Kitty urges SC: Bring back father

The camp of former President Rodrigo Duterte has asked the Supreme Court, through a traverse comment, to bring the former leader back to the Philippines.

Kitty Duterte, through her lawyer Salvador Panelo, claimed her father was “abducted” and argued that local law was insufficient to authorize his transfer to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Netherlands.

She asserted that during the deliberation of Republic Act No. 9851, or the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, in 2009, the Rome Statute had not yet entered into force in the Philippines and the ICC had not acquired its "complementary jurisdiction." She also alleged that the ICC had been weaponized and had violated her father’s rights for political purposes.

The traverse comment pointed out that when the ICC prosecutor submitted a request to investigate the situation in the Philippines on 24 May 2021, the country had already withdrawn from the Rome Statute. The withdrawal took effect on 17 March 2019.

The Department of Justice (DoJ) previously stated that due process was followed in serving the ICC warrant on Duterte, including the reading of his Miranda rights.

Kitty Duterte also cited the dissenting opinion of ICC Judges Perrin de Brichambaut and Gocha Lordkipanidze, who argued that the Pre-Trial Chamber had “erred in law” in concluding that the ICC still had jurisdiction over Duterte.

She further argued that since the ICC did not exercise jurisdiction while the Philippines was still a state party, it had no legal basis to continue its investigation or issue an arrest warrant against her father.

She also referenced the recusal of Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra from representing Philippine government officials in the Supreme Court, citing the ICC’s lack of jurisdiction over the country.

“The OSG’s recusal is a clear indication that FPRRD’s (Duterte) abduction and transfer to The Hague pursuant to the ICC arrest warrant was illegal and indefensible,” Kitty said.

She rejected the government’s claim that the arrest warrant was executed through the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), invoking the Latin maxim nemo potest facere per alium quod non potest facere per directum—meaning no one can do indirectly what they are prohibited from doing directly.

In response, Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla said they would answer all relevant legal arguments raised in the case.

“I stand by everything that we do. The abduction claim is a biased phrase,” he said. “Clearly, the ICC has competent judicial authority over the case.”

According to Supreme Court spokesperson Camille Sue Ting, each of Duterte’s children submitted their own traverse on 24 March, the deadline for filing.