On September 22, 2025, Vice President Sara Duterte confirmed that a third country had agreed to host her father, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, should the International Criminal Court (ICC) approve his request for interim release. This revelation, reported by multiple Philippine news outlets, adds a new international dimension to an already complex and contentious legal saga that has gripped the nation and drawn global attention.
The ICC, headquartered in The Hague, is currently weighing whether to grant Duterte's petition for interim release as he faces grave charges related to his administration’s infamous anti-drug campaign. The charges, detailed in a redacted public version of the "Document Containing the Charges" released by the ICC on September 22, 2025, include 49 incidents of murder and attempted murder classified as crimes against humanity. These incidents allegedly occurred during Duterte’s tenure as mayor of Davao City from 2013 to 2016 and as President of the Philippines from 2016 to 2018, according to GMA Integrated News.
The ICC’s document, signed by Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang, accuses Duterte of being an indirect co-perpetrator who ordered, induced, or aided and abetted these crimes. The charges are divided into three main counts: Count 1 involves the murder of 19 victims in Davao City between 2013 and 2016; Count 2 concerns the murder of 14 so-called "high-value targets" across the Philippines between 2016 and 2017; and Count 3 addresses the murder and attempted murder of 45 victims, 43 of whom were killed, during barangay clearance operations from 2016 to 2018.
The ICC’s findings describe a chilling pattern. According to the charges, Duterte and his alleged co-conspirators established a "network of perpetrators"—a mix of state actors, including law enforcement officers from the Philippine National Police (PNP), Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and Bureau of Corrections (BuCor), as well as non-police assets and hitmen. This so-called "National Network" operated in a manner reminiscent of the Davao Death Squad (DDS), conducting extrajudicial killings of suspected criminals. The document further alleges that some victims were listed in a "PRRD List"—referring to Duterte’s initials—with targets categorized by their "value" and corresponding covert rewards of between 50,000 and one million Philippine pesos per kill.
While the ICC’s case has been building for years, the question of Duterte’s interim release has become a flashpoint in Philippine politics. Vice President Sara Duterte, speaking at a rally in Nagoya, Japan, on September 21, 2025, reiterated her claim that the ICC had "kidnapped" her father. "What they did was they kidnapped President Duterte. This is abuse," she declared, as quoted by Philstar. She accused the ICC of forcibly removing the former president from the Philippines rather than allowing him to face trial in a local court. "When you have a warrant of arrest, you are brought before a judge. What they did to former President Rodrigo Duterte was, with a warrant of arrest, they forcibly took him from our country and brought him to The Hague," she said in Filipino. "He was not brought to a court here in the Philippines. That is the right of the accused in our country, there in the Philippines."
These statements have not gone unnoticed by the ICC. The prosecution has cited Sara Duterte’s remarks as evidence of the family’s refusal to recognize the court’s legitimacy. In a filing made public on September 12, Deputy Prosecutor Niang argued that such comments demonstrate a "pattern of the Duterte family refusing to accept the legitimacy of the legal proceedings." The prosecution warned that granting interim release would give Duterte "greater access to his associates and family who are actively attempting to interfere with the proceedings against him."
Despite the prosecution’s opposition, Sara Duterte has continued to defend her father’s application for interim release. She argued that the ICC cannot claim he is a flight risk, pointing out that the 80-year-old former president voluntarily returned to the Philippines from Hong Kong in March 2025 and has repeatedly expressed his wish to die in Davao City. She also revealed the difficulties her family faced in securing a host country willing to accept Duterte, stating, "I talked to the people I met in other countries because of my work. I met [these people] during my trips around Southeast Asia because of the Department of Education and my work at the Office of the Vice President." Ultimately, she said, they succeeded in finding a willing host nation, though she declined to name it, only clarifying that it was not Japan.
Under ICC rules, defendants granted interim release must reside in a specific country that agrees to monitor them and ensure their appearance at trial. The Vice President’s direct involvement in these negotiations underscores the high stakes and the profound distrust she holds toward domestic authorities. "I had no one I trusted in the Philippines to talk to about the sensitive matter," she admitted, according to GMA News.
The ICC’s confirmation of charges hearing for Duterte, originally scheduled for September 23, 2025, was postponed indefinitely after his defense team claimed he was unfit to stand trial. As of September 22, the court had yet to rule on either the interim release or the request for adjournment. Meanwhile, the former president remains in detention in The Hague, awaiting the court’s decision.
The backdrop to these legal maneuvers is the ongoing debate over Duterte’s legacy and the true human cost of his war on drugs. Official police figures report over 6,000 fatalities linked to the anti-drug crackdown during his presidency, but human rights organizations estimate the real number could be as high as 30,000, including many innocent civilians. The ICC has been investigating these allegations since 2018, and the current proceedings represent the most significant international effort yet to hold Duterte accountable for his actions as both mayor and president.
The situation has also sparked intense debate within the Philippines. Supporters of Duterte, including his daughter, argue that the ICC’s intervention is an affront to Philippine sovereignty and the right of the accused to be tried in local courts. Critics, on the other hand, contend that the scale and brutality of the alleged crimes demand international scrutiny and justice, especially given the perceived failures of domestic accountability mechanisms.
As the ICC deliberates on Duterte’s fate, the eyes of the world remain fixed on The Hague—and on Manila. The outcome will not only determine the former president’s immediate future but could also set a precedent for international justice in cases of alleged state-sponsored violence.
For now, the Duterte family waits, the Philippine public debates, and the international community watches as history unfolds in the halls of the ICC.
