Hearing on Duterte ICC arrest to proceed even without Cabinet officials - Sen. Marcos

Metro Manila, Philippines - Senator Imee Marcos said the hearing on former President Rodrigo Duterte’s arrest will proceed on Thursday, April 3, with or without the presence of Cabinet officials after Malacañang rejected the Senate invitation.

“Tuloy pa rin ang hearing [The hearing will proceed as planned],” Marcos, chairperson of the Senate committee on foreign relations, said in a text message to reporters on Wednesday, April 2.

Her office also released a copy of her letter to Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, dated April 1, in which she stated there was no justifiable reason for the absence of executive officials at the hearing.

Earlier this week, Bersamin formally declined the Senate’s invitation for executive officials to attend the second hearing, citing executive privilege and the sub judice rule, due to pending Supreme Court petitions related to Duterte’s arrest and his turnover to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on March 11.

Bersamin said Cabinet officials had addressed questions outside of executive privilege during the last hearing on March 20, and noted that Marcos had released "comprehensive findings."

Marcos, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s sister, responded that her report released March 27 was only preliminary.

“There are likewise new pieces of information that the Committee has received, and in the interest of fairness and transparency, the Committee would like to give executive officials a chance to explain their side relative to these new pieces of information,” she said.

Marcos also pointed out that Bersamin, as a former Supreme Court Chief Justice, should be aware that ongoing judicial proceedings cannot stop the legislature from conducting inquiries.

“The power of legislative inquiry is an essential component of legislative power. The same cannot be made subordinate to a criminal or an administrative investigation or to special civil actions pending before the Supreme Court,” she said.

Marcos also stressed that executive privilege does not automatically exempt officials from disclosing information. She earlier explained that it can only be invoked in response to specific questions during a hearing – not as a blanket refusal to attend.

“Regrettably, the undersigned finds none of the reasons you adduced in the Letter as sufficient justification for the refusal of executive officials to attend the hearing,” Marcos said.

“The undersigned hopes that you reconsider your decision and allow the invited Cabinet members to attend the scheduled hearing,” she added.

‘Wala namang itinago’

In a Palace press briefing earlier on Wednesday, Communications Undersecretary Claire Castro said Bersamin has not yet responded to Marcos’ request for reconsideration.

Castro reiterated the Palace's stance that the information Cabinet officials provided during the previous hearing was sufficient, allowing Marcos to release preliminary findings.

“Wala naman pong itinago, dahil sapat na po iyong napakahabang oras noong unang hearing para po masabi ang dapat na masabi po ng ating mga Cabinet officials patungkol po doon sa pag-surrender kay dating Pangulong Duterte sa ICC,” Castro said.

[Translation: We are not hiding anything, because the long duration of the first hearing was enough for our Cabinet officials to say what needed to be said regarding the surrender of former President Duterte to the ICC.]

In her preliminary report, Marcos highlighted serious violations of Duterte’s rights, including his right to due process, claiming that he was denied the opportunity to defend himself in a local court.

Duterte was arrested based on a warrant from the ICC for crimes against humanity over allegations of extrajudicial killings during his time as Davao mayor and President. The Marcos administration has repeatedly stated it does not recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction but justified Duterte’s surrender by citing the country’s commitment to the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol).

Marcos said more questions still need to be answered, though the list of resource persons for the second hearing has not been disclosed.