Palace rebuts Imee Marcos’ ‘province of The Hague’ remark

Sen. Imee R. Marcos (Bibo Nueva España/Senate PRIB)

MANILA, Philippines — The Palace on Thursday rebutted Sen. Imee Marcos’ remark questioning when the Philippines became a province of The Hague, Netherlands.

Marcos made the statement in her opening speech while leading the Senate inquiry into the arrest of former President Rodrigo Duterte.

At a briefing held simultaneously with the hearing, Palace Press Officer Claire Castro said the Philippines never wanted to be a province of any country.

READ: Sen. Marcos: Since when has PH become a province of The Hague?

“We have never intended to become a province of any country because we are an independent nation. We also never intended to become a province of Fujian, China. We have never considered becoming a province of any country,” she said.

Regarding Duterte’s arrest and transfer to The Hague, Castro maintained that the administration is simply upholding its commitment to the International Criminal Police Organization.

“We are simply enforcing the law,” she said.

READ: Go pleads for Duterte repatriation as Senate probes ICC arrest

Duterte was arrested at Ninoy Aquino International Airport on March 11 and detained at Villamor Air Base that same day. He was later transferred to The Hague, where he remains in custody.

The former president had his pretrial hearing on March 14, while his confirmation of charges is scheduled for September 23. He may appeal for an interim release before that date.

Sen. Marcos also alleged that the Philippines surrendered Duterte to foreigners as if he did not have a homeland.

Castro once again pointed out that the arrest was legal.

“She said, why did we surrender the former president to a foreign entity? This is in accordance with the law, RA [Republic Act] 9851—we are not violating any law,” she said.

“If there are those who should be held accountable, as we have said before, then they should be held accountable. The law used, RA 9851, clearly states that we can surrender—let me repeat this—in Section 70, it states that we may extradite or surrender to the International Court, if any, or to the state in relation to applicable extradition treaties, something like that,” Castro continued.

Section 70 of RA 9851, or the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide and Other Crimes Against Humanity, states that “authorities may surrender or extradite suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the appropriate international court, if any, or to another State pursuant to the applicable extradition laws and treaties.”

“It is clear—even Justice Carpio has explained this—that we can surrender anyone to the international court. This means that we do not need to have a treaty or an extradition treaty in place. What is stated there is simply ‘to surrender to the international court,’ and that is exactly what we are complying with,” she further said.