The International Criminal Court (ICC) has ruled that it still has the authority to hear the case against former president Rodrigo Roa Duterte, rejecting his legal team’s attempt to stop the proceedings.
In a decision released April 22, the ICC’s Appeals Chamber upheld an earlier ruling that allows the court to exercise jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed during Duterte’s anti-drug campaign.
At the heart of the issue is timing.
The Philippines was a member of the ICC from November 1, 2011 until March 16, 2019. While the country officially withdrew from the court on March 17, 2019, the judges clarified that this does not erase the ICC’s authority over alleged crimes committed while the Philippines was still a member.
In simple terms: leaving the ICC does not cancel accountability for actions taken while still under its jurisdiction.
The Appeals Chamber stressed that the court’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute, must be interpreted “in line with the object and purpose of the Statute,” which is “to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole.”
Judges warned that allowing countries to avoid investigation simply by withdrawing would defeat that purpose.
“It would be incompatible with this object and purpose to enable a State Party to evade its responsibilities… once it discovers that alleged crimes… are being examined,” the chamber said.
At the same time, the court clarified that countries still have the right to leave the ICC — but only moving forward, not retroactively. This ensures what the judges described as a “balance” between a country’s right to withdraw and its obligations while it was still a member.
The case against Duterte centers on allegations of crimes against humanity, specifically murder and attempted murder, linked to his administration’s “war on drugs.” Prosecutors claim these acts were part of a “widespread and systematic attack” on civilians between 2011 and 2019.
Duterte has denied wrongdoing.
The former president did not attend the hearing, having waived his right to be present. He was represented by his defense counsel.
With the appeal now rejected, the case moves forward in the ICC process, bringing it a step closer to a full trial where prosecutors will seek to prove the charges.
The ruling also sends a broader message: Countries cannot use withdrawal as a shield against accountability for alleged international crimes.