ICC sets Duterte pre-trial in closely watched case

By Erika Mae P. Sinaking

THE International Criminal Court (ICC) is set to hold a pre-trial hearing with former President Rodrigo R. Duterte on Feb. 23 to 27, marking a key procedural stage in the crimes against humanity case linked to his anti-drug campaign.

The hearing comes after Pre-Trial Chamber I on Feb. 20 rejected a defense motion seeking to disqualify the Common Legal Representatives for Victims, Filipino lawyers Joel R. Butuyan and Gilbert T. Andres, along with case manager Nicolene S. Arcaina.

Within hours of the ruling, Mr. Duterte’s legal team filed a request for leave to appeal, arguing that the decision raises questions about the “fairness and transparency” of the proceedings.

The defense had alleged “impediments to representation” and possible conflicts of interest related to Ms. Arcaina’s previous professional roles. However, the chamber, led by Presiding Judge Iulia Antoanella Motoc, ruled that the claims lacked a clear legal basis.

It described the arguments as “speculative and hypothetical,” saying the defense had failed to show how past professional relationships would compromise the lawyers’ duty to act in the best interests of victims.

In seeking leave to appeal, the defense said the ruling creates what it called a “structural imbalance” inconsistent with the ICC’s code of professional conduct. It argued that appellate guidance is needed to avoid further disputes that could delay proceedings.

The four-day hearing is not a trial but a pre-trial proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to move the case forward.

ICC spokesperson Oriane Maillet said in a video advisory that judges would assess whether the prosecution has established substantial grounds to believe Mr. Duterte committed the crimes.

“At this stage, the judges will not decide on Mr. Duterte’s innocence or guilt,” she said. “Instead, the pre-trial judges decide whether there is enough evidence against Mr. Duterte for the case to go to trial.”

The chamber will hear arguments from the prosecution, the defense and the victims’ legal representatives. Judges are expected to issue a decision within 60 days after the hearing.

Mr. Duterte, who is in ICC custody in The Hague, has waived his right to attend the hearing. His legal team earlier argued that he was unfit to stand trial due to health concerns, but the chamber ruled on Jan. 26 that independent medical assessments found him mentally and physically fit to participate.

Aurora Corazon A. Parong, co-chairperson of the Philippine Coalition for the ICC, described the confirmation hearing as a critical milestone.

“It is only after this hearing that the judges can decide if there is evidence for a trial for crimes against humanity of murder and attempted murder,” she said in a Facebook Messenger chat, adding that prosecutors have submitted more than 1,000 pieces of evidence.

Ms. Parong also rejected Mr. Duterte’s claim that the case is politically motivated, pointing to publicly available videos in which he issued orders to kill suspected drug offenders and promised protection to police officers.

The dispute over the victims’ legal team has also highlighted the role of victims under the Rome Statute, the ICC’s founding treaty. Unlike in many domestic systems, victims before the ICC may participate in proceedings through legal representatives.

Jose Sonny G. Matula, chairman of the NAGKAISA labor coalition, said victims are recognized as rights-holders, not merely witnesses.

“Under Article 68(3), they are mandated to be heard,” he said. “They should have counsel who understands the language, culture and wounds of the Philippines in the Duterte case.”

Mr. Matula said effective representation requires lawyers who can communicate directly with victims and families, explain legal developments and reflect the broader harm caused by the anti-drug campaign, including community fear, stigma and economic loss.

Supporters of the appointed counsel argue that their longstanding engagement with victims’ families places them in a strong position to fulfill that role as the case moves to its next stage.

The confirmation hearing will determine whether the case proceeds to full trial, setting the course for one of the most closely watched proceedings before the ICC in recent years.