Atty. Joel Butuyan, an International Criminal Court (ICC)-accredited lawyer, supported Malacañang's claim regarding the validity and legality of the implementation of the arrest warrant against former President Rodrigo Duterte.
In a press briefing with Palace Press Officer Usec. Claire Castro on Friday, Butuyan emphasized that there are two bases for the validity of the implementation of the arrest warrant: Republic Act 9851 and Article 59 of the Rome Statute.
The ICC-accredited Filipino lawyer highlighted that Republic Act No. 9851, also known as the "Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity," mirrors the Rome Statute.
"Nakasaad doon sa Article 17 ng RA 9851 na kapag may warrant of arrest na inisyu ang isang international court, mayroong option ang Pilipinas na i-surrender directly to the international court ang suspect," Butuyan explained.
He also cited Article 59 of the Rome Statute stating, "nakalagay doon na kapag inaresto ang isang tao sa Pilipinas halimbawa, ang procedure ay pwedeng idaan sa competent judicial authority at mayroon lamang very basic na pwedeng tanungin ang competent judicial authority. Wala na siyang jurisdiction para kwestyunin pa ang validity ng warrant of arrest."
He further explained that the authorities only need to verify the identity of the arrested individual, ensuring that it matches the person named in the warrant of arrest, and make sure that the arrested person's rights are respected in accordance with domestic law.
Butuyan noted that in the ICC's Ongwen case in 2015, it was established that there is no obligation for the arresting country to follow the procedure under Article 59 of the Rome Statute.
"So, hindi kinakailangang dumaan sa domestic judicial authority, for as long as 'yung substance ng Article 59 is complied with, which is, 'yung identity ng accused at saka kung respected 'yung rights ng accused," said Butuyan.
The lawyer reiterated that the arrest of the former president was in accordance with domestic law, as he was read his Miranda rights and had his own lawyer with him at the time of the arrest.
“Nakita naman po natin 'yung pag-serve ng warrant of arrest, naka-video nga lahat 'yung mga pangyayari. And kung ikukumpara natin 'yung pag-serve ng warrant of arrest kay former President Duterte sa pag-serve ng warrant of arrest sa ordinary suspect or criminal sa Pilipinas, eh sobrang nakakalamang si former President Duterte," he added.
Furthermore, he pointed out that Duterte was granted numerous privileges, going beyond what the law requires. Therefore, in terms of substance, no violations occurred, and the implementation of the arrest warrant was valid.
Clarifications on the arrest
Addressing the claims of a warrantless arrest, Butuyan clarified that the arrest was carried out under a valid warrant issued by the ICC, a body the Philippines had previously been a part of.
On Vice President Sara Duterte’s assertion that the arrest might be an extra rendition, Butuyan explained that extraordinary rendition typically involves the arrest of a suspect, often a terrorist, for transfer to another country, not to an international court.
He stressed that former President Duterte's arrest cannot be classified as extraordinary rendition because it was based on an ICC-issued arrest warrant, in contrast to extraordinary renditions, which occur without warrants and involve the transfer of individuals between countries.
Meanwhile, he explained that it was irrelevant whether the Philippine authorities acted on an Interpol diffusion or a red notice in the arrest, as the key factor was the validity of the arrest warrant.
“Para sa akin, iyong Interpol actually is just an international coordinating organization, hindi siya talagang iyong may power to really have a warrant effected ‘no,” said Butuyan.
“So whether it’s diffusion or red notice iyan, it doesn’t matter kasi talagang kung iyong red notice, binibigay iyan ‘shotgun’ sa lahat ng mga members ng Interpol; iyong diffusion, usually country to country iyan," he added.
Upon his arrival at NAIA Terminal 3 in Manila on March 11, the 79-year-old Duterte was arrested by Philippine authorities and subsequently sent to The Hague in the Netherlands.
Duterte is facing accusations of crimes against humanity, said to have been committed in the Philippines between November 1, 2011, and March 16, 2019.
