Malacañang acknowledged on Monday that Filipinos in the Philippines may be included under the Executive Order (EO) signed by US President Donald Trump which targets individuals and organizations that assist the International Criminal Court (ICC) in investigating or prosecuting American nationals or its allies.
However, Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Claire Castro said the United States respects the sovereign decisions of its allies and that the EO should not be seen as interfering in Philippine legal proceedings.
“Whatever our country’s prerogatives may be, the US will respect them,” said Castro in Filipino, as she allayed concerns the Philippines could face sanctions if it continues to assist the ICC, particularly in relation to the investigation into former President Rodrigo Duterte’s controversial war on drugs.
The EO’s wording tends to show that any sanctions to be imposed by the US would be against individuals and not countries or governments.
Last month, the Philippine government arrested Duterte and flew him to the ICC in The Hague, Netherlands.
With the EO going into effect on Sunday, concerns were raised that those responsible for the arrest and detention of Duterte may face possible sanctions.
Under the EO, even indirect assistance, such as helping execute arrest warrants related to an ICC investigation, could result in sanctions against those involved, whether they’re government officials, law enforcement agencies, or NGOs lending a hand. The broad language in the EO means that even indirect cooperation could lead to penalties.
Thus sanctions could be meted out to the owner of the chartered plane that flew Duterte to The Hague.
This possibility was raised in the last Senate hearing into Duterte’s arrest by Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, a former Philippine National Police chief and a key figure in the controversial war on drugs during Duterte’s presidency.
Dela Rosa had suggested that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee share its findings with Trump so that the assets of the owner of the plane could be frozen, in line with the EO.
Dela Rosa argued that the role of the plane in assisting the ICC’s actions in the Philippines, despite the ICC having no jurisdiction over the country, warrants such measures under the EO.
Castro, however, justified the government action, citing RA 9851, the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide and Other Crimes Against Humanity. The law, passed in 2009, grants the country the legal authority to investigate and prosecute crimes against humanity, including those committed during Duterte’s war on drugs.
“If our country and government made a decision based on RA 9851 and in cooperation with Interpol, the US will not block that, and they will respect the country’s sovereign prerogatives,” she explained.
The government has maintained that the arrest of Duterte was carried out in accordance with Philippine law, which complies with international legal standards and treaties, including those established by the United Nations.
Castro said there was no need for Dela Rosa to approach the US government for assistance in freezing the aircraft owner’s assets, given the Philippines’ sovereign right to pursue legal actions related to Duterte’s crimes.
“I don’t see any reason for Senator Bato to go to the US to ask for help to freeze the asset of the aircraft owner,” she said.
Castro took time to explain why the Philippines is a “major non-NATO ally,” which grants the country certain privileges but does not make it a full NATO member.
“When we looked at the definition, what appears in paragraph 3 of the EO seems to enumerate countries like Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Argentina, South Korea, New Zealand, and Taiwan. But when we looked at paragraph 7, it says that the term ‘non-NATO ally’ refers to countries designated in accordance with Section 517 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,” Castro said.