{"id":178311,"date":"2018-08-24T00:31:30","date_gmt":"2018-08-24T04:31:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=178311"},"modified":"2018-08-24T00:31:30","modified_gmt":"2018-08-24T04:31:30","slug":"sc-denies-de-lima-appeal-join-oral-argument-icc-withdrawal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2018\/08\/24\/sc-denies-de-lima-appeal-join-oral-argument-icc-withdrawal\/","title":{"rendered":"SC denies De Lima appeal to join oral argument on ICC withdrawal"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
In a media briefer released on Friday, the SC denied de Lima\u2019s motion for reconsideration seeking the High Court\u2019s permission to be allowed to \u201cappear and personally represent herself\u201d during the oral argument of the case initially scheduled on August 14, 2018. (File Photo: Senate of the Philippines\/Facebook)<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

MANILA<\/strong>\u00a0— The Supreme Court en banc denied Senator Leila de Lima’s appeal to participate in the oral argument next week on the petition seeking to invalidate the Philippine government’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).<\/p>\n

In a media briefer released on Friday, the SC denied de Lima\u2019s motion for reconsideration seeking the High Court\u2019s permission to be allowed to \u201cappear and personally represent herself\u201d during the oral argument of the case initially scheduled on August 14, 2018.<\/p>\n

The plea was denied by the Court on August 7, 2018 wherein 10 magistrates voted to junk de Lima\u2019s motion while two voted to grant it.<\/p>\n

Last Aug. 16, 2018, the detained De Lima sought for a reconsideration of the SC denial of her plea to join the oral argument.<\/p>\n

But the Court, in denying petitioner\u2019s motion for reconsideration, found that no new argument had been presented to warrant a reconsideration of its earlier resolution.<\/p>\n

The Court also directed that the oral argument on the consolidated petitions seeking to void the Philippine government’s withdrawal from the ICC will proceed on August 28, 2018 at 2 p.m. at the Supreme Court Session Hall, as scheduled.<\/p>\n

The oral arguments will tackle the petition filed by opposition Senators Francis \u201cKiko\u201d Pangilinan, Franklin Drilon, Paolo Benigno \u201cBam\u201d Aquino, Risa Hontiveros, Antonio Trillanes IV and de Lima – who filed for certiorari and mandamus – and said that under Article VII, Section 21 of the 1987 Constitution, “entering into treaty or international agreement requires participation of Congress, that is, through concurrence of at least two-third of all the members of the Senate.\u201d<\/p>\n

The second petition was filed by the Philippine Coalition for the International Criminal Court led by former Commission on Human Rights chairperson Loretta Ann Rosales.<\/p>\n

On March 14, President Rodrigo R. Duterte announced the Philippines\u2019 withdrawal of its ratification of the Rome Statute, a United Nations treaty creating the ICC.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

MANILA\u00a0— The Supreme Court en banc denied Senator Leila de Lima’s appeal to participate in the oral argument next week …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":152776,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,95],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-178311","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news","category-news-ph","mauthors-christopher-lloyd-caliwan","mauthors-philippine-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178311","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=178311"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178311\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/152776"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178311"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178311"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178311"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}