In a landmark decision that has sent ripples through the Philippines and the international legal community, the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has ruled that it retains jurisdiction over former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte, paving the way for his trial on charges linked to thousands of deaths during his notorious war on drugs. The ruling, delivered by the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber I on October 23, 2025, and released the following day, marks a significant setback for Duterte and a potential turning point for human rights accountability in the region.
Duterte, who served as president from 2016 to 2022, was arrested in March 2025 in the Philippines and transported to The Hague. The charges against him stem from his administration’s anti-narcotics campaign, which, according to multiple reports, resulted in the deaths of thousands of alleged drug users and dealers. Rights advocates and families of the victims have long claimed that domestic avenues for justice were blocked, prompting them to seek recourse in the ICC.
The former president and his legal team mounted a vigorous defense, challenging the ICC’s authority on several grounds. Central to their argument was the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute—the treaty that established the ICC—in 2019, during Duterte’s own term. The defense asserted that since the country was no longer a State Party at the time the formal investigation was authorized in 2021, the court had no standing to prosecute him. Duterte’s lawyers further claimed that the ICC’s preliminary examination, launched in February 2018, was an internal and informal process, insufficient to bring the matter under the court’s consideration before the withdrawal took effect.
The judges, however, were unmoved by these arguments. According to Asia Times, the Pre-Trial Chamber’s 32-page decision stated unequivocally that "the Chamber finds that the court can exercise its jurisdiction in the present case over the crimes alleged against Mr. Duterte that were committed on the territory of the Philippines while it was a State Party." The court emphasized that the Rome Statute contains provisions designed to prevent countries from evading accountability by withdrawing after alleged crimes have come under scrutiny. Specifically, Article 127(2) of the Statute ensures that withdrawal does not affect matters "already under consideration by the Court" prior to the date of withdrawal.
The judges clarified that the preliminary examination initiated in February 2018 was sufficient to place the situation "under consideration," thereby preserving the court’s jurisdiction. As Reuters reported, even though the official investigation—sanctioned by the judges—only began in 2021, the earlier examination was substantial enough to meet the threshold required by the Statute. The chamber further noted that a narrow reading of Article 127(2) would undermine the Statute’s core purpose: ending impunity for grave crimes.
Adding another layer of complexity, the ICC highlighted that the Philippine government continued to engage with the court even after its withdrawal became effective. The chamber pointed to Manila’s cooperation in Duterte’s arrest and surrender as "irrefutable" evidence that the country continued to recognize the ICC’s authority. This, the judges argued, directly contradicted the defense’s assertion that the Philippines had severed all ties with the court.
For the families of the victims and human rights advocates, the ICC’s decision has been a long-awaited affirmation of their quest for justice. Leila de Lima, a House of Representatives member, former rights commissioner, and senator who was herself jailed during Duterte’s presidency for criticizing the drug war, welcomed the ruling as "most welcome as it is just." In a statement quoted by Asia Times, de Lima said, "We are closer to justice and accountability with this decision of the PTC (pre-trial chamber)." She predicted that Duterte would likely appeal the ruling but described such efforts as "already a lost cause for him." De Lima also noted that the ICC had previously rejected Duterte’s plea for interim release and could soon dismiss claims of his mental incapacity.
Neri Colmenares, a prominent Filipino lawyer representing drug war victims, echoed de Lima’s sentiments. He told Asia Times that the court’s ruling "practically destroyed" the defense’s claims that Duterte was abducted to face trial in The Hague. Colmenares called for the next steps: "We ask President Duterte to stop employing delaying tactics and instead allow the confirmation of charges and trial to push through. The families of the victims have long yearned for the justice which they were deprived of by President Duterte. It is about time that the victims are allowed to submit their evidence and the stories of how their loved ones were mercilessly and brutally killed in the war on drugs."
The ICC’s ruling also addressed procedural history, tracing the Philippines’ ratification of the Rome Statute on August 30, 2011, which took effect on November 1 of that year. The chamber recounted that then-ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda opened a preliminary examination in February 2018 into alleged extrajudicial killings. Just weeks later, the Duterte administration announced its withdrawal from the Statute. Despite this, the ICC authorized a formal investigation in September 2021, covering alleged crimes committed between November 2011 and March 2019—the period when the country was still a member. The court authorized the resumption of the probe in January 2023 after rejecting the Philippine government’s claim that it was conducting its own genuine investigations, a decision upheld by the Appeals Chamber in July 2023.
As the proceedings move forward, the next stage will involve judges determining whether there is enough evidence to confirm the charges and proceed to trial. Notably, the court has not yet ruled on a separate defense motion that seeks to halt proceedings on the grounds that the 80-year-old Duterte is unfit to stand trial due to alleged cognitive decline. Judges have appointed a panel of medical experts, whose report on Duterte’s fitness is expected by the end of October 2025. A decision on how his health will impact the case is anticipated by mid-November.
The ICC’s decision has also exposed the deep political rifts within the Philippines. The alliance between the Marcos and Duterte families, once formidable, has fractured in recent years. Sara Duterte, the former president’s daughter, stepped aside to allow Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to win the presidency in 2022, but was later impeached as vice president amid allegations of corruption and even plotting against Marcos and his wife. The unraveling of this alliance has further complicated the political landscape as the country grapples with the legacy of Duterte’s presidency and the ongoing quest for justice.
As the world watches, the ICC’s ruling stands as a powerful reminder that international law can—and sometimes does—catch up to those accused of grave abuses, regardless of political maneuvering or withdrawal from treaties. For the families of the victims and advocates of human rights, the decision represents a crucial step forward on a long and difficult road toward accountability.