By Gerome Dalipe IV
The Philippines’ decision to turn over former President Rodrigo Duterte to the International Criminal Court (ICC) does not necessarily indicate a failure of the country’s judicial system, according to retired ICC Judge Raul Pangalangan and other legal experts.
Speaking at a seminar organized by the University of the Philippines (UP) College of Law, Pangalangan explained that the ICC has a self-referral mechanism that allows states with jurisdiction to request the court to take over cases.
“It’s not the equivalent of us saying, ‘Yeah, yeah, yeah, we have a terrible judicial system, and why don’t you do the job for us?’ Of course, it’s possible, but not necessarily,” said Pangalangan, the first and only Filipino to serve as an ICC judge.
He cited Uganda as an example of a country that used this mechanism to have the ICC handle cases that the state preferred not to litigate domestically.
“The self-referral is a mechanism by which a state basically asks the ICC to take over a trial that they prefer not to be litigated within their domestic jurisdiction,” Pangalangan explained.
He emphasized that allowing the ICC to handle Duterte’s case does not automatically reflect poorly on the Philippines’ judicial system.
Judicial Integrity Intact
UP Law Assistant Professor Michael Tiu, head of the UP Institute of International Legal Studies, also stressed that allowing the ICC to proceed does not mean the country’s justice system is broken.
“What you really just want to check is if there is an investigation or prosecution at all,” Tiu said.
He noted that political considerations, rather than flaws in the judicial structure, might have hindered domestic prosecution.
“Our courts are functioning, but that’s just not how this played out because of other considerations,” he added.
Sensitive ICC Processes
UP Law lecturer Ruby Rosselle Tugade, a senior legal associate at the Institute of International Legal Studies, emphasized that the ICC is “very sensitive to any state activity.”
She noted that referring a case to the ICC does not mean fully surrendering to its processes or admitting judicial inaction.
“The court can recognize that the state is doing something on its own,” Tugade said, adding that the ICC remains attuned to developments within the referring state.
Duterte’s arrest last week, based on an ICC warrant for crimes against humanity related to his controversial war on drugs, has sparked criticism from some quarters.
Critics argue that handing Duterte over to the ICC undermines Philippine sovereignty and paints the country in a negative light, suggesting systemic issues in its justice system.
However, legal experts counter that the move reflects a strategic choice rather than a concession of failure.
As Pangalangan noted, self-referral to the ICC allows states to address sensitive cases without entirely relinquishing judicial integrity.
