For nearly six months, the eyes of the world have been fixed on The Hague, where former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte sits in detention at the International Criminal Court (ICC). The high-profile case, centered on allegations of crimes against humanity stemming from Duterte’s controversial war on drugs, has now entered a new phase as his legal team revealed, for the first time, its initial set of evidence in his defense. Yet, the proceedings have been anything but straightforward, marked by legal maneuvering, delays, and mounting anguish among the families of victims.
According to Philippine Daily Inquirer, Duterte’s legal team, led by attorney Nicholas Kaufman, disclosed at least 30 pieces of evidence to the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor and the Office of Public Counsel for Victims. The bulk of these—29 items—were submitted on September 5, 2025, with a final item added on September 11. The nature of this evidence remains confidential, and neither the public nor the families of those killed in the anti-drug campaign have been told what these documents or materials contain. The defense maintains these items “support arguments challenging various legal aspects of the documents containing the charges.”
This disclosure comes at a critical juncture. The confirmation of charges hearing, originally scheduled for September 23 to 26, was recently postponed. The delay followed a request by Duterte’s defense for an indefinite adjournment, arguing that the former president is “not fit to stand trial.” The Pre-Trial Chamber’s majority agreed to delay the proceedings, though one judge dissented, asserting that only the trial chamber should determine a defendant’s fitness to stand trial.
Duterte’s health and mental state have become focal points in the legal battle. As reported by GMA Integrated News, Kaufman reiterated that his client “is unable to recall events, places, timing, or even members of his close family.” The defense has argued that these impairments render Duterte unfit for trial and that keeping him in detention while the court examines his fitness would be unjust. In a new “Defence Notification” submitted on September 16, Duterte’s camp proposed additional conditions for interim release, emphasizing, “Mr. Duterte should not remain in detention while proceedings on fitness—now expected to take no less than [REDACTED] at a minimum—are underway. Administrative delay, occasioned by [REDACTED], cannot justify the abrogation of liberty. Provisional release should be ordered as soon as continuing detention ceases to be reasonable.”
Despite these claims, the ICC has so far only postponed the hearings, not granted release. The defense’s latest submission notes that a “receiving State identified by the Defence as willing to host Mr Duterte will be required, as a condition for release, to facilitate [REDACTED] by the Court.” The details of these proposed arrangements remain under wraps, pending the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision.
Duterte has been held at the ICC’s Scheveningen Prison in The Hague since his arrest at Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport on March 11, 2025. The charges relate to his administration’s war on illegal drugs, during which, according to government records, more than 6,000 suspected drug offenders were killed in police operations. Human rights groups, however, estimate the true death toll may be as high as 30,000, citing unreported incidents and extrajudicial killings. The ICC Prosecutor has reportedly submitted 12 batches of evidence against Duterte, each containing hundreds to thousands of items, while over 300 victims have applied to participate in the proceedings.
The drawn-out process has not gone unnoticed by the families of those killed in the drug war. Many have expressed renewed anguish and frustration over the hearing delays. Llore Pasco, a mother who lost two children to extrajudicial killings and is now part of the Rise Up for Life and for Rights support group, told Philippine Daily Inquirer, “It’s like we’re being punished because of the delay.” The sense of limbo has only intensified as the legal wrangling continues, with the confirmation hearing now postponed indefinitely.
Kristina Conti, a lawyer representing some of the victims’ families, pointed out that Duterte could, if he wished, waive his right to attend the hearings in person, as permitted under Rule 124 of the Rome Statute. This would allow proceedings to move forward even if Duterte’s fitness remains in question, potentially offering a path to justice for those who have waited years for accountability.
Meanwhile, the Duterte family has sought to reassure the public about the former president’s well-being. Vice President Sara Duterte, his daughter, shared in a recent interview that she spoke to her father by phone last Friday, saying, “He’s okay.” She added that their conversation touched on politics, flood control, and even his personal life, giving a rare glimpse into the former leader’s current state amid swirling legal and political drama.
The case has also drawn the attention of major Philippine media, including ABS-CBN, which continues to provide extensive coverage of the proceedings. The network, known for its commitment to public service and promoting Filipino values, has played a crucial role in keeping the public informed about each twist and turn in the ICC trial.
As the legal process grinds on, the stakes remain high—not just for Duterte, but for the Philippines as a whole. The outcome of the ICC case could set a precedent for how international law addresses alleged abuses by heads of state. For supporters of Duterte, the case is seen as an affront to national sovereignty and a political witch hunt, while critics argue that it is a necessary reckoning for years of unchecked violence and impunity.
Both sides have made their voices heard. Duterte’s defense continues to challenge the court’s jurisdiction and the credibility of the prosecution’s evidence, while human rights advocates and victims’ families demand transparency and accountability. The Pre-Trial Chamber faces the unenviable task of balancing the rights of the accused with the need for justice for thousands of grieving families.
For now, the world waits—watching as the ICC weighs evidence, arguments, and the fate of a former president whose legacy remains deeply divisive. The next steps, whether a resumption of hearings or a decision on interim release, will undoubtedly shape not only the future of Rodrigo Duterte but also the broader struggle for justice in the Philippines.