A deeper look into the ICC, and Boracay

THE current brouhaha surrounding the country’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Court (ICC) quite interestingly pits a fast-growing Third World country against an international body that appears to have gained a less than pristine reputation.

The ICC was meant as an instrument of the Rome Statute to try criminal cases for those which courts no longer function, as in the case of large-scale conflict. A 2017 article on CNN.com (https://edition.cnn. com/2016/07/18/world/internationalcriminal-court-fast-facts/index.html) reveals a lot about the court and its beginnings, giving us a glimpse into current issues and controversies that it has found itself embroiled in.

In recent months, the ICC has taken up a case filed by a Filipino lawyer against President Rodrigo Duterte. Of course, many legal analysts found this odd, if not disturbing. If it were indeed a court of “last resort,” they asked, then why is it being used as a court of first instance, ahead of national judicial proceedings that the ISS is not allowed to supplant?

Worse, it forces us to ask why ICC prosecutor Bensouda makes public statements ahead of the proceedings. Shouldn’t she hold her peace until the cases are resolved?

In addition there are those who opine that the ICC in recent years has gained a reputation for being selective in the cases it chooses to handle (mostly from Africa), with a tendency to make public statements that makes people wonder whether it is really a court or another version of Human Rights Watch. Should we agree with this opinion?

Whichever way you answer the earlier question, its recent actions raise doubts on the court’s impartiality and integrity. Was this the reason 7 countries led by the United States and China opted not to be part of the ICC? Was it the reason some African countries also recently withdrew from the court?

Unlike other international bodies, this one is supposed to provide a venue for others to obtain justice for those eluded by it. In its rather young life, it is already controversial, its reputation put in question, and its behavior pleading with the Philippine government not to leave only betraying inherent weaknesses.

The first time the issue of Boracay’s waters gained public attention was in 1997, when coliform levels reportedly rose high enough to render some parts of the island dangerous for swimming. Fecal coliform in particular, comes from untreated sewage coming from comfort rooms.

When these are high, you can bet it comes from human sources. The famous photo of then Tourism Secretary Mina Gabor taking a dip in the beaches galvanized public opinion towards compelling the provision of wastewater treatment plants to treat the effluents of Boracay’s establishments.

You’d think that since this happened more than 20 years ago, the wastewater treatment interventions would have already ensurerd cleaner waters. It is true that treatment plants were established, a sewer network built, and an environmental users fee is collected from every visitor in order to protect the clear water and white sand from being damaged.

Alas, sources tell us that since 1997, only a little more than half of Boracay’s total wastewater is treated prior to discharge, mainly because the establishments do not want to pay the necessary treatment fees. With an increasing population, and the estimated almost 2 million annual visitors, the island is now inundated with more establishments and migrants than its ecology can carry. This is apparent in Boat stations 1 and 2, where most revelers congregate.

True, Boracay is a work in progress and so are other island destinations such as Siargao, El Nido in Palawan, Samal, Camiguin, Romblon, and Caramoan. With the future arrival of more tourists from Asian countries like China (reaching almost a million last year), expect a greater demand for other destinations and more pressure on these island ecosystems.

Thus, to avoid a repeat of Boracay, the best environmental planning needs to be engaged, and the common treatment facilities be fast-tracked to ensure that all are able to connect their wastewater to be treated. Enforcement of Clean Water Act requirements particularly Discharge Permits is demanded for these areas. This time, establishments cannot and should not renege from these.

In turn, the DENR-EMB should already report the monthly baseline water quality characteristics of these new islands and post them promptly in their website. A suggestion is to post the compliance status of the establishments to determine whether these are complying with requirements. It is time to be more transparent. This way, compliers are rewarded and violators easily identified.

After all, the natural beauty of these islands is the main capital that draw tourism enterprises and their customers. Allow nature to deteriorate and you lose the tourists. For reactions: