Lead: The International Criminal Court opened a four-day confirmation hearing beginning 23 February to determine whether former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte should be tried for crimes against humanity linked to his long-running “war on drugs.” Prosecutors say the case covers alleged murders and attempted murders between 1 November 2011 and 16 March 2019 and include three counts and involvement in at least 76 killings. Duterte, who led the Philippines from 2016 to 2022 and is 80 years old, has denied criminal responsibility and has declined to recognise the ICC’s authority.
Key takeaways
- The hearing began 23 February and will run four days; judges then have 60 days to issue a written decision on whether to proceed to trial.
- ICC prosecutors have charged Duterte with three counts of crimes against humanity and allege he was involved in at least 76 murders between 1 November 2011 and 16 March 2019.
- The period under investigation spans his time as Davao mayor and the first half of his 2016–2022 presidency; the Philippines withdrew from the Rome Statute on 16 March 2019.
- Human-rights organisations estimate the wider drug campaign may have resulted in tens of thousands of killings, with some groups citing figures as high as about 30,000.
- Duterte waived the right to be present at the hearing, saying he does not accept ICC jurisdiction; his lawyers have filed motions citing health and procedural objections.
- His arrest and transfer to The Hague followed a political rift between the Duterte and Marcos families after a 2022 alliance; Duterte was detained at Manila airport and flown to The Hague last March.
- The case is the first ICC indictment of a former Asian head of state and is widely seen as a test of the court’s ability to hold top officials accountable for domestic policies.
Background
Rodrigo Duterte emerged as a national figure after years as mayor of Davao, where he built a reputation for a hardline approach to crime. Elected president in 2016, he campaigned on promises to eliminate street-level drug crime and used tough rhetoric and incentives for police operations. His administration’s flagship anti-drug effort—Operation Double Barrel—encouraged police to target suspected dealers and users, a strategy critics say incentivised extrajudicial killings.
Domestic institutions produced contested accounts of the campaign’s toll: police reported deaths in alleged clashes, while human-rights groups documented killings of civilians, often in poor urban neighbourhoods, and said investigations into larger drug networks were incomplete. In March 2019 the Philippines withdrew from the Rome Statute, citing sovereignty concerns; the ICC’s inquiry covers acts that occurred before that withdrawal.
Main event
The confirmation hearing opened on 23 February in The Hague. Prosecutors described evidence they say links Duterte to a pattern of killings carried out by police and unidentified assailants, arguing he acted as an “indirect co-perpetrator” by using subordinates and non-state actors to carry out violent operations. They told judges the alleged conduct includes murder and attempted murder as part of a widespread attack on a civilian population.
Duterte waived his presence at the hearing and has publicly rejected the ICC’s jurisdiction. His legal team has challenged the process on procedural and health grounds, but judges ruled he is fit to participate. Families of alleged victims gathered outside the court on 23 February to protest and to follow proceedings inside.
The former president remains politically influential at home: he won a 2025 mayoral race in Davao, his daughter Sara serves as vice-president and is a declared prospective 2028 presidential candidate, and his son Sebastian is acting mayor of Davao. Political tensions between the Duterte clan and President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. preceded the arrest that led to transfer to The Hague, with critics saying the move followed a breakdown in an earlier 2022 political alliance.
Analysis & implications
Legally, the ICC confirmation stage is not a trial; judges assess whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant a full trial. If judges confirm the charges, the case would advance to pre-trial and potentially to a full trial, a process that can take years. For the ICC, securing a path to trial against a former head of state would be a significant demonstration of its mandate to prosecute serious international crimes when domestic systems are unable or unwilling to act.
Politically, the proceedings are likely to deepen divides within the Philippines. Supporters of Duterte view the case as politically motivated and an affront to national sovereignty, while victims’ families and rights advocates see it as a rare avenue for accountability. The timing complicates domestic politics: Sara Duterte’s prospective national ambitions and ongoing municipal roles for family members make the case a persistent domestic political issue.
Diplomatically, the case highlights the limits of international justice: the ICC relies on state cooperation to execute arrests and gather evidence. The transfer and detention of a former president required a degree of state acquiescence, underscoring how domestic political dynamics — in this instance the rupture between two powerful families — can affect international accountability efforts.
Comparison & data
| Source | Period | Reported deaths |
|---|---|---|
| Human-rights NGOs (est.) | 2011–2019 | Up to ~30,000 (estimate) |
| Police / official reports | 2011–2019 | Thousands listed as fatalities in police operations; smaller official counts for unlawful killings |
| ICC charges | 1 Nov 2011–16 Mar 2019 | Prosecutors allege involvement in at least 76 murders tied to the accused conduct |
These figures are not directly comparable: NGO estimates aggregate a broad set of killings across multiple years and actors, police reports often characterise deaths as lawful operations, and the ICC’s confirmed allegations concern a narrower set of incidents where prosecutors believe evidence links the former president to specific unlawful killings.
Reactions & quotes
Prosecutors framed the hearing as an assertion of the rule of law and the court’s mandate to pursue accountability for the gravest crimes.
“Duterte’s so‑called war on drugs resulted in the killings of thousands of civilians and many of these victims were children,”
Mame Niang, ICC Prosecutor
Members of Duterte’s family and political allies have dismissed the case as selective and politically driven.
“Let’s call this what it is – not justice, not accountability, but selective prosecution dressed up as moral superiority,”
Sebastian Duterte, Acting Mayor of Davao
Victims’ relatives who gathered outside the court described the hearing as a rare chance for recognition and possible legal redress, while some domestic officials emphasised national sovereignty and procedural objections to the ICC process.
Unconfirmed
- The exact total number of killings attributable to state‑linked actors during the drug campaign remains disputed; NGO estimates and official counts diverge significantly.
- The extent to which political motives alone — rather than legal considerations — drove national authorities to permit the transfer remains subject to investigation and interpretation.
- Individual allegations about specific killings remain under evidentiary review and have not all been independently adjudicated.
Bottom line
The ICC confirmation hearing marks a pivotal moment for accountability in the Philippines and for international justice more broadly. Judges must now weigh whether the Prosecutor’s case meets the threshold to move to trial; that decision will shape both legal precedent and domestic politics.
Whatever the judicial outcome, the proceedings will continue to influence Philippine public life: they shape narratives about governance, the rule of law and political legitimacy, and will likely affect electoral calculations ahead of the 2028 presidential race. For the ICC, the case will test practical limits of international prosecution when powerful domestic actors and fractured political alliances are involved.