‘NO WAY HOME’: Duterte faces ICC trial over drug war

By Joseph Bernard A. Marzan

THE HAGUE, The Netherlands — Can’t bring him home.

Trial will proceed in the case against former President Rodrigo Duterte after Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Thursday, April 23, confirmed charges of crimes against humanity against him, finding sufficient evidence to proceed to trial over alleged crimes linked to his administration’s anti-drug campaign.

In its April 23, 2026, decision, the chamber ruled that there are “substantial grounds to believe that Mr. Duterte committed the crimes with which he is charged,” allowing the case to move forward to the trial stage.

The ruling stems from proceedings under Article 61(7) of the Rome Statute, the governing charter of the ICC, which require judges to determine whether evidence presented by prosecutors meets the threshold to warrant a full trial.

The chamber, composed of Judges Iulia Antoanella Motoc, Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou, and María del Socorro Flores Liera, said confirmation proceedings are designed to ensure that only sufficiently supported cases proceed.

“The primary purpose of the confirmation proceedings is to decide whether the case as presented by the Prosecution is sufficiently established to warrant a trial,” the decision stated.

The judges emphasized that the evidentiary threshold at this stage is lower than that required for conviction but must still show a “clear line of reasoning underpinning the charges.”

Duterte has been detained at the ICC seat in The Hague following his arrest and surrender in March 2025.

The case arises from the ICC’s investigation into alleged crimes committed in the Philippines between Nov. 1, 2011, and March 16, 2019, covering Duterte’s tenure as Davao City mayor and later as president.

The end date of the investigation period was the formal date when the Philippines withdrew from the court under his administration.

Prosecutors allege that Duterte was involved in a common plan to “neutralise” suspected criminals, including those linked to illegal drugs, through violent means such as murder.

According to the chamber, Duterte is charged with multiple modes of liability, including indirect co-perpetration, ordering or inducing the commission of crimes, and aiding and abetting.

The judges said the prosecution’s allegations portray Duterte as being “at the apex” of entities involved in carrying out a widespread and systematic attack against civilians.

The chamber also clarified that the incidents cited by prosecutors — 49 incidents involving 78 victims — are “a non-exhaustive list” meant to illustrate the broader scale of alleged crimes.

“In these circumstances, the Chamber considers that requiring an exhaustive list of all incidents related to the charged criminality in this case is unwarranted,” the decision read.

Judges noted that the scale and nature of the alleged crimes, which may involve a large number of victims over an extended period, justify a broader framing of charges.

The chamber rejected defense arguments that the charges were overly broad, stressing that sufficient detail was provided to define the scope of the case and inform the accused of the allegations.

It also addressed challenges to the prosecution’s evidence, including claims that some material relied on hearsay or statements from self-confessed perpetrators.

The chamber said such evidence is not automatically inadmissible and may still carry probative value depending on the circumstances.

“The fact that evidence is hearsay does not necessarily deprive it of probative value,” the judges said, adding that credibility issues are more appropriately assessed at trial.

On the issue of public statements and official policies referencing self-defense and lawful conduct, the chamber said these must be evaluated in context.

It found that such statements were often made alongside alleged directives encouraging unlawful killings and, therefore, did not negate the prosecution’s claims.

“The mere inclusion of references to lawful conduct is not, in and of itself, determinative,” the decision stated.

The chamber also rejected the defense’s interpretation of the term “neutralise” as referring to lawful law enforcement, concluding that evidence supports its meaning as “to kill” in the context of the case.

The confirmation of charges sets the parameters for the trial, where judges will ultimately determine guilt or innocence based on a higher standard of proof.

The ICC investigation into the Philippines drug war has been a contentious issue since Manila withdrew from the Rome Statute.

On Wednesday, April 22, however, the court’s Appeals Chamber upheld the lower chamber’s decision that the ICC maintains jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed while the Philippines was still a state party.

The chamber said its decision ensures that the case proceeds on the basis of sufficiently supported allegations while safeguarding the rights of the accused and the interests of victims.

What happens next? A trial date has yet to be announced.

Now that charges have been confirmed, the Presidency of the Court is expected to constitute a Trial Chamber, composed of three judges other than those who sat on the Pre-Trial Chamber bench, to which the case will be elevated.

After its constitution, the new Trial Chamber will hold status conferences and confer with the parties and participants, both of which are key to setting trial dates and adopting necessary procedures to ensure a fair and expeditious trial.

The Trial Chamber will also rule on key preliminary issues, including the language or languages to be used during the trial phase and the timing and manner of the disclosure of evidence.