The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) ruled on Wednesday that the court had jurisdiction over the case against former president Rodrigo Duterte, keeping him in detention in the Netherlands and bringing him closer to a possible trial for crimes against humanity for his brutal war on drugs in the Philippines.

The ICC may exercise jurisdiction in the Duterte case for the alleged crimes committed in the Philippines from Nov. 1, 2011, to March 16, 2019, when it was still a party to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the court, according to the chamber’s decision.

Duterte, 81, has been detained in an ICC prison facility in The Hague since he was arrested and flown to the Dutch city on March 12, 2025. He is accused of crimes against humanity of murder for the thousands of mostly poor Filipinos summarily killed during his antidrug campaign from the time he was mayor of Davao City until the first half of his six-year term as president.

The Duterte government reported that the bloody campaign left over 6,200 dead in police operations. Human rights groups say the number was closer to 30,000.

The Appeals Chamber rejected all the arguments presented by Duterte’s lawyers that there was no legal basis for the continuation of the proceedings against him. It said that it considered his demand for “immediate and unconditional release moot.”

Rome Statute

Duterte and his lawyers contended that the Philippines was no longer a party to the Rome Statute when he was arrested in Manila and handed to the ICC in The Hague.

On March 17, 2018, Manila informed the ICC that it was withdrawing from the Rome Statute on orders of Duterte, who was angered by the initiation of an investigation of alleged extrajudicial killings in his drug war by the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC. Under the statute, the withdrawal took effect on March 16, 2019, a year after the Duterte government’s notification.

In a statement, the ICC said the Appeals Chamber observed that the Rome Statute “must be interpreted in a systemic manner and in line with the object and purpose of the statute, which is to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole.”

“It ruled that it would be incompatible with this object and purpose to enable a State Party to evade its responsibilities under the Statute by depositing a written notice of withdrawal once it discovers that alleged crimes committed on its territory or by its nationals are being examined by the Prosecution,” it said.

In other words, the ICC, citing the treaty itself, warns that withdrawing from the statute is not an escape route to avoid prosecution and possible conviction of crimes against humanity.

Duterte waiver

In a letter to the court two weeks earlier, Duterte waived his right to attend Wednesday’s hearing where Presiding Judge Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza read a summary of the ruling of the five-member Appeals Chamber.

The announcement of the decision was received with loud cheers by family members of victims of the drug war who watched the live broadcast of the proceedings at the University of the Philippines College of Law in Quezon City, some of them in tears.

Many of them carried pictures of their slain loved ones and placards saying, “Tuloy ang Laban” (Onward with the Struggle) and “Confirm the Charges vs Duterte.” They chanted, “Duterte Panagutin” (Hold Duterte Accountable), holding up pictures of an angry Duterte.

Joining the celebration was the human rights group, Karapatan, which issued a statement calling the ICC decision “a monumental victory for justice and a definitive blow against the culture of impunity.”

It said that the ICC had signaled that “justice cannot be outrun by political maneuvering and lies.”

“Today, the Appeals Chamber chose the side of the victims over the side of the perpetrators,” it said. “We remain steadfast in standing in solidarity with the victims of Duterte’s crimes. The path to justice is long, but today, it became significantly shorter.”

Confirmation of charges

After the resolution of the jurisdiction issue, the remaining ICC process prior to a possible trial, is the ruling on the confirmation of charges against Duterte, which is expected before or by the end of April.

The confirmation of charges was heard over four days last February. 

If the Pre-Trial Chamber I (PTC I) rules to confirm the charges, or a finding that there is basis to try Duterte, he will undergo a full-blown trial, which he must attend, according to court rules. A Trial Chamber will be established for this.

If PTC I decides there is not enough evidence to proceed, Duterte will be set free.

Duterte’s lead counsel, Nicholas Kaufman, said that from a legal perspective, the decision failed to clarify “the threshold for when an amorphous preliminary examination becomes a matter before the court.”

“As it would now appear, an investigation may be opened, post-withdrawal, not just one year down the line but even 20 years down the line,” he said in a statement after the ruling.

‘State-sponsored policy’

During the four-day confirmation of charges hearing, which is intended to establish “substantial grounds to believe” that Duterte committed the crimes he is accused of, the prosecution argued that the antidrug campaign was a “state-sponsored policy” to target civilians labeled as drug offenders, without due process.

The prosecutors said Duterte played a pivotal role in the killings by personally authorizing operations, hand-picking some of the victims himself. They presented his public pronouncements and declarations to “kill” suspects wantonly, creating a culture of impunity that encouraged state and non-state actors to conduct assassinations.

The defense, however, insisted that the charges were baseless and that there was no direct evidence linking Duterte’s public statements or policies to specific victims. It asserted that his prosecution was politically motivated and that the court interfered in the domestic affairs of the Philippines.

In the end Kaufman appealed for Duterte’s release on humanitarian grounds, saying that he was frail, aging and ailing.

“I tried to engage him concerning the evidence. And he lost the desire to follow me within less than a minute,” Kaufman told PTC I on Feb. 27, during the last day of the confirmation of charges hearing.

“How does the prosecution say that I did this? I’ve never murdered anyone,” he quoted Duterte as saying. “I was a faithful servant of the people, and that is how I wish to be remembered. I have now accepted my fate and I realized that I could die in prison.”

Edre U. Olalia, president of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers and chair of the National Union of People’s Lawyers, said in a message to Duterte that he could not escape from the consequences of his actions.

“You must accept the reality that you have to be accountable and that your imagined invincibility for the longest time has been shattered not by disingenuous populism nor fleeting power but by inevitable perdition,” Olalia said. CS

---