Power and Politics: The Limits of Legality
By Givheart Dano
"Let the court decide." These words have been echoing, attempting to balance the tremors of today's issue regarding Duterte’s arrest. Legal minds have tried to justify this, yet their opinions remain divided, it all comes down to how they interpret the law. However, the truth about Duterte’s fate in the face of justice has yet to be determined, as the ICC has not yet rendered its judgment. The ICC claims to be the entity that will bring justice for crimes committed in his own country. But one may ask: why outside his own land?
Of course, returning to the legal perspective, the ICC still has jurisdiction despite the Philippines’ withdrawal from the court during Duterte’s presidency. This withdrawal does not strip the ICC of its jurisdiction, as cases were already filed before the withdrawal took effect, allowing the ICC to retain its authority. However, even among the judges in The Hague (ICC), opinions are divided on the question of jurisdiction, which only highlights the complexity of the issue.
This brings us to a key point: legality alone does not fully capture the bigger picture of Duterte’s arrest. It leads to another dimension, one that is deeply political. This case is a test of power dynamics and political maneuvering. Duterte’s arrest extends beyond legal concerns; it reveals the political rivalries shaping Philippine politics today. It is clear that two major political factions are at odds, each with its own interests. Sending Duterte to the ICC is an ambivalent move that raises questions about the country’s justice system. Does this suggest that the Philippines lacks the capacity to prosecute such matters internally? This is the reality of politics.
On the other hand, the ICC, as an international body composed of 125 member states, now faces scrutiny regarding its power over sovereign nations. In the global arena, the ICC has issued warrants against world leaders accused of war crimes, such as President Putin of Russia and Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel, yet it lacks the ability to arrest them due to jurisdictional limitations. This exposes the limitations of the ICC’s authority.
Philosopher James Rachels asserts that killing is universally condemned because it threatens the sustainability of life and erodes culture. However, this issue goes beyond legal and moral concerns, it is fundamentally about power and politics. If we are truly striving for cosmopolitan justice as global citizens, we must acknowledge the political realities at play.
At first glance, Duterte’s arrest may seem like a victory for the ICC, but it also exposes its weaknesses. It demonstrates how power and politics operate on the global stage. When it comes to Russia, the U.S., Israel, and China, the ICC remains a toothless entity. In the end, what this case truly reveals is the ever-present struggle for power and political influence. One can only hope for world peace.
- Givheart Dano is a faculty member of the Tangub City Global College
