If the International Criminal Court (ICC) makes a request to freeze the assets of former president Rodrigo Duterte, the government will let the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) handle it.
Palace Press Officer and Communications Undersecretary Claire Castro said the request will be directed to the AMLC should the ICC deems it as a reparation for the victims of crimes against humanity, which Duterte was charged with.
"Kung ito po ay magkakaroon man ng issue or magbibigay ng order ang ICC, ituturo po natin, ibibigay po natin ito sa AMLC kung kinakailangan po (If this will become an issue or if the ICC gives an order, we will direct it to the AMLC if needed)" Castro said in a Palace briefing on Tuesday, March 18.
The Palace official maintained that the government will cooperate with the ICC. Thus, it will turn the matter over to the AMLC, which is the country's financial intelligence unit vested by law with independence to perform its mandate.
"Yes, but if there’s a need for that ang AMLC walang sinisino. So, kung kinakailangan po para po mabigyan ng reparation, damages kung sinuman ang masasabing nabiktima then kailangan pong ibigay ang hustisya (AMLC spares no one. So, if there is a need to give reparation to the victims then justice must be served)," she said.
Castro also explained that even without the request from the ICC, there was already a pending plunder case against Duterte, which may warrant the freezing of assets if proven.
"Tandaan po natin kapag may kaso po ng plunder [isasantabi ko muna po iyong ICC]. When it comes to freezing of assets, mayroon na pong naisampang kaso si Senator Trillanes na plunder against the former President Duterte and Bong Go. Dapat noon pa lang po sana inaral na ng AMLC kung dapat i-freeze because the case is plunder (Remember when someone is facing a plunder case, I will set the ICC aside for now. When it comes to freezing of assets, there was a plunder case filed by Senator Antonio Trillanes against the former president Duterte and Bong Go. AMLC should have looked into this if there is a need to freeze because the case is plunder)," Castro said.
In July last year, Trillanes filed plunder complaints against the former president and Go before the Department of Justice (DOJ) in connection with the alleged anomalous award of 184 government contracts worth more than P6 billion.
Nothing to refute on ICC's jurisdiction prior to withdrawal
The Palace also believes that the ICC has jurisdiction over the Philippines before the Duterte administration withdrew from the Rome Statute.
Castro argued that the ICC would not have acknowledged the Philippines' withdrawal if it was not a member in the first place.
"There’s nothing to refute, because it was effective until withdrawn, so there is nothing to refute about the said publication. There is a ratification," she said.
"Kung hindi po nag-take effect ito, bakit kailangan silang mag-withdraw in the first place. So, ibig sabihin, na-ratify po ito. So, since na-ratified po ito, it means, effective po ito, nag-take effect po siya. So, there is nothing to withdraw kung walang effectivity iyong batas (If this did not take effect, why do they have to withdraw in the first place. So, that means, this was ratified. So, since it was ratified, it means, it took effect. So, there is nothing to withdraw if the law did not take effect)," Castro underscored.
'We will try to discuss it'
In an interview with ANC on Tuesday, March 18, Castro was asked whether President Marcos would change his stance regarding the ICC. She said: As of the moment, we will try to discuss that.
The Palace Press Officer believes that it is now time to discuss the Philippines being a member of the ICC again, pointing out that crimes against humanity, like the drug war, might happen in the future again.
"Because this kind of situation, it really happened, not just now, maybe it will happen in the future. And there are times that we really need some kind of justice from an international criminal court because it's so sad to say, but sometimes it really happens," she said.
"And that justice in the country is kind of questionable sometimes. But I have to believe in justice system because I'm a lawyer. I have to fight for that. But there are times that I have to tell you this," she added.