The Marcos Jr. administration’s focus on political expediency is proving to be costly, potentially leading to diplomatic tensions and a degree of regional isolation.
Two significant legal matters the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) custody of former President Rodrigo Duterte regarding a charge of crimes against humanity and Timor-Leste’s jurisdiction over expelled lawmaker Arnolfo Teves highlight contradictions in the nation’s stance on international justice, sovereignty, and judicial collaboration.
The differing approaches in these cases reveal Duterte inconsistencies related to national autonomy and legal obligations, prompting concerns about fairness and underlying political motives. In Duterte’s situation, the government facilitated his arrest and transfer to The Hague in March 2025, despite the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2019, raising questions about sovereignty as many viewed the cooperation with the ICC as a compromise of national judicial authority. Conversely, the government has shown dissatisfaction with Timor-Leste’s refusal to extradite Teves, who is implicated in the assassination of Governor Roel Degamo.
On March 20, 2025, Timor-Leste’s Court of Appeals denied the extradition request, leading local law enforcement to publicly criticize the regional counterpart for eroding trust and collaboration. The Department of Foreign Affairs suggested that this decision might impact Timor-Leste’s aspirations for membership in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
The government is adamant about extraditing a citizen facing serious charges domestically, highlighting its commitment to cooperation despite lacking a formal extradition treaty. The inconsistency arises from the contrasting willingness to surrender jurisdiction over Duterte to an international body while demanding Timor-Leste to extradite Teves, which is viewed as a betrayal of regional unity.
Former Foreign Minister Dionisio Babo Soares emphasized that Timor-Leste is not obligated to meet another country’s demands, especially when such compliance could threaten its sovereignty and judicial integrity. He argued that Manila’s pressure reflects an expectation that disregards Timor-Leste’s sovereign right to handle extradition matters through its own legal system, asserting judicial independence amid concerns over due process and political influences in the Philippines. Timor-Leste faces allegations of failing to cooperate, which is seen as a breach of the bloc’s principles of mutual respect and collaboration.
Sovereignty has long been regarded as inviolable in this region, a principle that has led to tensions among Asian countries and organizations perceived as promoting Western ideals. The government positions itself as a victim of Timor-Leste’s obstinacy, while simultaneously disregarding comparable sovereignty claims related to Duterte’s situation. This inconsistent application of principles invites allegations of political opportunism at the expense of legal integrity. Implicitly, the discontent surrounding Teves’ case can be seen as a consequence of the efforts to dismantle Duterte’s influence.
Photo by Wesley Tingey on Unsplash (Free for commercial use)
Image published on February 12, 2023
