Duterte suffers setbacks ahead of key ICC hearing

The defense team representing former president Rodrigo Duterte has encountered setbacks as it prepares for a crucial confirmation of charges hearing at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Netherlands. These developments center on the ongoing investigation into alleged crimes against humanity related to the former president’s anti-drug campaign.

Defense Requests Denied

In a unanimous ruling, the Pre-Trial Chamber I denied the defense’s requests to compel the prosecution to disclose further details about witnesses and to receive less-redacted versions of key documents, including the Document Containing the Charges and the Pre-Confirmation Brief. The chamber also rejected a defense motion to disqualify the external legal representatives of victims involved in the case, finding the arguments presented did not demonstrate a conflict of interest or legal impediment.

Did You Know? The ICC investigation covers alleged extrajudicial killings that occurred from November 2011, when Duterte was mayor of Davao City, until March 2019, before the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute.

The confirmation of charges hearing, scheduled for February 23–24 and 26–27 in The Hague, will determine whether the prosecutor has presented sufficient evidence to proceed to a full trial. Duterte, 80, has been detained at the ICC’s detention facility since March 2025 and faces three counts of crimes against humanity. He has waived his right to attend the hearing, citing his rejection of the ICC’s jurisdiction and health concerns.

Balancing Transparency and Security

Presiding Judge Iulia Antoanella Motoc, along with Judges Reine Alapini-Gansou and Maria del Socorro Flores Liera, explained that existing redactions of witness information appropriately balance the principle of public proceedings with the need to ensure the safety and dignity of those involved, as mandated by the Rome Statute. The judges stated that a public trial does not guarantee unrestricted access to all case details if doing so could jeopardize individuals or undermine the proceedings.

Prosecutors had previously argued that redactions were necessary to protect sensitive security information related to victims and witnesses, a position supported by the Common Legal Representatives for Victims, who also favored maximum public access where possible. The chamber also declined to compel the prosecution to reveal the whereabouts and availability of witnesses for trial, citing a lack of legal justification for such a demand.

Expert Insight: The court’s decisions regarding witness information highlight the inherent tension between the principles of transparency in international criminal proceedings and the critical need to protect vulnerable individuals who may be at risk.

Evidence Lists Expanded

Despite the denials regarding witness information and legal representation, the ICC judges have approved requests from both the defense and the prosecution to expand their respective lists of evidence. The defense was permitted to add 108 items, while the prosecution was allowed to introduce 14 additional items into the record. These additions were approved due to their limited scope, relevance to the charges, and the absence of objections from either side.

Counsel Nicholas Kaufman, leading Duterte’s legal team, argued that the added materials were highly relevant to the case, with six items already disclosed since February 2025 becoming essential as evidence. The defense cautioned that excluding these materials would prejudice Duterte. Prosecutors agreed not to object to the inclusion of the 14 items they sought to introduce.

Frequently Asked Questions

What charges does Duterte face?

Duterte faces three counts of crimes against humanity tied to drug war deaths between 2011 and 2019.

What is the purpose of the confirmation of charges hearing?

The hearing will determine if the court finds that the prosecutor has gathered enough evidence to go to trial.

Who represents the victims in this case?

Nicole Arcaina, Joel Butuyan, and Gilbert Andres act as external representatives for the victims.

As the ICC proceeds with the confirmation of charges hearing, what impact might the court’s decisions have on the pursuit of accountability for alleged human rights violations?