The International Criminal Court (ICC) has thrust former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte into the global spotlight once again, following the public release of its Document Containing the Charges (DCC) against him on September 26, 2025. The document, while heavily redacted, lays out a sweeping case: Duterte is accused of masterminding a campaign of violence that the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) contends amounted to crimes against humanity. The charges, which are not yet final and await confirmation by a pretrial chamber, paint a harrowing picture of systematic killings carried out under Duterte’s leadership both as mayor of Davao City and as president of the Philippines.
According to the DCC, as reported by Philippine News Agency, the ICC alleges that between November 1, 2011, and March 16, 2019, Duterte and at least eight unnamed co-perpetrators (whose identities are censored in the public document) shared a “common plan or agreement to ‘neutralize’ alleged criminals in the Philippines through violent crimes including murder.” The DCC further notes that these co-perpetrators include members of the Philippine National Police and high-ranking government officials, though none are currently charged in the pending case against Duterte.
The ICC’s case is structured around three main sets of charges. First, it accuses Duterte of crimes against humanity for murders in and around Davao City during his term as mayor from 2013 to 2016, often referred to as the “Davao killings.” Second, it alleges crimes against humanity for the so-called “high-value targets killings,” which occurred during Duterte’s presidency from 2016 to 2017 as part of Operation Double Barrel. Third, it covers murders and attempted murders during barangay clearance operations, known as the “Tokhang killings,” from 2016 to 2018.
To support its case, the OTP plans to present evidence of nine incidents involving 19 murders in Davao City and Davao del Norte for the mayoral period. For the high-value target killings, it will cite five incidents resulting in 14 murders in Manila City and four other undisclosed localities. The Tokhang killings, meanwhile, are illustrated by 35 incidents involving 43 murders and two attempted murders, with these acts spread across Manila City, Bulacan, Quezon City, and Caloocan City. In total, the ICC aims to prove 76 murders and two attempted murders as representative samples of what it describes as a “widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population.”
Yet, the OTP emphasizes that these cases are only the tip of the iceberg. The DCC states that “at least hundreds of other murders during the mayoral period, (and) thousands of other murders in the presidential period, and other violent crimes” have been attributed to Duterte as the mastermind. The selected cases are meant to exemplify the larger pattern of violence that the ICC believes characterized Duterte’s war on drugs and anti-crime campaigns.
The ICC further alleges that Duterte’s responsibility extends far beyond mere oversight. The DCC accuses him of designing and disseminating the policy to “neutralize” alleged criminals, establishing and overseeing the Davao Death Squad (described as a mix of police and non-police hit men), instructing and authorizing violent acts, providing personnel and logistical resources—including weapons—and appointing key personnel to facilitate the execution of these crimes. He is also alleged to have offered financial incentives and promotions to police officers and hit men who killed alleged criminals.
Moreover, according to the DCC, Duterte is accused of creating a system in which perpetrators were assured protection, including promises of immunity and shielding from investigation or prosecution. He allegedly made public statements condoning and encouraging the killings, authorized state actors to take part in the anti-drug campaign (sometimes temporarily revoking such authorization to placate public outcry), and publicly named individuals as criminals—some of whom were later killed.
As the ICC works to move the case forward, it faces several procedural hurdles. Among the most pressing is the question of Duterte’s fitness to stand trial. According to Rappler, a hearing on this issue was postponed after Duterte’s lawyers argued that he suffers from a “progressively deteriorating” cognitive condition, allegedly preventing him from recalling events, understanding evidence, or giving instructions to his legal team. The ICC judges voted 2-1 in favor of postponement, with one dissenting judge insisting that assessing fitness is ultimately the trial chamber’s responsibility. The prosecution and the ICC Office of the Public Counsel for Victims have opposed the delay, with victims’ lawyer Kristina Conti suggesting the defense’s claims may be a tactic to stall accountability. She argued, “Duterte could have counsel represent him.”
Meanwhile, Duterte’s legal team has requested his interim release on humanitarian grounds, proposing that he be temporarily transferred to a third country under ICC-imposed restrictions. The ICC Office of the Prosecutor has strongly opposed this, citing Duterte’s “flight risk,” his documented history of threats against court personnel, and the potential for witness intimidation if he were released. On September 22, Vice President Sara Duterte revealed that a foreign state had agreed to accept her father if the release were approved, though she declined to name the country.
While the ICC process unfolds, disinformation about Duterte’s status has proliferated online. On September 26, 2025, Rappler published a fact-check debunking a viral TikTok video that falsely claimed Duterte had returned to the Philippines. The video, which garnered over a million views, showed Duterte’s daughter, Kitty Duterte, with text reading, “Welcome home, Dad. We’ll fight for the Philippines again.” In reality, the clip was from an old video with the caption “miss you, my favorite sleepyhead.” Rappler has repeatedly debunked similar false claims, emphasizing that Duterte remains detained at Scheveningen Prison in The Hague since his arrest on March 11, 2025, and that no interim release has been granted.
The ICC’s investigation and the surrounding media storm have stirred intense debate within the Philippines and beyond. Supporters of Duterte argue that the charges are politically motivated and that his anti-drug campaign was necessary to combat rampant criminality. Critics, including human rights advocates and families of victims, see the ICC proceedings as a long-awaited step toward justice for the thousands killed during Duterte’s tenure. The issue has also become a flashpoint in Philippine politics, with Vice President Sara Duterte’s involvement underscoring its far-reaching implications.
As the world watches, the ICC’s proceedings against Duterte represent not only a legal test of international accountability but also a reflection of the deep divisions and unresolved wounds left by the Philippine drug war. The coming months will determine whether the preliminary issues—such as Duterte’s mental fitness and jurisdictional challenges—can be resolved swiftly, paving the way for a trial that could shed unprecedented light on one of the most violent chapters in the country’s modern history.
