The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) ongoing proceedings against former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte have sent ripples through the country’s political and law enforcement circles, sparking a heated war of words, legal maneuvering, and public confusion about the true scope of international justice. The latest developments, spanning from August to November 2025, have seen not only the release of a crucial summary of court orders but also a dramatic clash among prominent political and police figures over the possibility of additional ICC arrest warrants.
On November 20, 2025, the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber I (PTC I) made public a summary of its decisions and orders relating to the crimes against humanity case against Duterte. The summary, covering August 1 to October 31, was distributed to the Office of the Prosecution, the Office of Public Counsel for Victims, and Duterte’s defense team. According to the Manila Bulletin, the chamber emphasized the principle of publicity of proceedings, derived from Article 67(1) of the Rome Statute, but redacted names and email addresses from public versions for security reasons. The five-page report, signed by Presiding Judge Iulia Antoanella Motoc and Judges Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou and María del Socorro Flores Liera, included 33 annexes documenting the court’s actions over the three-month period.
At the heart of the ICC case are charges of crimes against humanity stemming from thousands of extrajudicial killings during Duterte’s notorious war on drugs. After his arrest at Ninoy Aquino International Airport on March 11, 2025—immediately upon arrival from Hong Kong—Duterte was swiftly transferred to The Hague on the strength of an ICC arrest warrant. The legal process has since been marked by contentious debates about Duterte’s fitness to stand trial. His defense team has cited alleged declining cognitive abilities as grounds to suspend proceedings, specifically the September 23, 2025, confirmation of charges hearing. The ICC has responded by commissioning a panel of medical experts, whose report is due by December 5, with all parties allowed to submit observations by December 12.
While the ICC’s focus remains squarely on Duterte, a separate political storm has erupted in the Philippines around claims of an ICC arrest warrant for Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, who served as the country’s police chief during Duterte’s anti-drug campaign. The controversy began when Ombudsman Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla publicly asserted that he possessed a copy of such a warrant. “I have it on good authority kasi public interest ito. The ICC has issued a warrant against Senator Bato Dela Rosa. Warrant of arrest,” Remulla told DZRH radio, according to SunStar.
Senator dela Rosa, long a lightning rod for criticism and praise alike due to his central role in the drug war, responded by skipping a Senate plenary session and filing a motion before the Supreme Court to compel the Ombudsman to release the alleged ICC warrant. The Supreme Court has since issued a decision on his motion, although details remain closely guarded.
The situation escalated further when former Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief Nicolas Torre III publicly offered to arrest dela Rosa if an ICC order materialized. As reported by PhilNews, Torre—who oversaw Duterte’s transfer to ICC custody—stated in a national media interview that he was ready to execute any such warrant, emphasizing his professional duty to follow orders regardless of his current position. “From the start of my police career, I have always followed orders, and I would continue to do so even if I am no longer PNP chief,” Torre insisted.
This offer drew a fierce response from Davao City First District Representative Paolo “Pulong” Duterte, the former president’s eldest son. In a pointed social media post and subsequent statement, Paolo Duterte lambasted Torre’s credibility and leadership, highlighting the brevity of his tenure as PNP chief. “Before Mr. Torre fantasizes about ‘arresting’ anybody, he should first arrest the memory gap of the Filipino public—because almost no one remembers he was PNP Chief. And how could they? His term was so short, it can be measured in hours rather than achievements,” Paolo Duterte wrote. He went on to describe Torre’s stint as “an intermission, a placeholder, a bookmark in a chapter that nobody read.”
Paolo Duterte also drew a sharp contrast between Torre and Senator dela Rosa, asserting, “Bato actually served, fought, and bled for this country. Torre barely had time to find the comfort room in Camp Crame before being replaced.” He accused Torre of parading himself as an expert in international law and questioned his authority to comment on matters related to the ICC, especially given the Philippines’ withdrawal from the court in 2019—a point Paolo Duterte noted “everyone already knows.”
For his part, Torre has not shied away from the spotlight. Despite his short period as PNP chief—just two months, punctuated by a charity boxing match with Acting Davao City Mayor Sebastian “Baste” Duterte—he previously led significant operations, including the high-profile 16-day siege of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ compound in June 2024. That operation, dubbed “Operation Plan Teknon Alpha,” involved about 4,500 police personnel and cost the government an estimated ₱135 million, according to SunStar.
Yet, the question of whether an ICC arrest warrant for dela Rosa actually exists remains unresolved. The Department of Justice has stated it would only act on an arrest if an official ICC warrant is issued. Meanwhile, ICC spokesperson Fadi El Abdallah told national media that “the only ongoing case at the moment is against former President Rodrigo Roa Duterte,” and directly denied knowledge of any warrant for dela Rosa. “So, no is a direct answer to your question to confirm if such an arrest warrant exists,” El Abdallah clarified.
This official denial has not quelled speculation or political posturing. Paolo Duterte, in his critique, dismissed Torre’s recent “loudness” as “bitterness disguised as relevance,” arguing that credibility is earned over time—something Torre “never served long enough to build.” The broader context is one of profound division within the Philippine establishment, with Duterte allies portraying the ICC’s actions as foreign interference and critics insisting on accountability for the drug war’s deadly toll.
For now, all eyes remain on the ICC’s next moves. The chamber’s awaited medical report on Duterte’s fitness to stand trial, due December 5, could determine the pace and direction of the case. The defense, prosecution, and victims’ counsel will have until December 12 to submit their observations, potentially shaping the course of international justice for one of the Philippines’ most controversial leaders.
As the legal battles play out in The Hague and political skirmishes continue at home, Filipinos are left to grapple with questions of justice, sovereignty, and the legacy of a war on drugs that has left deep scars across the nation.
