“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” These words, spoken by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in reference to a sermon by Theodore Parker, resonate strongly in the recent ruling by the appeals judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ruling paves the way for an investigation into the thousands of killings that occurred during the Philippines’ “war on drugs.” Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch, aptly describes this as a significant step towards justice for the victims and their families.
While it is possible that the Philippine government may challenge the narrow 3-2 majority vote by the ICC’s appeals chamber in the future, the manner of voting and the democratic process of the proceedings provide a sense of confidence that justice and fairness are prevailing. The question of jurisdiction raised by the parties is crucial, as the court will need to determine the implications of a state party’s withdrawal and the end of their obligation to cooperate. However, such a move may jeopardize the suspects’ own case, as they could be required to continue appearing before the court if their challenge is denied.
The argument put forth by former president Rodrigo Duterte and his allies that the ICC no longer has jurisdiction over him due to the country’s withdrawal is undeniably impertinent and in violation of the doctrine of pacta sunt servanda. This doctrine dictates that agreements and treaties must be observed in good faith by nations. Moreover, such statements also violate the Constitution, specifically Article II, Section 2, which renounces war as an instrument of national policy and emphasizes principles of international law, peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations. These principles are already incorporated into the Philippines’ legal framework as part of its membership in the international community.
The ICC ruling serves as a powerful reaffirmation of the universal principle that crime does not go unpunished. It also contributes to the expansion and institutionalization of cosmopolitan norms and the strengthening of international laws. Additionally, it sends a clear message to tyrants, authoritarians, and dictators that they will be held accountable for their actions.
Professor Seyla Benhabib raises an important question on how we can establish political and legal institutions that govern us collectively on this earth. The challenge lies in reconciling the universal nature of human rights with the partiality of positive law. Crimes against humanity, as discussed by Benhabib, are governed by certain norms that dictate how individuals, including state officials and private individuals, should treat each other, even in times of extreme hostility and war. Acts such as ethnic cleansing, mass executions, rape, and cruel and unusual punishment are strictly prohibited and can serve as grounds for prosecution, regardless of one’s position or orders. The notion that “I was only doing my duty” can no longer be accepted as an excuse for violating the rights of others, even in conflict situations.
Ultimately, the ICC ruling’s purpose is to seek justice and ensure that the perpetrators are held accountable for their actions. As French writer Émile Zola eloquently expressed, the pursuit of justice is a passionate endeavor to bring light to those who have been kept in the dark, in the name of humanity’s right to happiness. Jose Mario D. De Vega is an assistant professor at the Department of Philosophy and Humanities in the College of Arts, Education and Sciences at the National University of the Philippines.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
