Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has chosen not to attend the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) crucial decision on his appeal for interim release, marking another dramatic moment in the ongoing legal saga stemming from his administration’s controversial war on drugs. The announcement, made through a formal filing by his legal counsel on November 27, 2025, underscores the gravity and complexity of the international proceedings now unfolding at The Hague.
According to Philippine Daily Inquirer and GMA Integrated News, Duterte’s lawyer, Nicholas Kaufman, submitted a signed waiver from the former president, stating: “With the leave of the Appeals Chamber, the Defence hereby places on the record Mr. Duterte’s signed waiver of his right to be present on November 28, 2025, during the reading of the judgment on the Defence appeal against Pre-Trial Chamber I’s decision on interim release.” The document further quoted Duterte himself: “I, Rodrigo Roa Duterte, respectfully waive my right to appear before the Appeals Chamber on 28 November 2025 at 10:30 and, consequently, instruct my lawyers to hear the judgment that will be rendered on my appeal against Pre-Trial Chamber I’s decision on interim release - ICC-01/21-01/25-282.”
The ICC Appeals Chamber is set to announce its ruling in open court on Friday, November 28, at 10:30 a.m. local time (5:30 p.m. in Manila). For those following the case from afar, the hearing will be livestreamed on the ICC’s official website, as well as on Facebook and YouTube, ensuring unprecedented transparency for an event that has captivated audiences both in the Philippines and around the world.
Duterte, now 80 years old, is currently detained at Scheveningen Prison in The Hague. He faces three counts of murder linked to 49 killings, all tied to his administration’s anti-drug campaign, widely known as Oplan Tokhang. The ICC took custody of Duterte after his arrest and transfer to The Hague, citing alleged crimes against humanity committed during his presidency. The anti-drug campaign, which Duterte launched shortly after taking office in 2016, resulted in at least 6,000 deaths according to official figures, though human rights organizations estimate the true toll could be as high as 20,000.
The roots of the current legal battle stretch back several years, with the ICC opening an investigation into Duterte’s role in the violent crackdown on illegal drugs. The campaign, which Duterte often defended as necessary to restore order and eradicate crime, has faced international condemnation for alleged extrajudicial killings and systematic human rights abuses. According to GMA Integrated News, Duterte is now facing charges of crimes against humanity for murder and attempted murder before the ICC, with the court’s focus squarely on the conduct and consequences of Oplan Tokhang.
The specific matter at hand is Duterte’s appeal against the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I’s earlier decision to deny his request for interim release. On October 14, 2025, Kaufman lodged an appeal, arguing that the Pre-Trial Chamber I had erred in its assessment. Kaufman contended that the court was mistaken in finding Duterte posed a flight risk, in rejecting state guarantees, and in failing to consider humanitarian grounds—especially given Duterte’s age and alleged health concerns. Duterte’s defense has consistently argued that he is unfit to stand trial, raising questions about the former president’s physical and mental condition while in detention.
The Pre-Trial Chamber’s rationale for denying interim release was laid out in stark terms. In its decision, the court cited Duterte’s family’s physical resistance to his arrest and their demand that he be returned to the Philippines. The tribunal stated: “The foregoing illustrates Mr. Duterte’s rejection of the proceedings against him before the Court, and the will of his close family to help him elude detention and prosecution.” The chamber also noted that Duterte appears to have “the necessary political contacts” and benefits from a “network of support in the country that may help him abscond.” These findings, according to the chamber, made continued detention necessary to ensure the integrity of the proceedings.
The ICC’s move to livestream the ruling reflects efforts to maintain transparency and public engagement in a case that has drawn intense scrutiny from the international community, Philippine society, and legal experts alike. For many observers, the case is not just about Duterte as an individual, but about the broader questions of accountability, sovereignty, and the reach of international justice. The fact that a former head of state is now standing trial in The Hague for alleged crimes committed while in office is, in itself, a rare and telling development in the global legal landscape.
Reactions to Duterte’s decision to waive his right to attend the ruling have been mixed. Supporters of the former president argue that the ICC’s proceedings represent an overreach of international authority, infringing on Philippine sovereignty and undermining the legitimacy of the country’s own legal system. They point to Duterte’s enduring popularity in some quarters and the political sensitivities surrounding the case as evidence that the ICC’s intervention is both unwarranted and destabilizing.
Critics, on the other hand, see the ICC’s actions as a necessary step toward justice for the thousands of victims of the war on drugs. Human rights advocates have long called for Duterte and other officials to be held accountable for what they describe as a campaign of extrajudicial killings and impunity. For them, the ICC’s investigation and the current proceedings in The Hague represent a rare opportunity to shine a light on abuses that have, for years, gone unpunished within the Philippines’ own judicial system.
The Philippine government’s official position on the ICC proceedings has shifted over time, with some officials expressing support for Duterte and others emphasizing the importance of upholding international obligations. The case has also become a flashpoint in the country’s domestic politics, with rival factions using the proceedings to score points or deflect criticism.
As the world awaits the ICC Appeals Chamber’s decision, the stakes could hardly be higher. If the appeal is granted, Duterte could be released from detention pending further proceedings—a move that would undoubtedly provoke strong reactions both at home and abroad. If the appeal is denied, the former president will remain in custody as the ICC’s investigation and potential trial continue to unfold.
Regardless of the outcome, the case of Rodrigo Duterte at the ICC stands as a powerful reminder of the challenges and possibilities of international justice in the 21st century. With the eyes of the world watching, the next chapter in this extraordinary legal and political drama is about to be written.
