Making Duterte answer to the law
Haling former presidents to court is nothing new in these parts, with two former chief executives charged with plunder in recent years. Former president Joseph Estrada was impeached and subsequently convicted by the Sandiganbayan in 2007, while former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo spent four years in detention, both officials charged for alleged misuse of public funds during their term.
And while the two were eventually released—with Estrada being pardoned by Arroyo, and Arroyo being cleared by the Supreme Court in 2016—seeing the country’s laws applied even to foremost officials of the land was some kind of relief for ordinary citizens regularly exposed to the abuse of power by those in high office.
Will this rare instance of justice served repeat itself in the case of former president Rodrigo Duterte? The former chief executive is facing an unprecedented investigation by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity over the extrajudicial killings committed during his bloody war on drugs, as well as a criminal case in a local court for allegedly threatening to kill a member of Congress.
That justice be done though the heavens may fall is certainly the expectation of many, after ACT Teachers party list Rep. France Castro slapped a case against Duterte for threatening to kill her and “all you communists’’ in a televised program on Oct. 11. Citing grave threats punishable under the Revised Penal Code and the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, Castro filed the first case against Duterte since he stepped down from office in June last year.
“I want to kill all you communists”
Not surprisingly, Duterte’s default reaction to the case filed on Oct. 24 was to ignore it, an indication that he may not be fully aware that he no longer enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution. Even more unthinkable for the official who used to be the most feared man in the country was how a mere Quezon City prosecutor could summon him to a preliminary investigation to answer Castro’s complaint.
In his counter-affidavit on Dec. 15, Duterte described Castro’s accusations as “pure speculation, if not altogether improbable or manifestly absurd,” with the “alleged threatening statements … not even addressed to complainant … or to any individual.” He was “simply reciting the story of my talk with Inday Sara to the program viewers,” Duterte said.
In his television program over the network run by his staunch supporter, Pastor Apollo Quiboloy, Duterte recalled telling his daughter (Vice President Sara Duterte) to disclose how she intended to use the P650 million confidential funds for the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education that she heads, which Congress had scrapped during budget deliberations. Castro was among the most vocal in opposing the funds.
Using the vernacular, Duterte told his daughter to tell Castro that the first target of her intelligence funds would be “you, France. I want to kill all you communists.” The words have come to haunt him, and could possibly send him to jail should the court find merit in Castro’s complaint.
“Immensely fearful for my life and security”
While the Duterte camp continues to defend him using the shopworn excuse that he was just “joking,” and that he “didn’t really mean to kill or have anyone killed,” his latest statement could lead to “fearful” consequences, said Castro. In her complaint, the party list representative said she anxiously watched the video which run for more than 10 minutes, and had since been taken down by the pro-Duterte network.
“Hearing Respondent Duterte, the immediate former President of the Philippines, father of the incumbent Vice President of the country and a self-confessed murderer, [call] my name multiple times and [make] grave threats to kill me made me immensely fearful for my life and security,” Castro said.
Indeed, his latest statement about “kill[ing] all you communists” sums up Duterte’s unofficial government policy of Red-tagging critics.
Filing a case against the former president could thus mean sweet vindication not just for Castro and other militant members of Congress, but also for those who had been subjected to vilification, public humiliation, cursing, and veiled threats by the foul-mouthed official whose violent rhetoric led to thousands of rights violations during his term. Even the police, whom Duterte had coddled and assured of protection, have acknowledged an official count of 6,000 suspects killed during their anti-illegal drugs operations.It now falls on the court to determine whether his words can be taken lightly, as Duterte would like us all to believe. It now falls on the court to tell us whether a powerful president, or ex-president, can go about threatening to kill people and get away with it. It now falls on the court to dispense justice without fear of presidential censure. The alternative is to be complicit in subverting the judicial system to satisfy a bully. Can we then count on the court to lean on the letter—and the spirit—of the law to excise this ugly phenomenon out of our national life?
