This story
was taken from Bulatlat, the Philippines's alternative weekly
newsmagazine (www.bulatlat.com, www.bulatlat.net, www.bulatlat.org).
Vol. V, No. 29, August 28-September 3, 2005
International
Court May Convict Arroyo,
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt by the International People’s Tribunal
(IPT) last Aug. 19 at the University of the Philippines (UP) Cine Adarna of
human rights violations. In this interview Hakan Karakus – president of the
International Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL) and one of the judges of
the IPT – said that the IPT participants are committed to inform the
international community of the verdict. While it is possible for the
International Criminal Court (ICC) to also decide along the same line, the trial
may not push through given the Philippine government’s refusal to ratify the
Rome statute.
BY AUBREY SC MAKILAN Last Aug. 19, the
International People’s Tribunal (IPT) found President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
“guilty beyond reasonable doubt” of human rights violations. If Arroyo were to
be tried in the International Criminal Court (ICC), Hakan Karakus (Turkey), one
of the judges of the IPT, said that the decision may still be the same. The
possibility, however, of Arroyo’s case being tried at the ICC would depend on
the country’s acceptance of the ICC’s jurisdiction.
Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye denied as early as 2002 that the Macapagal-Arroyo
administration’s stand against the ICC is in compliance with the U.S.
administration’s refusal to ratify the Rome Statute establishing the ICC. Turkey’s Karakus may be the
most silent among the three IPT judges, but this does not mean he is indifferent
to human rights violations. In fact, his silence was mainly due to his limited
command of the English language. Clearly, as may be gleaned from this interview,
he has more to say as president of the International Association of People’s
Lawyers (IAPL), a lawyers’ group that focuses on the human rights situation and
people’s struggles. Prof. Sebnem Korur Fincanci, a forensic doctor of the
Turkish Medical Association, one of the IPT’s international jurors, served as
his interpreter. What are the
limitations of being a people’s lawyer? To be a lawyer means to be
a part of the system. You can only struggle as much as the system permits you.
You have limits and boundaries. That’s the most challenging part. However, it is
important for you to be successful in some of your struggles. You can sometimes
go beyond the boundaries but not much because that is how the system works. I have been more free in
prison when I was being tortured because I did not use the means and
opportunities of the system. Working as a lawyer, I have to use the instruments
of the system. There are several bases of
struggles and there are different steps. All of these steps should have their
own instruments of struggle. So to be a lawyer is to struggle on a legal basis.
But there may be other bases and organizational work to do but we cannot
disregard the legal basis to struggle even if it has limitations. And to work in
behalf of the people is very important. Have you been part of
other IPTs before? I should have worked for
the Korean tribunal held in the United States in 2002 but I was not able to get
a visa. The U.S. embassy did not give any answer. I do not know why they refused
to grant me a visa. The tribunal was to try Korean occupation and human rights
violations by the U.S., along with 16 other countries in the 1950s. What were your
observations of the recently concluded IPT? The tribunal was
well-organized and successful. It is not of course a legal procedure but it has
political basis and it was successful in this regard. The international
solidarity mission was well-planned and the teams have very good documentation.
To share all these information with the international team and afterwards
reaching a conclusion was important. The judges were very
prominent people. Irene Fernandez and Lennox Hinds have the power of
representing the people. The judges, prosecutors and the jurors’ composition was
well-designed. The proceeding was powerful. We are familiar with such
kinds of cases. I have also experienced these kinds of violations myself. The
cases were all striking and important. For me, the abduction and the killing of
Eden Marcellana and Eddie Gumanoy were striking. But the girl who witnessed her
father’s torture was most striking because a child seeing the torture of his or
her parents is a great violence. I also want to raise an
important issue. The testimony of these children in front of many people is a
violence in itself. The children are badly affected while they give testimonies
in this kind of proceeding so I stopped the girl’s testimony. I asked to cut the
girl’s testimony short because she was in a bad situation. She was crying and I
think that we were late to cut it short. It is important to first have the
testimony together with a psychologist in a confidential manner. Maybe this can
be video-recorded and afterwards shown in this proceeding instead of having
children themselves testify. Why does the IPT
believe that President Macapagal-Arroyo committed crimes against humanity? I totally agree with the
verdict, mainly because of systemic characteristics of the crimes. The
violations are very clear. The evidence showed the violations together with the
government’s culpability and the targets of such violations. There was also
proof of the social inequality related to human rights violations. What would be next
move after this IPT? There are several plans for
each person or organization that attended the IPT. Each will take the case to
their own organization, raise the issue, conduct discussions and try to inform
other people and governments about the Arroyo administration. The case shall be
discussed in all countries. Can President
Macapagal-Arroyo be indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for
crimes against humanity? In order for Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo to be indicted in the International Criminal Court, the country
should ratify the Rome Statute. But of course Macapagal-Arroyo is guilty of all
these human rights violations. The tribunal has decided. Afterwards it is our
mission, all of the international bodies, to take the case to the international
community. If she were tried by
a conventional court, what would have been the appropriate punishment? In the [conventional]
international criminal court, those responsible will be isolated. They will be
resigned from their positions. And if they were convicted, they will be exiled
to another country but not in detention. In this kind of international
tribunals, the governments responsible for the crimes are exhibited in front of
the eyes of the community that they are guilty. According to the Rome
Statute, Macapagal-Arroyo should be exiled from the Philippines. She cannot live
in the Philippines anymore because of human rights violations. In Turkey, it is difficult
to sue the president. The law prohibits this kind of trial. There is a need for
a rebellion, like a military attack, to put on trial people for human rights
violations. For instance, Prime Minister Adnan Menderes was hanged after a
military coup. The latter overthrew the democratic government of Turkey. What are your views
on terrorism? All nations have class
struggles. Imperialists and the bourgeoisie use terrorism as a rogue for the
struggle of people. While they associate the people’ struggle with terrorism,
they also use organized terrorist attacks for quelling the people’s struggle. For example, they use
events like Al Qaida-related or the London subway attack to accuse the people
for their struggle. And they support these “terroristic” activities in order to
blame people for their struggle. Terrorism for me is the
government’s violations. The government authorities are the real terrorists. There are national
liberation movements. These kinds of movements cannot be evaluated as terrorist
activities as long as they are not against civilian people. Even if they are
against armed forces, they cannot be called terrorists because they are national
movements for freedom. Bulatlat © 2004 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
Leader of International Lawyers Group Says
Bulatlat
In the past, Bunye also stressed that the Arroyo
administration’s stand is not due to the threats from the
U.S. to withdraw
military aid to countries which will support the ICC. At present, the
Philippines has not yet ratified the Rome Statute.
As of July 1, 2003, 90 states, or around half of
the states around the world, have done so.
In this tribunal, we applied the
international conventions of the law to this case so we did not have a trial
different from the international law. If the case were taken to the
international court, then the decision wouldn’t change because we were
objective, we have the evidence, and we conducted the trial according to
international law. So the ICC would most probably decide in the same way.