There are several developments on the question of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and its pursuit of justice that may not only serve to catalyze our yearning for a law and justice-based society, but these might likewise alter what some perceive as a Black Swan.
These turn critical as the 2022 presidential elections loom in what might either be a dark and ominous horizon, or a long-coveted dawn—and yet another chance at finally achieving the presidency we need.
When a president’s term ends, he loses all immunities from suit and comes under the justice system; allowing the latter to prove if indeed it is potent enough to pursue justice, the failure of which highlights the ICC as a recourse. It is not merely having a functioning justice system but one willing to prosecute crimes against humanity.
While descending to the vice presidency is a permutation cited as a virtual panic room, the constitutional immunity from suit is not applicable. Absolute immunity applies only to the president. While the vice president is impeachable—which merely means removal from office—judicial accountability remains. The Department of Justice has declared vice presidents can be sued. Filial love can, however, be the basis for an amnesty. That, unfortunately, is a get-out-of-jail card.
Discern then the following revelations against the ultimate backdrop of presidential accountability, both enroute to and at the final destination as the wheels of justice turn.
Recently, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the ICC received a 57-page request for the authorization of investigation on possible crimes against humanity. Critics and advocates should read the submission. Going as far back as 2011, it covers the current presidency up to March 2019. More importantly, it is far from hearsay. It is complete with citations and footnotes from various sources including recorded public declarations and public confessions.
Notable are recorded statements of admonitions and admissions of objectives, even orders, dictates and directives delivered publicly prior to and during a presidential incumbency. When taken as a continuum, these constitute consistency, where latter dictates under the office of the highest Executive go beyond validating admonitions all through to empowering with presidential authority. The public directive, “Go ahead and kill them,” cannot be clearer and more potent. Same with “Don’t take this as a joke.”
The Rules of Court and 1997 jurisprudence both declare that voluntary confessions to the media, when corroborated by the commission of a crime, are admissible evidence. Especially when constantly repeated. In September 2018, the president admitted his “only sin is the extrajudicial killings.”
That these liabilities are arrayed against an individual and not on the state is important as the personal presidential immunities currently enjoyed are set to disappear. The 2022 elections are less than a year away, set squarely within the ICC investigation period.
Note the hope-filled words of former ICC Justice Raul Pangalangan who declared that there are no impediments to the ICC initiative despite our current non-membership.
“Impunity leaves a gap in our moral universe where persons can commit horrendous crimes and still move about casually, unchastised, and unpunished, as if they owed no debt to their victims and the world. ICC closes that gap.”
Cras alius dies est. In 2022, we may have a chance at rejoining that moral universe.
Dean de la Paz is a former investment banker and the Managing Director of a New Jersey-based power company operating in the Philippines. He is the Chairman of the Board of a renewable energy company and is a retired Business Policy, Finance and Mathematics professor. He is a graduate of Ateneo de Manila University, the University of Northern Virginia, and the Asian Institute of Management. He may be reached at deandelapaz@gmail.com.
