On November 29, 2025, the International Criminal Court (ICC) delivered a resounding decision that reverberated across the Philippines and beyond, rejecting former president Rodrigo Duterte’s request for interim release ahead of his highly anticipated trial for crimes against humanity. The ruling, which followed a widely watched hearing in The Hague, has ignited a firestorm of reactions—both online and in the country’s political corridors—while spotlighting the deep divisions over Duterte’s controversial war on drugs.
The ICC’s Appeals Chamber, in a unanimous verdict, found that Duterte’s legal team had failed to provide sufficient safeguards to justify his temporary release from detention. Presiding judge Luz del Carmen Ibanez Carranza stated unequivocally that "the conditions for release proposed were not sufficient to mitigate the risks it found in relation to Mr Duterte's interim release," according to reporting by Agence France-Presse. The court also dismissed the defense’s plea for humanitarian parole, despite claims about the 80-year-old former leader’s health. Duterte, who was detained in Manila on March 11 and transferred to the ICC’s prison at Scheveningen, The Hague, appeared frail and barely spoke during his initial video appearance.
For many families of those killed during Duterte’s war on drugs, the ICC’s ruling was a moment of vindication. At a Manila university campus, where families of victims gathered to watch the hearing, the announcement was met with cheers and applause. "We really prayed for [Duterte] not to be granted an interim release," said Dahlia Cuartero, whose late son Jesus would have celebrated his 33rd birthday the following day. "This is the best birthday gift for him," she told AFP, capturing the raw emotion felt by those who have long sought justice.
The ICC’s decision was not simply a legal setback for Duterte; it also triggered a coordinated online backlash. According to PressOne.PH, the ICC’s Facebook page was inundated with more than 100,000 comments in the hours following the livestream of the verdict—marking it as the court’s most engaged post ever. The flood of reactions, which extended to unrelated posts, was characterized by synchronized messaging from Duterte supporters. Common refrains labeled the ICC a "kangaroo court" or even a "crocodile court," echoing Filipino slang for corruption, while others accused the court of being a "political court" that selectively targets adversaries of the West. Some went so far as to allege, without evidence, that President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. had bribed the ICC with gold bars or funds siphoned from flood-control budgets—claims reminiscent of persistent conspiracy theories that have circulated in Philippine politics for years.
PressOne.PH’s analysis of over 1,000 comments revealed that just 277 unique accounts were responsible for the surge, with about 10% of entries being duplicates or near-duplicates. This pattern of amplification, where repeated keywords and templated comments dominate, points to a deliberate effort to shape the narrative and sow doubt about the ICC’s legitimacy. Notably, these aggressive campaigns targeted English-language posts, suggesting a calculated move to influence international opinion. In contrast, ICC posts written in Filipino or Bisaya attracted minimal engagement, despite Duterte’s supporters frequently citing his alleged unjust detention as a rallying cry.
Amid the digital uproar, the ICC’s judicial process continues to move forward. Maria Kristina C. Conti, the ICC assistant to counsel representing victims of the drug war, told BusinessWorld that the next critical step is the assessment of Duterte’s fitness to stand trial. Medical experts appointed by the court are currently evaluating his physical and cognitive condition, with findings due by December 5 and a decision anticipated in January 2026. "The next decision for the Pre-Trial Chamber is on fitness to stand trial. If he is not fit, the trial will not continue and it will be delayed. He does not walk free, but the proceedings cannot move forward," Conti explained.
If Duterte is found fit, the court is expected to reschedule the confirmation of charges hearing. The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber’s warrant, issued in March 2025, cited at least 43 individuals killed—19 by the so-called Davao Death Squad during Duterte’s tenure as mayor, and 24 others allegedly by or under the supervision of Philippine law enforcers. Rights groups, meanwhile, assert that thousands were killed in extrajudicial executions during Duterte’s presidency from 2016 to 2022, a claim that has galvanized human rights advocates and drawn international scrutiny.
One major legal hurdle remains: jurisdiction. Duterte’s defense continues to argue that the ICC lacks authority over the case, a position that, if accepted, could see the case dismissed entirely. Conti emphasized the importance of this question, stating, "Jurisdiction means the ICC has the authority to talk about, discuss, or rule on these issues. If the ICC has no jurisdiction, it will dismiss the case. That would invalidate all further orders in this situation." She added, "What matters is that the killings were widespread and systematic. There is no magic number. If the court sees that the pattern is widespread, then it is widespread."
The ICC’s objectivity has been a frequent target of Duterte’s allies, who claim the process is politically motivated. The Partido Demokratiko Pilipino, Duterte’s party, issued a statement accusing the ICC of bias and called on supporters to pray for the former president. Yet, as Conti pointed out, "It is inaccurate to say he is a whipping boy. The ICC has gone after many other officials. Duterte is not the only one before the Court. Several others are also facing charges."
The fallout from the ICC proceedings has also spilled into the Philippine political arena. Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa, a former police chief and key Duterte ally, has been absent from Senate sessions since November 11, following reports—unconfirmed by the ICC—of a warrant for his arrest related to the drug war. Kristina Conti publicly criticized dela Rosa’s absence, telling reporters, "My concern is that the year is about to end and he is still absent from the Senate. An ordinary government employee would be in trouble if they were absent for three weeks. Why is he allowed to be absent?" She added, "Dela Rosa should remember that he is a senator and he needs to do his job. He was not elected only to protect former president Rodrigo Duterte; he was elected to protect the country," as reported by GMA News Online.
Despite the heated rhetoric and swirling disinformation, the ICC’s process remains governed by the Rome Statute, with strict legal standards guiding each step. Conti warned that coordinated online attacks and harassment could themselves become grounds for additional cases before the ICC, further reinforcing the argument for international oversight. Victim-support groups, including the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers, are preparing a consolidated legal team to represent those affected by the drug war, aiming to ensure their voices are heard as the proceedings advance.
As the ICC moves toward a decision on Duterte’s fitness and the resumption of legal proceedings, the Philippines finds itself at a crossroads—torn between competing narratives, political loyalties, and the enduring quest for justice. The coming months will determine not only the fate of a former president but also the country’s commitment to accountability on the world stage.
