ICC Judges Confirm Crimes Against Humanity Charges Against Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte

BY EMMANUEL OGBONNA

Judges at the International Criminal Court have confirmed crimes against humanity charges against former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte, marking a significant step toward a full trial over allegations tied to his controversial anti-drug campaign.

In a unanimous decision issued Thursday, a three-judge panel concluded there were “substantial grounds” to believe Duterte bore responsibility for a series of killings carried out over more than a decade. The ruling covers actions dating back to his tenure as mayor of Davao City and extends through his presidency from 2016 to 2022, a period defined by an aggressive crackdown on illegal drugs that drew widespread international criticism.

Duterte, now 80, was arrested in the Philippines last year and has consistently denied any wrongdoing. His legal team has challenged both the substance of the allegations and the credibility of key witnesses, arguing that the case relies heavily on testimony from individuals who have admitted involvement in violent acts themselves.

The court’s detailed decision outlines what judges described as a coordinated and sustained policy aimed at eliminating suspected criminals. According to their findings, Duterte played a central role in shaping and executing a strategy to “neutralize” individuals linked to the drug trade. Prosecutors allege that law enforcement personnel, along with organized groups acting as so-called “death squads,” carried out killings with either direct encouragement or tacit approval from senior leadership.

During pretrial proceedings earlier this year, deputy prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang told the court that the violence evolved into a system in which participants were incentivized to carry out killings. He described a climate where financial rewards and fear of retaliation drove individuals to take part, with some treating the killings as a form of competition.

The scale of the violence remains a point of contention. Official police figures place the death toll at more than 6,000 during Duterte’s presidency, while human rights organizations estimate the number could be as high as 30,000, citing unreported cases and broader patterns of extrajudicial killings.

Duterte’s lead defense counsel, Nick Kaufman, criticized the ruling, arguing that it rests on unreliable testimony. He contends that cooperating witnesses, many of whom have acknowledged participating in killings, have provided uncorroborated accounts that should not form the basis of an international prosecution.

No date has yet been set for the start of the trial. Duterte has not appeared in court during the proceedings so far, having waived his right to attend hearings in person. Last month, judges determined that he is medically fit to stand trial, following earlier delays prompted by concerns about his health.

The decision has been welcomed by international human rights advocates, who view it as a landmark moment in efforts to hold powerful political figures accountable. Maria Elena Vignoli of Human Rights Watch said the case sends a clear signal that those accused of serious international crimes cannot evade justice indefinitely, regardless of their position or influence.

The legal battle has unfolded against a complex jurisdictional backdrop. In 2018, ICC prosecutors announced a preliminary examination into the Philippine government’s anti-drug operations. Shortly afterward, Duterte declared that the Philippines would withdraw from the court, a move widely interpreted by critics as an attempt to avoid international scrutiny.

Despite the withdrawal, the court has maintained that it retains jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed while the Philippines was still a member. That position was reinforced earlier this week when ICC appeals judges rejected a request from Duterte’s legal team to dismiss the case on jurisdictional grounds.

As the proceedings move closer to trial, the case is expected to test not only the strength of the evidence against Duterte but also the broader reach of international justice mechanisms in addressing allegations of state-led violence. The outcome could carry significant implications for accountability efforts worldwide, particularly in cases involving leaders accused of overseeing systematic human rights abuses.