On December 9, 2025, the Philippines’ leading media conglomerate, ABS-CBN, reported a development that has stirred both political circles and the public: Davao City 1st District Representative Paolo “Pulong” Duterte has officially requested clearance from the House of Representatives to embark on a nearly two-month journey spanning 17 countries. The request, addressed to Speaker Faustino Dy III, covers travel from December 15, 2025, to February 20, 2026, and follows a similar pattern set earlier this year.
According to ABS-CBN and multiple local news sources, Duterte’s itinerary includes Hong Kong, China, Malaysia, Indonesia, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Cambodia, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, France, Belgium, Italy, and Singapore. The lawmaker’s single-page letter, dated December 1, 2025, did not specify the purpose of the extensive trip, a detail notably absent in both this and his previous request made in March.
This marks the second time in 2025 that Rep. Duterte has sought and, in the first instance, received House approval for such broad international travel. Back in March, then-speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez granted Duterte’s plea for a travel clearance, which was later revised and extended to cover the same 17 countries from March 20 to May 10. That earlier journey began after Duterte accompanied his sister, Vice President Sara Duterte, to the Netherlands and Japan on March 11, following the arrest of their father, former president Rodrigo Duterte. The elder Duterte was brought to The Hague to face trial before the International Criminal Court (ICC).
In his latest letter to Speaker Dy, Paolo Duterte wrote, “This is to request for a travel clearance for my upcoming travel to Hong Kong, China, Malaysia, Indonesia, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Cambodia, (United States), Australia, (United Kingdom), the Netherlands, Germany, France, Belgium, Italy and Singapore from 15th of December 2025 to Feb. 20, 2026.” He further assured, “Rest assured that the expenses that will be incurred from this trip are from my personal funds alone. In addition, this is also to seek your kind indulgence in allowing this Representation to attend the scheduled plenary sessions and meetings virtually from the aforementioned dates.”
Observers have noted that the lack of a stated purpose for both the March and December travel requests is unusual for a sitting member of the Philippine House of Representatives, especially given the sheer scale and duration of the journeys. In March, Duterte’s plans were initially limited but quickly expanded to include 17 destinations across three continents, with the itinerary revised multiple times. He even filed an additional request for a personal trip to London and China from March 17 to April 20, coinciding with the Holy Week.
The practice of lawmakers seeking travel clearance is not uncommon in the Philippines, as House rules require members to obtain official permission for trips abroad, particularly those that might affect attendance at plenary sessions or committee meetings. However, Duterte’s repeated requests for multi-country, months-long travel—coupled with his assurance that all expenses are covered personally—have raised eyebrows. Some political analysts suggest that the timing and scope of the trips may be linked, at least indirectly, to the legal situation facing his father.
Indeed, the backdrop to Paolo Duterte’s travel plans is the ongoing international legal scrutiny of former president Rodrigo Duterte. On December 9, 2025, ICC-accredited lawyer Gilbert Andres appeared on One News’ “Storycon” to discuss the latest developments in the ICC’s case. Andres confirmed that the conclusions of three medical experts who examined Rodrigo Duterte had already been submitted and would soon be posted publicly on the ICC website. Stakeholder submissions, he said, are due by December 12.
“The experts were not asked to determine Duterte’s ‘fitness to stand trial’—a term not found in the Rome Statute,” Andres clarified. “They are tasked only to assess ‘medical conditions that may affect his participation in proceedings.’” This distinction is significant, as it frames the ICC’s inquiry in terms of procedural fairness rather than legal culpability or immediate trial readiness.
Andres also explained the process by which an ICC arrest warrant, if issued, could be transmitted to Philippine authorities. Despite the Philippines’ formal withdrawal from the Rome Statute, he said, any warrant could pass through Interpol, thanks to a memorandum of agreement with the ICC Office of the Prosecutor. “Local agencies,” Andres noted, “can act on such warrants under Republic Act No. 9851, the country’s law on genocide and crimes against humanity.” This means that, regardless of the country’s current relationship with the ICC, there remains a legal pathway for the enforcement of international warrants within the Philippines.
For many Filipinos, the confluence of Paolo Duterte’s international travel and the ongoing ICC proceedings against his father is more than coincidental. The younger Duterte has not publicly commented on whether his travels are related to the international case or his father’s legal defense. Still, the overlap in timing—particularly his presence in the Netherlands and Japan immediately after Rodrigo Duterte’s arrest in March—has fueled speculation.
In the meantime, Paolo Duterte’s request to attend House sessions and meetings virtually during his travels reflects the broader shift toward remote work and digital governance, a trend accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic and now increasingly normalized in legislative bodies worldwide. It remains to be seen whether Speaker Dy and the House leadership will approve this second lengthy absence, especially given the heightened scrutiny of the Duterte family’s international activities.
ABS-CBN, in its coverage, emphasized the company’s commitment to public service and its role in informing and connecting audiences both in the Philippines and abroad. The network’s reporting on this issue underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in governance—values that, as many Filipinos would agree, are as vital today as ever.
As the deadline for stakeholder submissions to the ICC approaches and the House considers Paolo Duterte’s latest travel request, the intersection of local politics and international law is once again in the spotlight. With the former president’s fate hanging in the balance and his son traversing the globe, the coming weeks promise to be pivotal not just for the Duterte family, but for the Philippine political landscape as a whole.
For now, all eyes remain on the House of Representatives and the ICC, as Filipinos await the next chapter in a saga that continues to captivate—and divide—the nation.
