The ongoing debate surrounding the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) investigation into former President Rodrigo Duterte has sparked strong reactions from legal experts, political figures, and the Filipino public.
A recent statement issued by Sakda Wannuragas, a respected Thai lawyer, has further reignited discussions on the importance of national sovereignty and the need for legal matters to be resolved within the country’s own judicial framework.
Wannuragas, a seasoned legal expert with extensive experience in international and domestic law, has called on the ICC to respect the sovereignty of the Philippines, emphasizing that the country possesses a fully functional legal system capable of addressing internal concerns. His statement underscores the fundamental principle that legal proceedings must remain within national jurisdiction to ensure justice is served in accordance with the Philippine Constitution.
Duterte, who served as President from 2016 to 2022, has been under scrutiny for alleged human rights violations linked to his administration’s controversial war on drugs. While accountability remains a priority for the Filipino people, many believe that the resolution of these matters should rest solely within the judicial institutions of the Philippines, without external interference.
“The Philippines has a well-established and independent legal system that is fully capable of addressing internal legal matters. International bodies should respect state sovereignty and allow due process to take its course within the framework of the Philippine judicial system,” said Wannuragas.
The Philippines’ legal community has long asserted that the nation’s judiciary is independent and capable of handling complex cases, including those involving past government officials. Many Filipino legal experts argue that the ICC’s involvement undermines the country’s legal framework and sets a precedent where international bodies can override sovereign legal systems.
Beyond legal professionals, this sentiment resonates with political leaders and citizens alike. Many Filipinos view the ICC’s involvement as an infringement on national autonomy, with concerns that it could be used as a tool for political influence rather than genuine justice.
Legal scholars note that international legal bodies should complement, not override, domestic legal systems. The Philippine government withdrew from the ICC in 2019, reinforcing the stance that any legal matters concerning the country should be resolved internally. Given this, many question the legitimacy of the ICC’s continued investigation despite the Philippines no longer being a member of the court.
Political analysts suggest that the ICC’s actions could create diplomatic tensions between the Philippines and the international community. Some warn that continued foreign intervention could lead to nationalist sentiments strengthening within the country, prompting calls for greater independence in handling domestic affairs.
The call to uphold national jurisdiction resonates deeply with Filipinos who have long fought to protect the country’s independence and democratic processes. Many believe that any legal action against former leaders must be pursued through the proper domestic channels, ensuring due process without external influence.
As the discussion unfolds, calls for international institutions to respect Philippine sovereignty continue to grow. Wannuragas and other legal professionals have reaffirmed their commitment to monitoring developments and ensuring that any action taken aligns with the principles of fairness, justice, and national independence.
Filipinos remain divided on how to approach accountability for past administrations, but one thing is clear: national sovereignty must remain at the forefront of any legal proceedings. Whether through domestic courts or international institutions, the pursuit of justice must be balanced with the preservation of the country’s autonomy and legal integrity.
