Pubdate: Mon, 15 Aug 2016
Source: Philippine Daily Inquirer (Philippines)
Column: Fleamarket of Ideas
Copyright: 2016 Philippine Daily Inquirer
Contact:  http://www.inquirer.net/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1073
Author: Joel Ruiz Butuyan

EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLINGS AS CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY

A TOTAL of 3,257 extrajudicial killings (EJKs) were committed during 
the Marcos dictatorship. In contrast, there were 805 drug-related 
fatalities from May 10 (when Rodrigo Duterte emerged winner of the 
presidential election) to Aug. 12, per the INQUIRER count.

If the current rate continues, the total number of EJKs for the six 
years of the Duterte administration will end up about 700 percent 
more than the killings committed during the 14 years of the Marcos 
dictatorship.

President Duterte is either ill-advised or terribly underestimating 
the risk that he can be held liable at the International Criminal 
Court, given the circumstances of the killings.

In 2011, the Philippines ratified the Rome Statute which established 
the International Criminal Court. Under this treaty, every Filipino, 
including the President, can be tried by this Court which has 
jurisdiction over crimes against humanity. The treaty provides that 
when murder is "committed as part of a widespread or systematic 
attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of 
the attack," it becomes a crime against humanity.

The possibility that the current EJKs will be considered by the 
International Criminal Court as amounting to a crime against humanity 
is a liability risk that our President is miscalculating.

Ruben Carranza, director of the New-York-based International Center 
for Transitional Justice, points out that "[w]hen over 500 civilians 
have been killed by both police and vigilantes with the clear goal of 
targeting them in a 'war against drugs,' with their impunity 
explicitly guaranteed by the president, then the elements of EJKs as 
a 'crime against humanity of murder' are already there-(a) widespread 
or systematic killings, (b) civilians are targeted, and (c) the 
perpetrators know or intended their conduct to be part of a 
widespread or systematic attack."

On Aug. 11, Kabayan party-list Rep. Harry Roque delivered a privilege 
speech in which he said: "It is clear that the civilian population is 
being attacked-news reports all around us overwhelmingly establish 
that hundreds of Filipinos have been killed either directly by 
governmental forces or with their support or tolerance."

Roque likewise said: "It is also clear that the President is aware 
that these acts are ongoing. Even without proof of a directive on his 
part, he has, in many instances, spoken about the use of violence 
against drug syndicates."

Roque cited the decisions of international criminal tribunals which 
prosecuted political and military officials for crimes against 
humanity committed in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. These 
tribunals declared that "it is not necessary to show that [the crimes 
committed] were the result of the existence of a policy or plan" and 
that the plan "need not be declared expressly or even stated clearly 
and precisely. It may be surmised from the occurrence of a series of events."

The party-list representative cautioned the President to be careful: 
"While it would be imprudent for me to say with certainty that 
President Duterte has already committed a crime against humanity, it 
would be a disservice to this entire nation if I did not warn him to 
be careful. Neither the Rome Statute nor general international law 
prescribes a minimum number of victims for an indictment. So long as 
the [International Criminal Court] believes that the war on drugs is 
'widespread' and 'systematic,' [it is] likely to investigate."

The President enjoys immunity under Philippine law, but he has no 
similar immunity for crimes under the International Criminal Court's 
jurisdiction. Carranza says "the presidents of Sudan and Kenya were 
charged" in the court even during their incumbency. And there is no 
expiration of liability for ICC crimes, so he can be charged even 
long after he leaves Malacanang.

The determination of Mr. Duterte to cleanse the country of the drug 
menace and his willingness to risk his "life, honor, and the 
presidency" to achieve this goal are praiseworthy.

However, we are at that stage of our civilization where we have long 
abandoned the ancient practice of relying on operatives to dispense 
justice through the smoking barrel of their guns. We have advanced 
our civilization by relying on gun-wielding men to apprehend 
criminals, but have separately assigned the task of listening to 
accusations of guilt and protestations of innocence to men and women 
who mete out penalties.

It is true that our current justice system is notoriously imperfect 
and graft-prone. But we do not improve our way of life by marching 
back to the Dark Ages where justice is made synonymous with violence. 
We improve our defective justice system by fixing it, not by abandoning it.

It is true that the proliferation of drugs is partly due to corrupt 
judges. But it is also true that illegal drugs proliferate because of 
a corrupt police force and a corrupt prosecution service, both of 
which are executive agencies within the President's control to reform.

It is also true that before our children become drug dependents who 
clog police and court dockets, there are the education, health, and 
social welfare departments which are executive agencies within the 
President's control to tap for instructive, reformative, and curative 
solutions to the drug menace.

We want our President to succeed in his fight against illegal drugs. 
But in his haste and zeal, he may end up accused of a crime more 
serious than the ones perpetrated by his archenemies. The last thing 
our country needs is a President facing trial at the International 
Criminal Court.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom