Former President Rodrigo Duterte has been arrested in Manila following an international warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) over allegations of crimes against humanity related to his deadly anti-drug campaign.
Authorities took Duterte into custody early Tuesday morning at Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport upon his return from Hong Kong. The arrest, carried out by Interpol Manila in coordination with local law enforcement, marks a significant escalation in the international legal battle over Duterte’s controversial war on drugs.
The Charges Against Duterte
The ICC alleges that Duterte is responsible for extrajudicial killings during his presidency from 2016 to 2019, as well as during his tenure as mayor of Davao City from 2011 to 2016. The charges stem from an estimated 12,000 to 30,000 deaths linked to anti-drug operations, many of which were reportedly carried out without due process.
Despite the Philippines withdrawing from the Rome Statute in 2019, the ICC maintains jurisdiction over crimes committed while the country was still a signatory. Under the principle of complementarity, the court proceeded with its investigation after determining that Philippine authorities had failed to conduct a genuine probe into the killings.
Legal Implications and Next Steps
Duterte’s arrest initiates a complex legal process. If Philippine authorities proceed with surrendering him, he will be transferred to The Hague, Netherlands, where ICC proceedings will take place. The court will then determine whether the charges against him will proceed to trial.
Human rights organizations and families of drug war victims have long awaited this moment, calling it a step toward accountability. “This is not about vengeance. This is about justice finally taking its course,” said one legal advocate representing victims.
Meanwhile, Duterte’s allies have strongly condemned the arrest, with some officials arguing that the former president should be tried within the country rather than by an international tribunal.
Duterte’s Defiant Stance
Prior to his arrest, Duterte remained defiant, stating that he was prepared to accept his fate. He has repeatedly dismissed the ICC’s jurisdiction, insisting that his drug war policies were necessary to combat crime and protect the nation. However, international human rights groups have consistently documented instances of abuse, including police allegedly planting evidence to justify killings.
The arrest of Duterte sends a strong message about global accountability, setting a precedent for other leaders accused of human rights violations. Whether he will ultimately face trial at the ICC remains uncertain, but for many, this moment represents a long-awaited step toward justice.
ICC Jurisdiction and the Philippines’ Withdrawal
The Philippines became a State Party to the Rome Statute on November 1, 2011. However, in March 2018, then-President Rodrigo Duterte announced the country’s withdrawal from the ICC, which became effective on March 17, 2019. Despite this, the ICC maintains jurisdiction over crimes committed during the country’s membership, particularly from 2011 to 2019.
In 2021, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I issued a decision (ICC-01/21) authorizing an investigation into alleged crimes against humanity committed in the context of the war on drugs. The Chamber ruled that there was a reasonable basis to believe that extrajudicial killings had been systematically carried out by state forces and that domestic mechanisms failed to genuinely investigate and prosecute these crimes.
In 2023, the ICC Appeals Chamber (ICC-01/21 OA) rejected the Philippine government’s appeal against the decision to continue the investigation. The Appeals Chamber ruled that the Philippines’ withdrawal did not affect the ICC’s jurisdiction over crimes committed while the country was still a member. The ruling reinforced the ICC’s position that states cannot escape accountability by withdrawing from the Rome Statute.
Domestic Legal Framework: Republic Act No. 9851
Republic Act No. 9851, also known as the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity (2009), serves as the country’s domestic counterpart to the Rome Statute. It criminalizes war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity, ensuring that individuals responsible for these offenses can be prosecuted within the Philippine justice system.
Despite this law, critics argue that domestic prosecutions of those responsible for the drug war killings have been inadequate, with only a handful of cases resulting in convictions. The Philippine government has contended that its legal system is functioning and that the ICC’s intervention is unnecessary. However, the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber found that national proceedings did not sufficiently address the scale and systematic nature of the alleged crimes.
Supreme Court Ruling: Pangilinan v. Cayetano
A landmark ruling by the Philippine Supreme Court in Pangilinan v. Cayetano, G.R. No. 238875 (2021), affirmed that the country’s withdrawal from the ICC did not remove its obligations for acts committed while it was still a party to the Rome Statute. The Court emphasized that international treaties to which the Philippines was bound continue to have legal effects unless formally repealed through domestic legislative processes. This decision bolstered the argument that the ICC retains jurisdiction over crimes committed from 2011 to 2019.
Furthermore, the ruling held that the executive branch’s unilateral withdrawal from an international treaty does not automatically invalidate the treaty’s obligations. This principle aligns with the ICC’s reasoning in asserting its authority over the ongoing investigation.
Implications and the Path Forward
The ICC’s investigation remains a contentious issue in the Philippines, with the current administration under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. expressing resistance to cooperating with the Court. However, international human rights organizations and victims’ families continue to advocate for accountability and justice.
As the legal battle unfolds, the interplay between international and domestic law will shape the trajectory of justice for victims of the drug war. The precedents set by the ICC’s decisions, along with the Supreme Court’s ruling, highlight that withdrawing from international agreements does not absolve a state of its past obligations. Whether the Philippines will cooperate with the ICC or take measures to strengthen its domestic accountability mechanisms remains to be seen.
Jaja has a degree in journalism and took classes in international law and business communication. Her career spans roles at prominent international media outlets, including International Business Times, Celebeat and Delightful Philippines. As a news editor, Jaja covered a wide range of beats, including legal, business, economy, cryptocurrency, personal finance, gaming, technology, and entertainment.