The evidence is suppressed

Few days ago, when a largely unverified news of an impending indictment against President Rodrigo Duterte before the International Criminal Court was reported, Malacañang was a showcase of uncanny equanimity. The president displayed calmness beyond compare. In the face of a supposed threat of an international prosecution, he seemed undisturbed almost dismissing the reportage nonchalantly. No amount of pressure for allegedly being responsible for thousands of deaths in the bloody campaign against illegal drug trade could rattle Duterte enough.

President Duterte approached the otherwise disturbing news in an ingenious and dismissive way. The tack he used was novel and, admittedly, brilliant. I surmised that he wanted to project to us, his constituents and perhaps to his international audience, some kind of disdainful confidence. Still, in my view, his presentation was wrapped in an indistinctive pretense of modesty. I could not help but applaud Duterte when he said that if it were his destiny to be held responsible and go to prison for the tokhang killings, he, in a manner of speaking, would bow to it. Destiny? What coy!

On the other hand, Secretary Harry Roque, the president’s spokesman gave an entirely different view. Rather than imitating the coolness of his principal, the dismissive posture of Roque was in a form of his characteristic hambug. In the process, he tipped us, rather unwittingly, that indictment would indeed be anchored on the legal terminology called probable cause. Why do I say that?

Roque explained that the Philippines withdrew its signature to the treaty creating the international criminal court. In Public International Law, it is only when a state affixes its signature to a treaty that it is considered to agree to be bound by its legal tenets. Such withdrawal, earlier made by the Philippines, amounted to our country’s non- consenting to be in the operative framework of the tribunal. In other words, we do not agree to fall within the jurisdiction of the court. The international criminal court has no jurisdiction over our president and so its orders, like any warrant of arrest, cannot be enforced within our shores. Since the legal effect of an arrest warrant is to bring the accused within the jurisdiction of the court for him to be heard and tried, there is no way Duterte can be arrested and tried.

Roque, in the televised interview, stated something that disturbed me. No, let me correct that. Roque startled me. He was emphatic in his declaration, saying that our country would not cooperate with the court. Our police authorities will not help in the investigation and so whatever pieces of evidence they have in their position cannot and will not be presented in court. Without such evidence, the prosecution against Duterte has to fail.

All along, I have suspected that our policemen know something reprehensible about the deaths of alleged drug pushers but they are suppressing available evidence. It is almost always reported in our dailies that those who fell to the guns of uniformed men tried to shoot it out with the police. But each time this kind of story popped out, public information officers tended to gloss over the incident claiming that the lives of policemen were placed in imminent danger. Self-defense is the name of the game. In other words, there would be no damming evidence against the men in uniform.

What Roque said in the interview seemed to suggest otherwise. When he stated that the police would not give the evidence, he meant that authorities will suppress it. Busa, naa diay ebidensiya, dili lang ipakita!