On August 10, 2025, the legal and political saga surrounding former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte took another dramatic turn, as new statements from both his family and the legal team representing victims of his controversial anti-drug campaign shed light on the unfolding International Criminal Court (ICC) proceedings in The Hague. The developments come as Duterte, 80, remains detained at Scheveningen Prison in the Netherlands, awaiting a critical confirmation of charges hearing scheduled for September 23, 2025.
Kristina Conti, a lawyer representing victims of Duterte’s bloody war on drugs, made headlines over the weekend by stating that her camp has no objections if the ICC chooses to disqualify its lead prosecutor, Karim Khan. This statement followed a petition from Duterte’s chief counsel, Nicholas Kaufman, who argued that Khan’s impartiality could reasonably be doubted due to his alleged prior involvement in a related case. According to Kaufman, Khan had previously represented drug war victims in a private legal capacity, a fact Kaufman claims was never disclosed when Khan took over the ICC investigation as chief prosecutor in 2021.
“In the case of the Philippines, even if Khan is removed, there won't be such serious [ramifications],” Conti explained in an interview, as reported by Tribune. She acknowledged that, while Kaufman’s argument had merit, she had no knowledge of Khan’s supposed earlier involvement in a similar case. The defense’s formal submission to the ICC was largely redacted, leaving many details about the timeline and extent of Khan’s prior engagement unclear. Still, the petition cited Article 42(7) of the Rome Statute, which bars prosecutors from participating in cases where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned due to previous involvement.
The controversy over Khan’s role comes at a sensitive moment for the ICC. Khan is currently on leave following allegations of sexual misconduct, and deputy prosecutor Mame Mandiaye has assumed his responsibilities in the interim. Conti stressed that the ongoing legal proceedings would not be significantly affected by Khan’s absence, as the deputy prosecutor is fully capable of ensuring continuity. “The process goes on,” she remarked, implying that the pursuit of justice for drug war victims would not be derailed by internal changes at the court.
The ICC’s investigation into Duterte’s alleged crimes against humanity officially began on September 15, 2021, after the court found sufficient grounds to probe thousands of extrajudicial killings linked to his government’s anti-drug campaign. However, the investigation was paused just two months later at Duterte’s request, illustrating the complex diplomatic and legal maneuvering that has characterized the case from the outset. Khan, who took over from former chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, inherited a politically charged case that has drawn international attention and fierce debate within the Philippines.
Duterte’s legal woes are rooted in a single count of crimes against humanity, encompassing killings recorded from November 1, 2011, to March 16, 2019. This period spans his tenure both as Davao City mayor and as president. The killings include those allegedly perpetrated by the so-called Davao Death Squad, a shadowy group that rights organizations claim was composed of local police officers. High-profile figures such as Senator Ronald de la Rosa, a former police chief, and retired police chief Oscar Albayalde have been linked as co-perpetrators in the drug war, according to official data cited by Tribune.
Official government figures list over 6,000 deaths resulting from the anti-drug campaign, but human rights groups estimate the true toll could exceed 30,000, with most victims coming from low-income communities. The stark discrepancy in numbers has fueled domestic and international criticism, with advocates arguing that the campaign disproportionately targeted the poor and circumvented due process. In ICC proceedings, victims are afforded an independent role, represented by a court-appointed legal representative who can present their views and call witnesses, including police officers and other state officials. Conti previously noted that “insider witnesses” — often law enforcement personnel — are commonly called in international tribunals to testify against high-ranking officials.
As the legal drama unfolds in The Hague, the Duterte family faces the personal toll of the former president’s detention. Acting Davao City Mayor Sebastian “Baste” Duterte, Rodrigo’s son, announced on August 10 that he plans to travel to the Netherlands soon to visit his father. Speaking at Magsaysay Park, Baste reflected on the emotional and physical impact of incarceration on his aging father. “Detention can take a toll on anyone’s mental health, causing depression and loss of appetite,” he told local reporters, as reported by SunStar. He observed that Duterte has become noticeably thinner, attributing this to a lack of appetite for prison food and the absence of family meals.
“Any ordinary person, if you’re put in a detention center—even with, you know, a clear case against you but without due process—how would you feel? That’s what happens to a person,” Baste said, emphasizing what he described as the “very unjust” nature of his father’s situation. He reminded the public that Duterte is still officially the mayor of Davao City, with Baste only serving in an acting capacity. The younger Duterte urged residents to continue following his father’s direction, underscoring the family’s belief in his legitimacy and leadership despite the ongoing legal proceedings.
Rodrigo Duterte was transferred to The Hague on March 12, 2025, and made his initial appearance before the ICC via video link two days later. The upcoming confirmation of charges hearing on September 23 represents a pivotal moment in the case, as the court will decide whether the evidence is sufficient to proceed to trial. The ICC investigation, which has faced repeated delays and political pushback, centers on Duterte’s administration and its aggressive approach to drug-related crime — a policy that drew both praise for its tough stance and condemnation for its alleged human rights violations.
As the hearing date approaches, the Philippine public and the international community remain sharply divided over Duterte’s legacy and the legitimacy of the ICC proceedings. Supporters argue that the former president acted decisively to combat a national crisis, while critics contend that his methods amounted to state-sanctioned violence. The fate of Karim Khan’s role as prosecutor, the health and well-being of Duterte in detention, and the broader implications for justice and accountability in the Philippines all hang in the balance as September 23 draws near. For now, both the victims’ advocates and Duterte’s family are preparing for what promises to be a landmark chapter in the country’s legal and political history.
The coming weeks will reveal not only the direction of the ICC’s case against Duterte but also the resilience of a nation grappling with the legacy of its most contentious leader in recent memory.
