Miriam Rev 9

7/28/2019 Miriam Rev 9

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/miriam-rev-9 1/4

The establishment of an internaonal criminal court with jurisdicon over internaonal crimes . . . has been

repeatedly recommended. It can only be reiterated here that armave acon on exisng proposals . . would be mely and benecial . . . for the world community.

Miriam Defensor Sanago, POLITICAL OFFENCES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW, Quezon City

Philippines: University of the Philippines Law Center, 1972

The Rome Statute of the Internaonal Criminal Court is arguably the most important instuonal innovaon

since the founding of the United Naons. The Rome Statute is a benchmark in the progressive developmen

of internaonal human rights. Sponsorship speech of Miriam Defensor Sanago as Chair of the Senate Subcommiee on

the Rome Statute of the Internaonal Criminal Court, 16 August 2011

“Miriam Defensor

Sanago had won laure

as a student and excelleas a legal scholar. She

had become the younge

presiding judge in the

Regional Trial Court of

Quezon City . . . She

handled a record y

cases a month . . . She

gained a reputaon for

strict imparality in

applying the law. Sen

the example personallyshe insisted that the

employees be ecient,

competent and honest.

Citaon, Ramon Magsays

Award for Public Servic

Asia’s equivalent of th

Nobel Prize, Manila, 3

August 1988

Professor Dr. Miriam Defensor Sanago

Philippine Candidate

Internaonal Criminal Court

Professor Dr. Miriam DefensorS a n t i a g o h a s a l o n g a n d

distinguished career in governmentand a strong record of judicial and

academic excellence.

Before her term as senator,she served as presiding judge of theQuezon City Regional Trial Court,Commissioner of Immigration, and

Secretary of Agrarian Reform.

She was awarded the 1988Ramon Magsaysay Award for PublicService (the Asian equivalent of theNobe l Pr i ze ) fo r her work a s

Commissioner of Immigration.

She has a Doctor of Science of Law degree from the University of Michigan, where she was a BarbourScholar and Dewitt Fellow. She wasalso a Visiting Law Fellow at OxfordUniversity and a Visiting Fellow at the

Lauterpacht Research Centre for

International Law at Cambrid

University.

She was a professor of lawthe University for the Philippines more than a decade. She is listed in 2000 United Nat ions roster eminent and highly-qualified expertsinternational law and is the author onumber of books on international linternational relations and trial co

practice and procedure.



Professor Dr. Miriam Defensor Sanago

Government Service

Senator, Republic of the Philippines 1995-2001, 2004-2010, 2010 -2016 Chaired key commiees including Foreign Relaons, Constuonal

Amendments, several Oversight Commiees Chair, Subcommiee on the Internaonal Criminal Court

Secretary of Agrarian Reform 1989Commissioner of Immigraon and Deportaon 1988 – 1989 Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court, Branch 106, Quezon City 1983 – 1987

Legal Consultant, University of the Philippines Law Center 1981 – 1983Legal Consultant, Philippine Embassy, Washington D.C. 1982Legal Ocer, United Naons High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, 1979 – 1980Special Assistant to the Secretary of Jusce 1970 – 1980

Educaon

Doctor of Juridical Science (Barbour Scholar and DeWi Fellow), University of Michigan (requirements, except publicaon, fullled in six months with“A” average) 1976

Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, Centro Escolar University 1989Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, Xavier University, Ateneo de Cagayan de Oro 1989Doctor of Humane Leers, honoris causa, University of San Agusn 1989Master of Laws (DeWi Fellow), University of Michigan, with “A” average 1975

Master of Arts in Religious Studies (cand.), Maryhill School of Theology, Quezon City 1996Bachelor of Laws, cum laude, University of the Philippines 1969Bachelor of Arts in Polical Science, magna cum laude, University of the Philippines (nished in 3 -1/2 instead of

4 years, with an average grade in the last semester of 1.1 )1965Valedictorian, Iloilo Provincial Naonal High School. Awardee, All-Around Girl Medallion 1961Valedictorian, La Paz Elementary School 1957

Post-Graduate Educaon

Vising Law Fellow, St. Hilda’s College, Oxford University 2000Vising Fellow, Lauterpacht Research Centre for Internaonal Law, Cambridge University 1999Paris-Geneva Summer Program in Internaonal Law, sponsored by American University 1998Summer Program in Law at Oxford University, sponsored by Florida State University 1997

Summer Program of Instrucon for Lawyers, Harvard University 1996Graduate, California Judicial College, University of California at Berkeley (in the praccal courtroom test, judgesgave her the highest grade of 33 out of 35) 1985

Fellow, Seminar on judicial wring and caseow management in the trial courts, Instute of Judicial Administraon,Quezon City. Topnotcher of examinaon in judicial wring 1984

Fellow, UN/UNITAR Programme in Internaonal Law, The Hague, Holland and Brussels, Belgium, 1978Fellow, External Session of The Hague Academy of Internaonal Law, Tokyo, Japan 1978Fellow, Academy of American and Internaonal Law, Southwestern Legal Foundaon, Dallas, Texas, 1972

Publicaons Professor Dr. Defensor Sanago has published books on internaonal law and internaonal relaons, as well as constuonal law, criminal law, civil law and court procedure and pracce. She has also published books on poliscience, good governance, history and philosophy. She has published arcles on internaonal organizaons, humanitar

law, refugee law, immigraon law, internaonal terrorism and the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court.

With her father, District TrialJudge Benjamin A. Defensorwhen she graduated fromhigh school as valedictorian.She too went on to be a trial judge.

“Senator Santiago is a gifted Lawyer who has excelled in all three branches of government - executive, legislative and

judicial. She is an authority in international law and is arespected figure in the legal academe.”

Reynato S. Puno, Former Chief Justice Supreme Court of the Philippines



Mr. President, disnguished colleagues:

The Rome Statute of the Internaonal Criminal Court is

arguably the most important instuonal innovaon since

the founding of the United Naons. The Rome Statute is a

benchmark in the progressive development of internaonalhuman rights.

In 1998, pursuant to two General Assembly resoluons,

a diplomac conference on the establishment of an Interna-

onal Criminal Court convened in Rome. It was aended by

some 160 states, as well as by internaonal organizaons

and non-governmental

organizaons. The most

powerful camp among

the delegates were the so

-called “like-minded”

states, which opposedthe 1994 dra by the In-

ternaonal Law Commis-

sion, and which also op-

posed the views of the

permanent members of

the Security Council.

The Philippines was a mem-

ber of that “like-minded” caucus of states.

To harmonize Philippine law with the Statute, in 2009

the Philippines passed R.A. No. 9851, entled “An act den-ing and penalizing crimes against internaonal humanitarian

law, genocide, and other crimes against humanity, organiz-

ing jurisdicon, and designang special courts.”

The Philippines has a long-standing commitment to hu-

man rights and humanitarian law. Starng from 1945 wh

the Philippines declared independence, our country has re

ognized the compulsory jurisdicon of the Internaon

Court of Jusce. In 1948, the Philippines became a party

the Universal Declara-

on of Human Rights.In 1949, the Philip-

pines became a party

to the 1949 Geneva

Convenon. The Phil-

ippines is a party to

the major human

rights instruments.

In addion, the

Philippines is a party to

the major internaonal

humanitarian law in-

struments.

By concurring

with the Rome Statute,

the Philippines will

help to strengthen in-

stuons like the ICC

to end impunity, and

arm the posion of

the Philippines as a

leading human rightsadvocate in Asia.

I humbly recommend that this Senate should concur

the racaon of the Rome Statute. (Full text available

hp://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/?p=399)

Sponsorship speech of Professor Dr. Miriam Defensor Sanago as Chair

of the Subcommiee on the Statute of the Internaonal Criminal

Court, 16 August 2011 (excerpt)

Republic of the PhilippinesCongress of the Philippines

Metro ManilaFourteenth Congress

Third Regular SessionBegun and held in MetroManila, on Monday, the

twenty-seventh day of July,two thousand nine.

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9851

AN ACT DEFINING AND

PENALIZING CRIMES

AGAINST INTERNATIONAL

HUMANITARIAN LAW,

GENOCIDE AND OTHER

CRIMES AGAINST

HUMANITY, ORGANIZING

JURISDICTION,

DESIGNATING SPECIAL

COURTS, AND FOR

RELATED PURPOSES

Sponsored in the Philippine Senateby Professor Dr. Miriam Defensor

Sanago

Delivering hersponsorship speech inthe Philippine Senate onthe Statute of the ICC

Supreme Court upholds actions of Professor Dr. Miriam Defensor Santiagoas Commissioner of Immigration:

HARVEY, et al, petitioners , vs. DEFENSOR SANTIAGO, respondent

June 28, 1988

“We reject petitioners' contentions and uphold respondent's official acts. Every sovereign power has the inherent power to exclude aliens from its territory up-on such grounds as it may deem proper for its self-preservation or public interest.

Particularly so in this case where the State has expressly committed itself to defend the right of children toassistance and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudi-cial to their development. Respondent Commissioner of Immigration and Deportation, in instituting deportation

proceedings against petitioners, acted in the interests of the State.”



Permanent Mission of the Philippines to the United Nations

556 Fifth Avenue, New York, 10036

(212) 764-1300 [email protected] [email protected]

www.un.int/philippines

Professor Dr. Miriam Defensor Santiago wins landmark case in the Supreme Court onconstitutional amendments : “Bluntly stated, the right of the people to directly propose amendments to the Constitution through thesystem of initiative would remain entombed in the cold niche of the Constitution until Congress providesfor its implementation. Stated otherwise, while the Constitution has recognized or granted that right, the

people cannot exercise it if Congress, for whatever reason, does not provide for its implementation. This petition must then be granted, . . . the system of initiative to propose amendments to the Constitutionshould no longer be kept in the cold; it should be given flesh and blood, energy and strength.”

Miriam Defensor Santiago v. Commission on Elections, 19 March 1997 Supreme Court cites as authority publications of Professor Dr. Miriam Defensor Santiago: “Indeed, the burden of proof was on the respondents to dispute this presumption and show by clear andconvincing evidence that the Swiss deposits were lawfully acquired and that they had other legitimatesources of income. A presumption is prima facie proof of the fact presumed and, unless the fact thus

prima facie established by legal presumption is disproved, it must stand as proved.” Main Opinion by Justice (now Chief Justice) Renato Corona in Republic of the Philippines

v. Marcos (15 July 2003), citing Miriam Defensor Santiago, RULES OF COURT ANNOTATED, 1999 edition, p. 857

“The Court must take the liberal approach that recognizes the legal standing of non - traditional plaintiffssuch as citizens and taxpayers, to raise constitutional issues that affect them.”

Concurring Opinion of Justice Jose C. Vitug in Cruz v. Secretary of Environment andNatural Resources (6 December 2000), citing Miriam Defensor SantiagoCONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1st edition, 1994

“Jurisprudentially there is either the lenient or the strict approach in the appreciation of legal standing

The liberal approach recognizes legal standing to raise constitutional issues of nontraditional plaintiffssuch as taxpayers and citizens, directly affecting them.”

Concurring Opinion of Justice Jose C. Vitug in Chavez v. Presidential Commission onGood Government (9 December 1998), citing Miriam Defensor SantiagoCONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1

stedition, 1994

Miriam Rev 9

Documents

Transcript of Miriam Rev 9