Ibi sabihin, there's no difference. Ibi sabihin, pwede kasing ganoon yung argument. Siya kayang presidente noon. Iba na yung presidente ngayon na sakaling ayaw din talagang pasukin o talagang yan ang position nila.

They don't want the ICC to enter. Paano kung magkaroon, to be fair, although this is hypothetical pa rin, kung magkaroon ng honest to goodness investigation ngayon under the Marcos administration, still that won't stop or shouldn't stop the ICC investigation?

It should not stop. Kasi yun nga, there's a jurisprudence sa ICC na it should be reckoned at that time when it was being considered by the ICC.

At it should be reckoned at that time. Yung investigation dapat ng Philippines should be reckoned at that time when it was requesting for the suspension.

When did the Philippines actually request for a suspension? I think sometime November of 2021 if I'm not mistaken. So that was the golden chance of the Philippines under the Duterte administration.

But it seems that they're actually admitting that they did not do it. An honest to goodness investigation that will mirror the ICC investigation.

So pag sinabi-mirror at sinabi niyong high level, how far up there in the hierarchy?

Sabi niyo kanina kasi, ang tanong ko diyan, kung ang pinaka-suspect diyan si President Duterte, paano ka makakapag-conduct ng high level investigation na siya yung tutumbukin?

Pero ngayon, hindi na siya yung presidente. Siya yung nakaupo. Understandable yun. Pero sabi niyo pwedeng PNP. Pero ngayon, hindi na siya yung presidente. May sabihin dapat ganoon na kataas ang coverage ng isang investigation.

So ganoon na kataas. Who are the people who are potentially responsible for implementing that policy? Kasi sa Crimes Against Humanity, hindi lang isahan, dalawahan. It's really a policy that's being implemented by the state. At sino ba yung mga nagsalita? Sino ba yung nambuyo? Sino ba yung nagpisip? So hanggang saan yan?

So kasama yan? Kasama ang enablers, planners, instigators? So sino yung responsible for the overall policy of extrajudicial killings in the war against drugs?

Pag-occupy sa Ukraine? Although ang tanong nga dito, meron bang mekanismo? Kasi kanina or yesterday, parang nagpakita naman siya parang ang basa ko, he was mocking the ICC. Punta siya rin sa Mariupol yung Ukrainian territory na occupied ng Russia ngayon.

So wala naman umbareso sa kanya at wala naman ginawa yung Ukraine. I mean ito bang ganito arrest warrant na yan? Should that somehow embolden or give more hope or optimism for those here in the Philippines who want the same to happen to former President Duterte?

Or baka far-fetched yan? Of course it's a source of hope on two grounds. Number one, it means that even incumbent sitting heads of state and heads of government are actually criminally responsible to the ICC.

No less than sitting Russian President Vladimir Putin. Matakin mo yan, sitting president yan. So how much more a former president? And then number two, in fact a head of state or a head of government cannot use it as a defense to be just to escape criminal liability.

Hindi po siya defense lalo na kung it's an international crime such as crimes against humanity or genocide or war crimes or aggression.

Well first it's really a legal process. Let's remind ourselves that the ICC is really a working court. So that's the first step, yung arrest warrant. Number two, you're right on that Christian. There is no, let's just say that wala namang international yung ICC sheriff who will serve that.

But there's actually an example there, si Al Bashir, na for tulong nagkaroon ng standing arrest warrant for him. But there's an implication actually for an arrest warrant, a practical implication.

Ibig sabihin Vladimir Putin cannot anymore go outside of Russia and occupied Ukraine. Kasi there might be friendly governments who will just surrender him to the jurisdiction of the ICC.

So yun yung mga practical implications for heads of state who have a standing warrant of arrest with the ICC. So they have limited mobility.

Ang naisip ko dyan, Atty. Gilbert. Tama yan, ganyan din yung basa ng marami. Limited yung mobility. So huwag kang magkakamaling pumunta sa isang state na pwedeng ilaglag ka, arrestohin ka at isuko ka sa ICC.

Because I think maka naman magkiaiba yung case ni former President Duterte and Vladimir Putin. Kasi very powerful yung si Putin hanggang ngayon. So I think even if he goes out of Russia,

for example sa mga kaibigang bansa or even not so friendly, mas mahirap pa rin pagdinambot siya because of Russia. It's very powerful.

Si President Duterte, wala naman siyang ganoon situation. I don't think he would bother going outside of the Philippines. Siguro mas natamaan ito yung kanyang mga underlings ng panahon na yan.

Q1. Asuming maglabas ang arrest warrant kay Sen. Bato de la Rosa, I think pwede silang habulin in other respects, tama po ba?

A1. Yes. Agree ako dyan Christian. So yan talagang effect. Hindi sila lalabas ng Pilipinas.

Q1. Pero kasi pinatanong din yan sa Sen. Bato de la Rosa para sinasabi na hindi papayag yung Pilipinas na pumunta rito sa ICC para arrestuhin sila kung sakali man.

How do you enforce that aside from simply limiting their movement? Friendly sa kadali yung current administration, sila yung nakaipok?

A1. May mechanism pag nandun sila sa territory ng isang state party, the state party can actually enforce it, yung arrest warrant. Or this is really far-fetched, there are also regional mechanisms.

For example, may isang accused sa Africa, may organization of African states, African Union, Philippines naman, Malabuyan. So there are certain mechanisms.

Actually, tinumbok mo na Christian yung issues on international criminal law, how to enforce an arrest warrant. That's the starting point. So makita mo dito yung interplay ng international law at international relations.

Sometimes it's very complex yung pag-serve at pag-effect ng arrest warrant. So we just have to reckon with it and we just have to think for creative ways how to implement it.

At least naisulat sa papel, may lagda na ikaw pinapa-aresto ka. Malaking moral victory yan of course. Part na rin yan ng victim's rights, yung access to justice na nakikita nila ay mayo naman pala nag-work na international justice system, ay mayo naman palang arrest warrant na na-issue. So part pa yan ng victim's rights, yung access to justice.

Paano pala yung, recently merong police na na-convict in connection sa pag-summary execute dun kay Kulot at kasama niya several years ago, early during the drug war. So panibagong conviction na naman.

Baka naman i-argue ng Philippine government, ito may nangyayari. Hindi ganoon kabilis as you would want the process to proceed. Pero at least meron mga na-convict. Tumatakbo yung proseso. Can that be an argument against the complementarity principle?

Q1. Kung unwilling and unable to genuinely prosecute yung state party sa tratado, pwede man gamitin argument dyan? May na-convict recently?

A1. No. These are just low-level police officers. They're not the ones who are responsible for implementing a policy of extrajudicial killings. So it will actually prove the point that these are just low-level and it doesn't mirror the ICC investigation.

Talagang walang masama kung sabihin yung pagpapatayin yung mga addict na yan dahil yung mga addict na yan pinapatay o sinisira yung buhay ng maraming Pilipino. So okay lang na, di ba sinasabi lagi yung dating presidente, bakit illegal sa kanya na sabihin patayin yung mga criminal na yan kung talagang sila yung...

Again, two points. Number one, yung right to life is so important. It's the most fundamental human rights. Kung walang right to life, useless lahat ng human rights. And because the right to life is the most important human rights, there's a presumption if someone is killed in a police operation,

there's a presumption that there was something fishy, there was something irregular. Kasi dapat walang namamatay di ba sa isang police operation. So in fact, shift yung burden. The burden is on the police officers who conducted the police operation to prove that the killing was done in a way that's legitimate.

Kasi yun nga, right to life. So in fact, dapat mga police officers yung mga ininvestiga kung may namamatay ko sa isang police operation. Just like what happened in the war on drugs, at least 6,000 people killed. So hindi dapat rason na addict ipatayin because of the right to life.

Number two, and if we look at the international development, drugs is seen as a health issue. Not as a medical enforcement issue. Kasi kung addict yan, edi rehabilitate. Ganoon na ngayon. It's a health issue na.

So I think it starts with the wrong premise, yung sinasabi ng under 30 administration.

Timing. Pregnant with assumptions. Sobrang taba ng assumptions sa dalawang bagay na yan. Addict yan, kaya dapat patayin. Unang una dapat, paano ibang nalaman kung addict? Hindi siya dumaan sa proseso.

So paano kunwari itong, sabihin natin si Bravo Koy, o Brave Koy ba ito? Hindi ko masyadong nababasa. Bravo. Sabi niya, takbo ka presidente, tingnan natin galing mo. Ginagawa mo lang content si Duterte. Ah ganoon ba?

Unfortunately, hindi niya nare-realize ang value ng mga discussions. Unwari, si Bravo K. Sabihin natin, pinagbintangan siya, o ikaw addict ka, tapos bigla siya pinatay.

Pwede bang argument yun? Addict naman yan. Sino nagsabi? Sabi ng administration, nilagay sa drug list. Paano ikaw Bravo meron ka nakaaway na barangay captain, nilagay ka sa listahan niya sa drug list, tapos bigla kang tinambangan?

I think yan ang dapat pinapaliwanag sa mga tao.

Or ang kapamilya, paano rin ang kapatid mo? Biglang sinuspensya, wala namang ebidensya, wala namang proseso. Alam mo sa mga Pilipino nagiging reality ang isang legal norm, isang prinsipyo ng bakas kung nangyari sa kapamilya o sa kapatid.

Q1. Would you agree nabawasan o nawalan ng kaluloy ang maraming Pilipino because of this vicious drug war?

Q2. Parang ganyan din ba yung reading? Parang nabawasan ang pagiging tao natin dito sa karanasan na ito?

That's the first step to violating human rights. Kasi kung hindi tao na yan, wala nang right to life yan. But in fact, in international human rights law, a human being should always be recognized as a person before the law.

So hindi nawawalan ang pagkatao ng isang tao, ano man gawin niya, tao pa rin yan.

... Kasi parang hanggang ngayon wala naman silang pakialam sa karapat ng pantao. Siguro unless tanggalin natin ang karapat nilang mag-comment sa YT o mag-access ng FB na nila maririalize, Uy karapatan ko yan ba tinatanggal mo? O karapatan gumawa ng fake accounts. Bakit parang hirap ipaintindi ng human rights sa kanila?

Para maintindihan. Kailangan ma-experience ng isang kamag-anak. Kasi kung hindi, parang mga abstract concepts lang ito. When in fact these are real life. May mga implication ito sa buhay. Yan yung challenge sa Pinoy. Kailangan concrete siya.

... Purely politics lang yan. Siguro maganda i-review mo rin ang pronouncements ng Pangulo. Dating Pangulo naman nakaraan na yan. Although binago niya ng konti pronouncements siya. Nung una kung walang...

... Ang patayin mo pa rin. May mga ganun siya statements.

... He was pronouncing that policy explicitly.

... That's policy. Di kailangan nakakapapil pag sinabi niya policy na yan. And when President Duterte says that, he doesn't say it in a very lackadaisical way. Kasi abogado siya. Alam niya mga legal implications ng mga sinasabi. Kaya hindi niya pwedeng sabihing joke lang, hindi pwedeng ganun bawian.

... Hindi pwedeng ganun kasi Presidente siya. Tignan mo naman yung tone, yung context nung sinabi niya yan. Napaka-serious siya. Wala siyang sinabi after sinabi niya na joke lang. Walang sinabing punchline.

... Ito magkikwento ako. May naalala ako. Kasi hindi ko nalang babanggit ikaw sino itong local official. Mayroon dati pinag-inita na local official si President Duterte. Tapos tinanong ko yung kaalyado niya na mataas din yung position sa gobyerno hanggang ngayon.

... Sabi ko, sir talaga bang sankot sa droga? At ano ibig sabihin ng involvement niya sa droga? Kasi nasa drug list eh. Ikakilala siya nung tinatanong ko. Sabi, ang kwento rin sa kanya, yung local official na napag-inita ng Presidente na time na yan, may kaalyadong barangay captain na na-link sa illegal drugs sa probinsya niya.

... Para sabihin, ikaw mismo involved ko sa drugs, yung local official na yan. At yun pinag-initan. Walang due process yan kasi bulong-bulong lang yan. I remember early during the Duterte administration may local officials na binabanggit niya yung pangalan nasa drug list at yung iba nung pumipida sa kanya para magpaliwanag, hindi kami involved.

... I remember there was one official kasi nandun ako sa isang forum na nandun yung local official. Sabi ko, sir ba't nandito kayo? Nagbabaka sa akali siya may makakausap siya from Malacanang na magiging conduit sa Presidente dahil gusto niya magpaliwanag. Kasi natatakot siya baka patayin siya susunod. So walang due process di ba?

Q1. Ang ganyang situations na yan, pwede rin bang anuhin yan? Can that be used against a former president sa ICC?

... So baka pinapolitika rin. So yun nga yung challenge dun. Kaya kailangan may due process talaga para alam natin patas. May rights of doctors at mayroong proseso para sabihin na dapat i-charge yan under the Dangerous Drugs Act."

Q1. Kung ayaw nilang papasukin yung ICC because they have their own reasons, pero meron ba nakikita promising signals na baka meron talagang mangyaring honest to goodness investigation niya yan? Kasi hindi siya necessarily makakapaghinto ng proseso sa ICC?

Q1. Kung hindi sakup sa ICC? Lalo na lahat ng namatay sa mga police operations? Kasi that's really within the power of this present administration. Yung mga individual cases na yan, 6,000 more or less. That's within their power.

So kung mga high level, nasa ICC na yan. And secondly, it's really yung reckoning. At the end of the day, talagang may reckoning talaga. There's really a justice system that will reckon with it whether it's international or domestic.

So talagang gawin talaga ang investigation na ito. That will really show the right to life is being respected sa Philippines.

More power to you. More power to you. Ingat po kayo sa pag-uwi niya. Thank you.

Ayan, totoo naman yung sinasabi ni Bravo Coy. Real talk, kung tatakbo ulit ang Presidente, Presidente si Duterte for sure mananalo ulit siya. Ako I agree, mananalo ulit siya kung pwede tumakbo.

Kaso Bravo, medyo i-review mo ng konti yung Constitution. Hindi na siya pwede tumakbo kasi naging Presidente na siya. Hindi siya pinapayagan. Barred na siya from running again for President.

Vice President pwede pero Presidente hindi na pwede. Ayan. Pero totoo yan. I still agree. I agree with you. Very popular pa rin si President Duterte.

Ang problema sa ating mga Pilipino, ang laki ng attachment natin sa popularity ng mga politiko natin to the point na parang sinasanglana natin yung kaliluan natin sa iba sa kanila.

Parang wala na silang magagawang tama. Sabukan natin mag-i-mapanuri. Kahit ano pang political persuasion nyo, kahit sino man yung sinasuportahan yung politiko. Kung nakikita nyo may pagkukulang, e call out nyo.

Kung nakikita nyo na maayos yung ginagawa nila, e purihin nyo. Yan nga lang, hindi po trabaho yan ang nasa media para himurin yung behind kung kasino-sinong mga politiko.

Kasi hindi natin trabaho to make them look good. Trabaho yan ng mga PR practitioners nila at siguro ng mga supporters nila.

Pero pagdating po sa ordinary citizens, ito kasi minsan ang baba ng bar natin. Pag ang isang public official ginawa niya yung trabaho niya, marami sa atin pumapalakpak. Alam nyo yung palakpak na pang noontime show yung gumagano.

Galing si Mayor nagpagawa ng kalsada o pinakolekta yung basura. Pag inisip nyo, pinapalakpakan nyo rin ba yung security guard pag binantayan niya yung ito sa isang opisina o eskwelahan during his shift?

Kinokoronahan nyo rin ba? Hinihimod nyo rin ba? Siyempre hindi kasi inisip nyo, ginagawa lang naman yung trabaho niya. O yung ATM machine, papalakpak pa tayong ganun, ATM machine, naglabas ng pera, nakapag-withdraw ako.

Hindi natin ginagawa yan. Pero sa mga politiko, ginagawa ng marami sa atin yan. Bakit? Kasi very personalistic tayo. Pag masyado tayo na-attach sa isang politiko, wala na. Buong kaluluan natin nasa kanila na.

So wala na silang magawang mali. Miss kinapak-obvious na mali. Lagi natin hinahanapan ng justification. Hindi ginawa niya yan kasi ganito. Hindi politika lang yan. Kahit nakita nyo na andami nang nangyari.

So that's it.