THE HAGUE, Netherlands — Although the arguments over jurisdictional jurisprudence has already been brushed aside by the International Criminal Court (ICC), former president Rodrigo Roa Duterte's lead counsel thinks that the "argument is compelling" and eventually, he believes that Duterte’s case would not reach trial.

However, Atty. Joel Butuyan of the Center for International Law (CenterLaw), also an ICC-accredited lawyer, retorted to this that the argument of Duterte’s counsel was “rehashed” and had “little weight” and the former Davao strongman would subsequently face charges for crimes against humanity before the international tribunal.

Prior to Bututan's reaction, Duterte’s lawyer Nicholas Kaufman expressed optimism that Duterte’s case before the ICC would not reach trial because of ‘compelling’ grounds that would throw the ICC case out.
The confirmation of charges is scheduled for September 23, and there will be no trial if the charges against him are not confirmed, according to the ICC.

In an interview, Kaufman enthused that “there won’t be a confirmation-of-charges hearing if the judges rule in our favor.”

The British-Israeli barrister argued that the ICC cannot exercise jurisdiction as the 80-year-old former president was “kidnapped,” echoing the sentiments of the Duterte camp.

“I view it as a kidnapping, nothing more or less. It’s an extrajudicial rendition. He was given no due process, just slung over to the Hague,” he cited.

“We hope to persuade the judges pre-trial that it (the court) cannot exercise its jurisdiction over the case,” he added.

But Butuyan dismissed Kaufman’s assertion that Duterte was “kidnapped.”

“With all due respect, Mr. Kaufman is not raising ‘compelling’ arguments, but rehashed arguments which have been found to have little weight,” he reiterated.

Butuyan also said that Duterte’s arrest underwent a legal process.

“With respect to the allegation of kidnapping, it has little factual basis to make it a feasible legal argument,” he stressed.
“There was a validly issued warrant of arrest which was issued after more than seven years of preliminary examination and investigation, Mr. Duterte was read his Miranda rights in compliance with our constitution, and he even had the benefit of multiple lawyers while being arrested,” he clarified.

The Filipino lawyer likewise asserted that the issue of “ICC’s alleged lack of jurisdiction . . . has been brushed aside by both the ICC and our own Supreme Court.”

“It is also an argument that will make a mockery of the Rome Statute because it leads to a preposterous interpretation of the ICC treaty,” he stated.