{"id":12840,"date":"2026-03-23T06:55:47","date_gmt":"2026-03-23T05:55:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/?p=12840"},"modified":"2026-03-20T18:55:17","modified_gmt":"2026-03-20T17:55:17","slug":"icc-appeals-chamber-rejects-duterte-bid-for-release-as-victims-press-for-justice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/icc-appeals-chamber-rejects-duterte-bid-for-release-as-victims-press-for-justice\/","title":{"rendered":"ICC appeals chamber rejects Duterte bid for release as victims press for justice"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has rejected<\/a> former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte\u2019s bid for interim release, ordering that he remain in detention in The Hague as proceedings in his crimes against humanity case continue.<\/p>\n

In its ruling, the chamber affirmed<\/a> the January 2026 decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I, which concluded that Duterte is medically fit to take part in pre-trial proceedings. The finding was based<\/a> on an assessment conducted by independent experts in December 2025.<\/p>\n

The Appeals Chamber said<\/a> doctors chosen by the defense team did not conduct a new medical examination and that the defense report presented no new information about Duterte\u2019s health.<\/p>\n

Confirmation of charges hearings pushes through<\/strong><\/p>\n

From February 23 to 27, the ICC held<\/a> the confirmation of charges hearing to determine whether there are \u201csubstantial grounds\u201d to believe Duterte committed crimes against humanity. The ICC will decide<\/a> within 60 days whether to confirm the charges and proceed to trial, decline them, or adjourn the hearing and request further investigation by the prosecutor.<\/p>\n

Duterte faces<\/a> three counts of crimes against humanity for alleged killings carried out between 2011 and 2019 during his time as mayor of Davao City and later as president. He waived<\/a> his right to attend the hearing in person, refusing to acknowledge the ICC\u2019s jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

ICC prosecutors argued<\/a> that Duterte oversaw systematic killings carried out nationwide through a \u201cnational network\u201d of alleged co-perpetrators. This network reportedly included<\/a> members of law-enforcement agencies, police officers, and civilians who were involved in carrying out the killings.<\/p>\n

According to ICC trial lawyer Robynne Croft, Duterte is considered<\/a> an indirect co-perpetrator because of his role in a shared plan to eliminate suspected criminals. She stated<\/a> that this included his alleged control over the Davao Death Squad (DDS) and the broader national network that was used to implement the plan.<\/p>\n

Evidence presented included<\/a> official and independent records of drug-related deaths, a list of suspected drug personalities, and a 2016 command memorandum issued by Ronald \u201cBato\u201d Dela Rosa, who was then the chief of the Philippine National Police and is now a senator. The memorandum outlined<\/a> a strategy to \u201cneutralize\u201d drug dealers. According<\/a> to insider witnesses linked to the DDS and cited by ICC prosecutors, the term \u201cneutralize\u201d was understood to mean killing.<\/p>\n

Croft argued<\/a> that Duterte acted as an indirect co-perpetrator, designing and directing the campaign while controlling those who executed it. \u201cThere can be no doubt about Duterte\u2019s knowledge and intent,\u201d she said<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Duterte lawyer rejects \u201ckilling policy\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

Duterte\u2019s lawyer Nicholas Kaufman repeatedly argued<\/a> that the Davao Death Squad was fictitious, claiming that evidence of its existence relied only on anecdotes and hearsay. He rejected<\/a> the prosecution\u2019s assertion that it functioned as an organized network behind a killing policy in Davao City that was later expanded nationwide.<\/p>\n

Kaufman insisted<\/a> that his client had never killed anyone, despite Duterte\u2019s past public statements appearing to admit involvement in killings. He murdered no one, Kaufman said<\/a>, adding that there is \u201cabsolutely nothing\u201d directly linking Duterte to the deaths in the drug war.<\/p>\n

The defense also challenged<\/a> the credibility of prosecution witnesses. \u00a0During the defense presentation on February 26, 2026, Kaufman described key witnesses as \u201cself-confessed vicious murderers,\u201d arguing that their testimony is \u201cinherently unreliable.\u201d He also argued<\/a> that Duterte\u2019s remarks appearing to order killings were merely hyperbole.<\/p>\n

Evidence shows clear directive understood as \u201ckill,\u201d says prosecution<\/strong><\/p>\n

In contrast, Gilbert Andres, the victims\u2019 common legal representative, said<\/a> the former president\u2019s public statements effectively functioned as policy. He noted that whenever Duterte encouraged killings, alleged drug users were killed across the Philippines.<\/p>\n

Senior trial lawyer Julian Nicholls of the ICC prosecution team argued<\/a> that the evidence shows that Rodrigo Duterte conveyed a clear directive that was understood and carried out by those responsible for the killings. According to Nicholls, the message signaled<\/a> that those who committed killings under Duterte\u2019s direction would receive protection, financial rewards, and promotions.<\/p>\n

Nicholls also told<\/a> the court that even if Duterte\u2019s public speeches were set aside entirely, the prosecution still has substantial evidence supporting its case. He said<\/a> the broader body of evidence contradicts the defense claim that Duterte merely intended his subordinates to follow the law and that his speeches were rhetorical exaggerations.<\/p>\n

On the final day of pre-trial proceedings on February 27, Kaufman presented<\/a> police records to support the defense\u2019s claim that drug war victims had offered armed resistance. He argued that documents such as arrest warrants, operational reports, and firearm recovery records show that incidents were legitimate police operations that escalated into gunfights, prompting officers to shoot in self-defense.<\/p>\n

Families dispute defense\u2019s claims victims fought back<\/strong><\/p>\n

Estrella Nonay, the 72-year-old mother of drug war victim Bernard Nonay, said<\/a> she does not believe the defense\u2019s arguments. Her son, a tricycle driver and the family\u2019s sole breadwinner, was shot<\/a> dead by two motorcycle-riding assailants on June 20, 2018 after dropping off a passenger.<\/p>\n

Nonay said<\/a> she remains hopeful that the case against Duterte will move forward and believes that the pursuit of justice for the victims is fair and justified.<\/p>\n

Purisima Dacumos also condemned<\/a> the defense\u2019s claim that victims fought back, saying her husband Danilo did not resist and was not a violent person. Llore Pasco said<\/a> they were saddened by the loss of their loved ones but grateful for the opportunity to share their stories in court, while angered by what they described as misleading claims by the defense.<\/p>\n

Sheerah Escudero, whose brother was also killed, dismissed<\/a> the defense\u2019s statements, saying the families themselves are living proof of the brutality of the so-called \u201cwar on drugs.\u201d<\/p>\n

ICC is victims\u2019 last chance for justice<\/strong><\/p>\n

Lawyer Joel Butuyan, who represents victims before the ICC, called<\/a> for the case to proceed to trial, describing it as the victims\u2019 last chance for justice. He warned of ongoing impunity in the Philippines and said a full trial would document the history and highlight the human toll of the drug war.<\/p>\n

Also representing victims, lawyer Gilbert Andres said<\/a> the Duterte administration failed to prosecute police officers responsible for government-acknowledged killings during the Philippine drug war.<\/p>\n

Andres argued<\/a> that the deaths point to a state policy of extrajudicial killings, noting that the government\u2019s reporting of the fatalities as accomplishments could suggest state sponsorship of the killings.<\/p>\n

Andres said<\/a> the anti-drug campaign was widespread, systematic, and disproportionately targeted the poor, including children. Citing the Philippine Supreme Court, he stressed<\/a> that police cannot claim a presumption of regularity in operations where deaths occur, underscoring the need for accountability.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe victims want these charges to be confirmed because they want to be reintegrated into their communities,\u201d Andres said<\/a>. \u201cThey are still in the shadow of fake news, fear, and threats from Mr. Duterte\u2019s supporters.\u201d<\/p>\n

Advocacy groups reported<\/a> that victims\u2019 families involved in the ICC proceedings faced online harassment and disinformation.<\/p>\n

Rubilyn Litao, national coordinator of Rise Up for Life and for Rights, reported<\/a> that victims, including herself, are being targeted by an AI-assisted disinformation campaign during ongoing ICC hearings. After the confirmation hearing concluded, families and human rights advocates celebrated<\/a> briefly with small cakes inscribed in Tagalog \u201cTuloy ang laban\u201d (\u201cThe fight continues\u201d). The Duterte Panagutin Campaign Network called<\/a> for continued public support to hold Duterte and his allies accountable.<\/p>\n

Evidence against Duterte is strong, says legal analyst<\/strong><\/p>\n

Legal analyst Paolina Massidda said<\/a> the evidence against Duterte appears strong enough to move forward to trial. She explained<\/a> that victims whose cases fall within the confirmed charges and timeframe – up to 2019 – may participate safely in the proceedings, with protections such as anonymity.<\/p>\n

Massida is a lawyer with the ICC\u2019s Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV), whose mandate<\/a> is to represent victims of mass atrocities before the \u00a0ICC. Victims\u2019 participation, she said<\/a>, is essential to documenting crimes, amplifying their voices, and strengthening cases, even if some affected individuals fall outside the formal scope.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Michael Tiu Jr., head of the UP Law Center International Criminal Law Program, said<\/a> he was surprised by portions of Kaufman\u2019s opening statement, particularly its references to Philippine politics. He noted<\/a> that such political commentary is unusual in ICC hearings and appeared intended more to influence public perception than to present evidence relevant to the judges\u2019 decision on whether to advance the case to trial.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has rejected former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte\u2019s bid for interim release, ordering that he remain in detention in The Hague as proceedings in his crimes against humanity case continue. In its ruling, the chamber affirmed the January 2026 decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I, which concluded that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":11088,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[64,73,58,59,62,3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12840","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-war-on-drugs-en","category-aktuelles-en","category-human-rights-news","category-internal-affairs","category-international-institutions","category-news-en"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12840","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12840"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12840\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12918,"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12840\/revisions\/12918"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11088"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12840"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12840"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amp.ngo\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12840"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}