The Philippine government has no legal basis to surrender any of its citizens to an international tribunal such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) because there are no existing rules that govern the process, Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa’s legal counsel said on Wednesday.

In a Facebook post, Lawyer Israelito Torreon argued that Section 17 of Republic Act No. 9851, or the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity, cannot be enforced in its current form because it lacks implementing rules and procedures governing the surrender of Filipino citizens to international courts.

Torreon said that while the law allows the Philippines, “in appropriate cases,” to surrender or extradite a person to an international tribunal investigating crimes under the Act, it does not specify the process for doing so.

“No Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) have ever been promulgated by the Department of Justice, the Department of Foreign Affairs, or any other competent authority to define or govern the specific process by which such surrender may be effected,” he wrote.

He explained that the absence of implementing rules means that Section 17 of R.A. 9851 is not self-executing and, therefore, cannot serve as an independent legal authority for the surrender of individuals to international tribunals.

“By its own terms, the statute contemplates further regulation as it explicitly requires that surrender or extradition be carried out pursuant to applicable laws and treaties,” he further stressed.

Torreon pointed out that the “qualifying phrase demonstrates legislative intent that the provision is conditional, not automatic,” and it operates only within a complete and lawful framework of treaty obligations and procedural safeguards.

"The rule of law demands specificity and due process in any measure that affects individual liberty,” he added. 

‘Due process must be observed’

Torreon emphasized that surrendering a Filipino to a foreign or international court is a “grave deprivation of liberty” that must strictly comply with constitutional due process requirements.

“Such an act cannot be founded on a vague statutory clause devoid of procedural implementation,” he said. 

“The Constitution, under Article III, Section 1, prohibits any deprivation of life or liberty without due process of law,” he added. 

Without clear rules, Torreon noted that “any executive action to surrender a Filipino would be constitutionally infirm.”

“Indeed, it is a fundamental principle of administrative and statutory construction that laws conferring coercive powers must be implemented through clear procedural regulations,” he said. 

The lawyer stressed that laws conferring coercive powers—such as those authorizing arrests, extraditions, or surrenders—must include procedural safeguards to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability.