Philippines, explained.
Allegations of impunity led the ICC to take action against Duterte (Ezra Acayan/Getty Images)
Duterte’s legal battle puts the spotlight on the International Criminal Court and the future of Philippine politics.
Subscribe to The Informer for monthly expert analysis, and to Events for advance notice of visiting world leaders and distinguished guests.
You may unsubscribe from Lowy Institute newsletters at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
Duterte’s ICC arrest: A day of reckoningDuterte’s ICC arrest: A day of reckoning
For all his bravado and rhetoric against the International Criminal Court, no other statement from the Philippines’ former president Rodrigo Duterte betrays as much meaning as when he exclaimed in 2016: “Sorry? Not sorry – You want to scare me by threatening to have me thrown in prison? International Criminal Court? Bullshit.” Duterte’s words deserve recollection after reality intruded on 11 March when the ICC arrested Duterte on a warrant for crimes against humanity and extradited him to The Hague.
During Duterte’s term (2016-22), government data revealed that at least 6,000 people were killed by the police during his so-called “war on drugs”. But the ICC estimated that there were between 12,000 and 30,000 deaths, which also included victims of vigilante-style killings. According to a 2022 report from the Philippines’ Commission on Human Rights (CHR), the deaths resulted from “excessive and disproportionate force” against drug suspects “who are mostly civilians killed in uninhabited locations sustaining gunshot wounds”.
Allegations of impunity led the ICC to take action against Duterte, which exposed contentious issues between state sovereignty and court jurisdiction. Duterte’s lawyers argue that his arrest was illegal since the Philippines withdrew its ICC membership in 2019. Vice President Sara Duterte, who is feuding with Duterte’s successor, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, and facing an impeachment trial herself, condemned her father’s arrest: “This is a blatant affront to our sovereignty and an insult to every Filipino who believes in our nation’s independence.” Yet the ICC maintains jurisdiction for the alleged crimes under Duterte, which occurred before the country’s withdrawal.
Duterte’s arrest cannot be isolated from the toxic politics that have convulsed the Philippines in recent times.
While the ICC deserves commendation for its extensive investigative efforts, it faces several limitations. To carry out its arrest warrant, the court acted through the International Criminal Police Organisation (Interpol), which coordinated with the Philippine National Police (PNP). Although Marcos’ administration insisted it did not assist the ICC, Marcos claimed that the Philippines “has commitments to Interpol which we have to fulfill”. Thus, Duterte’s case is a rare victory for the court, unlike its recent attempts to implement arrest warrants for Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, which appear unlikely to be served.
The ICC relies on national government cooperation, which leaves it at the mercy of domestic politics. Duterte’s arrest therefore cannot be isolated from the toxic politics that have convulsed the Philippines in recent times. His constant criticism and threats against the Marcos administration have led to the president’s decision to allow his predecessor’s arrest and extradition to the Hague, instead of having his case tried in Philippine courts. The bitter political fallout between the families once united under the formidable Uniteam has allowed the ICC to detain Duterte.
Duterte’s arrest is expected to exacerbate political discord among Filipinos. His influential allies in government and loyal supporters are crying political persecution. Meanwhile, human rights groups and the victims’ families of extrajudicial killings view the arrest as a moral vindication. Some regard Duterte’s downfall as the start of the end of a political dynasty, while others may exploit the incident with mass protests. With the impeachment case against Sara Duterte closing in and the 2025 midterm elections due in May, the Dutertes might rally around the arrest in a bid to gain public sympathy with the goal of regaining political power to avenge their patriarch.
How Duterte’s ICC trial will unfold remains unclear. The burden is on the international court to show how it will handle the case amid global criticism about the slow pace of proceedings and low conviction rate. The pressure is also on the Marcos administration as to how it will manage the political backlash from Duterte’s supporters.
Regardless, Duterte’s trial will be an unexpected blessing for victims and human rights groups that have long clamoured for accountability and justice – something that local courts have failed to provide given a track record of acquitting or favouring powerful political personalities in the face of evidence of their corruption and abuses. According to Kristina Conti, ICC Assistant to Counsel, “the arrest of Duterte will finally allow the victims of [the] drug war and Duterte to face off on equal footing”. His arrest on Philippine soil and extradition to the Hague also offers a ray of hope for justice for millions around the world who suffer from the intimidation and apparent impunity of strong-man leaders.
About the author
Andrea Chloe Wong
Andrea Chloe Wong has a PHD in Political Science at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand.
The most-pressing world events explained by Lowy Institute experts and global contributors, in your inbox, every Thursday.
You may unsubscribe from The Interpreter at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
