The Duterte case enters the pre-trial stage: International Criminal Court ruling and the political aftermath in the Philippines.
29/01/2026
On January 26, 2025, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, issued a ruling rejecting the request from former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte's defense team to indefinitely suspend the proceedings on health grounds. Following the submission of a report by an evaluation panel consisting of three independent medical experts on December 5 last year, the court determined that the 80-year-old Duterte is capable of effectively exercising his procedural rights and is fit to participate in the pre-trial proceedings. The court rescheduled the hearing, originally set for September last year and subsequently postponed, to February 23, 2025. This hearing will determine whether the evidence supporting the prosecution's charges is sufficient to refer the case to a formal trial. Duterte is the first former head of state to be arrested and detained by the International Criminal Court. He faces three charges of crimes against humanity, centered on alleged extrajudicial killings during the drug war he implemented while in office. The Philippine National Police acknowledges a death toll exceeding 6,000, while human rights organizations estimate the number to be as high as 30,000.
From Davao City to Malacañang Palace: The Timeline and Geographic Dimensions of the Accusations
The indictment submitted by the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court outlines a clear and escalating trajectory of violence. The charges do not begin with Duterte's presidential term but trace back to his tenure as mayor of Davao City in Mindanao, southern Philippines. The first charge involves 19 murder cases that occurred between 2013 and 2016, with the prosecution alleging Duterte's participation as an accomplice. Davao City is Duterte's political stronghold, where he served as mayor for over 20 years, and his image as a tough enforcer was initially established here.
The second charge focuses on the murders of 14 so-called high-value targets between 2016 and 2017, at the beginning of his presidential term. The third charge covers 43 murders that occurred nationwide from 2016 to 2018 during the crackdown on suspected drug users or dealers. The core of the prosecution's accusation is that Duterte created, funded, and armed execution squads, and instructed and authorized violent acts, including murder, against so-called criminals. From the southern city of Davao to the capital Manila, and across multiple regions of the Philippine archipelago, the charges attempt to demonstrate that this was a nationwide, systematic attack, meeting the criteria for crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute.
The expansion of geographical scope coincides with the leap in the level of power. This reflects the prosecution's strategy: not only to hold him accountable for his actions as president but also to reveal that his pattern of violence is a consistent, top-down driven systemic behavior. Duterte stepped down as president in June 2022, but the International Criminal Court's investigation did not cease. On March 11, 2025, he was arrested in Manila and extradited to the Netherlands that same night, and has since been detained at the detention center in Scheveningen, The Hague.
Health Disputes and Procedural Gamesmanship: Legal Offense and Defense Inside and Outside the Courtroom
The legal proceedings of the Duterte case have themselves become an intense battle of attack and defense. One of the core strategies of the defense team is to challenge the defendant's capacity to participate in the litigation. After the hearing in September last year was postponed, defense attorneys such as Nicholas Kaufman argued that Duterte's short-term memory was significantly impaired, his health had deteriorated during detention, and he was unable to effectively understand the proceedings or provide instructions to his lawyers, thus preventing him from receiving a fair trial.
The response of the International Criminal Court was to commission an independent medical panel composed of experts in fields such as geriatric neurology and psychiatry to conduct an assessment. In its ruling, the court clarified a key legal principle: the standard for determining whether a party is fit to participate in proceedings lies in their basic understanding of the process, rather than requiring them to be at the peak of their cognitive abilities. Based on the expert report, the court made a ruling of fitness. Data shows that since its establishment, the International Criminal Court has never ultimately found any suspect completely unfit to stand trial, even in other cases involving elderly defendants.
The frustration of the defense team stems not only from the verdict but also from procedural issues. Attorney Kaufman stated that the defense was denied the opportunity to submit its own medical evidence and could not cross-examine the contradictory conclusions reached by the panel of experts appointed by the judge. They have indicated that they will appeal the ruling. On the other hand, the prosecution camp has also undergone changes. Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan recused himself due to an ongoing investigation into sexual assault allegations against him. Moreover, as early as October 2023, the court ruled in response to the defense's request that Khan should be excluded from the case due to a conflict of interest, as he had represented potential victims in the Duterte case before serving as a prosecutor. These procedural twists and turns highlight the complexity and internal challenges faced by the International Criminal Court when handling highly politically sensitive cases.
Jurisdictional Disputes and the Failure of "Exit Strategies"
The most contentious issue of international law in this case is none other than jurisdiction. The Philippines ratified the Rome Statute in 2011, becoming a member state of the International Criminal Court. However, just one month after the court's prosecutor announced in February 2018 that a preliminary investigation into the drug war would be initiated, then-President Duterte declared in March 2018 the commencement of the process to withdraw from the Rome Statute. According to the Statute, the withdrawal notice takes effect one year after submission, and the Philippines officially withdrew on March 17, 2019. Duterte's defense team thus argues that the court lacks jurisdiction over events occurring after March 2019, or over cases for which formal investigations were only launched thereafter.
The Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court rejected this argument in a key ruling in September 2023. The court noted that its jurisdiction covers alleged crimes committed during the period when the Philippines was still a state party, i.e., up to March 16, 2019. More importantly, the ruling clarified a principle: a state cannot abuse the right of withdrawal to shield alleged perpetrators already under the court's scrutiny. This means that jurisdiction may be maintained as long as the alleged criminal acts occurred while the country was still a state party, and the court's investigation had substantially commenced or was reasonably foreseeable before its withdrawal. This ruling closes a potential loophole that attempted to evade accountability by withdrawing from international treaties, carrying profound implications for the international judicial system.
Domestic Political Echoes and the Symbolic Significance of Human Rights Accountability
Although Duterte is entangled in The Hague, the ripples stirred by this case within the Philippines have never subsided. While current President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. maintains a political alliance with the Duterte family, the Philippine government's decision to comply with the International Criminal Court's arrest warrant on the extradition issue is itself a thought-provoking signal. The Marcos administration faces the dual pressure of balancing domestic nationalist sentiments with international legal obligations.
For the families of victims and human rights organizations, the ruling on January 26 was an encouragement. Labor rights group SENTRO and the Asia Pacific Women's Coalition Against Trafficking issued a joint statement, calling it a resounding victory for justice and accountability. The statement emphasized: The International Criminal Court's ruling reaffirms a simple yet powerful truth: no one, not even a former head of state, is above the law. These groups estimate the death toll to be as high as 30,000, far exceeding official statistics. What they seek is not only justice in individual cases but also a thorough reckoning of the state policies that, under the guise of anti-drug campaigns, led to widespread violence.
Duterte himself has consistently maintained a confrontational stance. Even when appearing frail and weak during his first video court appearance, he has long insisted that he only ordered the police to shoot in self-defense and has always defended this anti-drug campaign. He has even repeatedly told supporters that he would rather rot in jail if it could free the Philippines from drugs. This strongman image stands in stark contrast to the octogenarian now undergoing health assessments in court.
The confirmation of charges hearing on February 23 will be the next critical juncture. The judges will meticulously examine the evidence submitted by the prosecution to decide whether to confirm the charges and proceed to the trial stage. Regardless of the outcome, the case of Rodrigo Duterte has already made history. It tests the International Criminal Court's determination and ability to hold those in positions of power accountable, while also challenging the resilience and wisdom of the global human rights protection mechanism when faced with the shield of national sovereignty. The legal debates inside the Hague courtroom are tightly connected to the political memories on the streets of Manila through an invisible thread, collectively writing a contemporary narrative about power, violence, and accountability.
Reference materials
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/philippines-duterte-icc-world-court-9.7061517?cmp=rss