The legal team of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has strongly contested the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) over alleged crimes against humanity committed during his administration’s war on drugs. Duterte’s lawyer maintains that the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2019 exempts the country from the court’s authority. However, the ICC has reaffirmed its jurisdiction, stating that its probe covers alleged offenses committed while the Philippines was a state party, from November 1, 2011, to March 16, 2019.
This dispute arises as the ICC continues its investigation into Duterte’s controversial anti-drug campaign, which human rights groups claim resulted in thousands of extrajudicial killings. Despite the government’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute, the ICC argues that it retains the right to investigate and prosecute crimes that occurred before the exit became official. This stance is consistent with the 2021 ruling of the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber, which asserted its authority over cases involving crimes committed within the jurisdiction’s timeframe.
Duterte, who has repeatedly dismissed the ICC’s authority, has garnered mixed reactions from the public. Supporters view the investigation as a foreign interference in national affairs, while human rights advocates see it as a step toward accountability. As the legal battle unfolds, international legal experts highlight the broader implications of the case, emphasizing that withdrawal from a treaty does not absolve a state or its leaders from accountability for past actions. The ICC’s final decision on the matter is anticipated to set a precedent for future cases involving countries that opt to leave the court’s jurisdiction.
