Duterte faces ICC ‘virtually' for the first time, confirmation of charges hearing set on Sept. 23
Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte appeared before the International Criminal Court's (ICC) Pre-Trial Chamber I after being taken to The Hague on murder allegations related to his war on drugs.
According to the ICC, Duterte is suspected of the crime against humanity of murder, allegedly committed in the Philippines between November 1, 2011 and March 16, 2019.
During the ICC's Pre-Trial Chamber I, Duterte's lawyer Salvador Medialdea stated that his 'client was abducted from his country.' He also invited the registry's representative to present in court and explain to the judges how Duterte's arrest was just and fair.
Medialdea also said that it was his first time seeing Duterte since his arrest on the morning of the Pre-Trial Chamber I and had less than an hour to 'discuss legal issues.' He also said he could not give the former president a copy of the arrest warrant because no one supplied them with such.
Judge Iulia Antoanella Motoc of the ICC, in response to Medialdea, stated that doctors in the detention center found Duterte to be 'fully mentally aware and fit' after undergoing checks and tests.
'And when you approached health matters, saying you were not able to come to the hearing, the doctors that consulted with you were of the opinion that Mr. Duterte was not in a position to come to the hearing physically, but that if he gave permission, he would be able to take part via video link.
'Now, that is with regards to the health matters that you just mentioned,' Motoc said. 'They are very important, especially concerning the matter of age.'
Motoc also addressed Medialdea's concern regarding being supplied with the arrest warrant.
'Now with regards to the rights of Mr. Duterte, we have before us the registrar or the registry's report that says that Mr. Duterte has been informed of his rights, including Article 66 and 67 of the Rome Statute, and that he is aware of his rights and that he is also aware of the charges against him,' Motoc said.
Motoc further explained that they also have the registry's report saying that he has received the arrest warrant in the English language. It is just the beginning
Motoc clarified that this is just the initial hearing, where they discuss Duterte's rights and the charges against him.
'And then there will be a full procedure that will unfurl leading up to the confirmation of charges that will enable Mr. Duterte to raise all the matters that you have just raised, with regards to the warrant of arrest, with regards to the crimes committed, with regards to the charges, and any other matters associated with his arrest, and the matters of the jurisdiction of the court,' Motoc added.
She reassured Dutere's team that they will have the opportunity to do all this throughout these proceedings.
Motoc also confirmed that Medialdea's request to postpone the hearing to next week was denied by the court. 'This first initial appearance hearing does not need much preparation as I have said to you on a number of occasions,' Motoc said.
Moving on, Motoc said that there will be a hearing to confirm the charges against Duterte.
'After accessing all the factors, including the need for the parties and participants to adequately prepare, as well as Mr. Duterte's rights, including his right to be tried within a reasonable time, the date for the commencement of the confirmation of charges hearing is September 23rd, 2025,' Motoc said.
If the case moves forward, a trial is expected to start in early 2026.
Duterte, 79, was arrested in Manila and flown to the Netherlands on Wednesday. Appearing frail, he confirmed his identity via video link from a detention unit but did not speak further due to his alleged health condition.
Prosecutors accuse Duterte of orchestrating widespread extrajudicial killings during his presidency, targeting alleged drug offenders. Victims' families see his ICC appearance as a step toward justice.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
27 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel probe
The British government privately threatened to defund and withdraw from the International Criminal Court if it issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders, Middle East Eye can reveal. David Cameron, then foreign secretary in Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, made the threat in April 2024 in a heated phone call with Karim Khan, the British chief prosecutor of the court. Less than a month later, Khan announced that he was seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his then-defence minister, Yoav Gallant, as well as for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh and Mohammed Deif. In a statement at the time, Khan called for his office and the court to be allowed to carry out their work with 'full independence and impartiality'. 'I insist that all attempts to impede, intimidate or improperly influence the officials of this Court must cease immediately,' he said. Read more: David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel war crimes probe Lord Cameron reportedly spoke aggressively and shouted over ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, saying he was 'losing the plot' in issuing warrants for Israeli leaders (Justin Tallis/AFP)
Middle East Eye
4 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Exclusive: David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel war crimes probe
The British government privately threatened to defund and withdraw from the International Criminal Court if it issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders, Middle East Eye can reveal. David Cameron, then foreign secretary in Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, made the threat last April in a heated phone call with Karim Khan, the British chief prosecutor of the court. Less than a month later, Khan announced that he was seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his then-defence minister, Yoav Gallant, as well as for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh and Mohammed Deif. In a statement at the time, Khan called for his office and the court to be allowed to carry out their work with 'full independence and impartiality'. 'I insist that all attempts to impede, intimidate or improperly influence the officials of this Court must cease immediately,' he said. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters MEE understands that on 16 March 2024, Khan's extensive team of lawyers and researchers had decided they would be in a position to apply for warrants by the end of April. On 25 March, Khan informed the US administration of his decision and forewarned them the warrants would be applied for by the end of April. Then on 15 April in London, the prosecutor told British Justice Secretary Alex Chalk that he would apply for the warrants. Khan had asked to meet the foreign secretary, but Cameron was out of the country. Exclusive: UK believes Trump may sanction Amal Clooney over ICC Palestine role Read More » Cameron, a former British prime minister who was appointed foreign secretary by Sunak in November 2023, phoned Khan while the prosecutor was on an official visit to Venezuela on 23 April. MEE can reveal details of the call based on information from a number of sources – including former staff in Khan's office familiar with the conversation and who have seen the minutes of the meeting. Cameron told Khan that applying for warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant would be 'like dropping a hydrogen bomb'. Cameron said it was one thing to investigate and prosecute Russia for a 'war of aggression' on Ukraine, but quite another to prosecute Israel when it was 'defending itself from the attacks of 7 October'. He claimed the warrants would have 'profound implications' in Britain and within his own Conservative Party. Cameron then said that if the ICC issued warrants for Israeli leaders, the UK would 'defund the court and withdraw from the Rome Statute'. Article 127 of the Rome Statute, the ICC's founding charter, allows countries to withdraw by written notification to the secretary-general of the UN. 'Lose the dressing room' Cameron, who currently sits as a Conservative peer in the House of Lords, the upper house of the UK parliament, accused the prosecutor of singling Israel out. He asked why Khan's office had not 'prosecuted Iran for its attacks on Israel'. He told the prosecutor he would 'lose the dressing room' and be seen by many states including the US as 'losing the plot'. 'If [the UK] were to [withdraw from the ICC], we would have to accept that the rules-based system would be dead' - ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan Cameron further said that if the ICC issued the warrants, the UK would be 'required to arrest' Netanyahu if he travelled to the country. Khan told Cameron that his office had engaged with Israel for the past three years, but it had 'not resulted in any meaningful exchange of material relevant to investigations'. According to MEE's sources, the foreign secretary spoke aggressively and repeatedly shouted over Khan, who had to ask to be able to complete his points. The prosecutor noted that his office was investigating crimes committed by Hamas as well as Israel, but Cameron said this was drawing a 'moral equivalence' between the two. He stated again that the UK would withdraw from the Rome Statute. Khan replied that 'if this were to occur then we would have to accept that the rules-based system would be dead'. Cameron insisted that 'the world is not ready for this'. He told Khan he was 'on the brink of making a huge mistake. You sometimes need to take a step back and consider things'. But Khan refused to back down and continued defending his position. He said there was a 'serious risk' that many in the world would view the rules-based order as 'not being applied equally'. Khan thanked the foreign secretary for his call and the conversation ended without the two reaching any resolution. Approached by MEE for a response to the exchange with Cameron, Khan said: 'I have no comment to make at this time.' MEE has asked Cameron and the British Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office for comment. Cameron: Warrants 'a mistake' When Khan announced he was applying for the warrants on 20 May, Cameron publicly called the decision 'a mistake' and accused the ICC of drawing a 'moral equivalence' between Israeli and Hamas leaders. He claimed that 'no one, I think, has been tougher on the Israelis than me in direct call after call, and message after message, about having to meet their obligations'. On 10 June the Conservative government filed an objection to Khan's application to the ICC, arguing that the court did not have jurisdiction over Israeli nationals – a position the Israeli government has held for years. The next month, Keir Starmer's newly elected Labour government announced it would drop the objection. 'We're very clear about the importance of the rule of law and the independence of the court both domestically and internationally,' a spokesperson for Starmer said. Palestine was accepted into the ICC in 2015, and in 2021 the court said it had the power to investigate war crimes in the occupied territories. 'I don't like being threatened' Sources Khan spoke to in the hours following his phone call with Cameron told MEE he seemed surprised and upset by the exchange. 'I don't like being pressurised,' Khan said, according to sources present at the time. 'I don't like being - I won't say if it rises to blackmail - I don't like being threatened.' ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan attends a UN Security Council meeting on Sudan and South Sudan at the UN headquarters on 27 January 2025 (AFP) Khan added that 'the sentiment is not unexpected". 'The gall of articulating it so bluntly and candidly I think was a surprise and a disappointment… countries that you love, that deserve better, how on earth can leaders that have held such high office, that are so well known, think you can get away with that?' The British prosecutor added that 'if you did that to a director of public prosecutions… it would be a criminal offence, potentially'. He said he was 'disappointed that a country like that and leaders that are so senior would debase themselves and their nation. 'They have no right to debase a nation… they're debasing something they have no right to debase, which is a people.' 'I don't like being threatened... How on earth can leaders that have held such high office, that are so well known, think you can get away with that?' - Karim Khan Sunak's government firmly supported Israel's war on Gaza and consistently resisted calls to restrict arms sales to Israel. In a session of parliament's foreign affairs select committee in January 2024, its chair Alicia Kearns, a Conservative MP, asked Cameron whether 'you have never had a piece of paper put in front of you by a Foreign Office lawyer that says that Israel is in breach of its international humanitarian commitments under international humanitarian law'. Cameron replied that 'I cannot recall every single bit of paper that has been put in front of me … I don't want to answer that question.' He added that 'if you are asking me whether I am worried that Israel has taken action that might be in breach of international law … yes, of course I am worried about that.' In March the Guardian reported that Kearns said she believed the government had received advice from its own lawyers saying Israel had breached international law in Gaza. 'I remain convinced the government has completed its updated assessment on whether Israel is demonstrating a commitment to international humanitarian law, and that it has concluded that Israel is not demonstrating this commitment, which is the legal determination it has to make,' Kearns said at a fundraising event on 13 March. Khan sanctioned by US The Labour government, elected in July, imposed a partial arms embargo on Israel that September and suspended free trade agreement talks with the country last month. Speaking during Prime Minister's Questions last week, Starmer described Israel's actions in Gaza as 'appalling... counterproductive and intolerable,' and said the government would keep looking at further action including sanctions. But it has stopped short of accusing Israel of breaking international law in Gaza. After the ICC issued the arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant in November, the government refused to explicitly confirm it would arrest the politicians if they came to the country, although a spokesperson for Starmer said the government would 'fulfil its legal obligations'. Other Israeli officials, who are not subject to arrest warrants, have since visited the UK. In April, MEE reported that Foreign Minister Gideon Saar made a secret trip to London and met British Foreign Secretary David Lammy. After the report, the attorney general's office confirmed to MEE that it had blocked an arrest warrant request made to the Metropolitan Police by legal groups alleging Saar had aided and abetted breaches of international law in Gaza. Exclusive: US warns UK and France not to recognise Palestinian state Read More » Khan is currently on leave after attempts to suspend him failed, and pending a UN investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct towards a colleague. He denies the allegations, which have not been referred to Dutch police. In 2022 the Russian Federation issued a warrant for Khan's arrest in response to ICC warrants issued against Russian President Vladimir Putin and his minister for children. As of February, Khan has also been sanctioned by US President Donald Trump because of the arrest warrants issued for Netanyahu and Gallant. He has had his US visa revoked and his wife and children have been banned from travelling to the US. His bank accounts have been frozen in the UK. The warrants for Israeli leaders are currently in the hands of two deputy prosecutors. Last Thursday, the US imposed further sanctions on four ICC judges whom it accused of being involved in 'illegitimate actions targeting the United States and Israel'. Neither the US nor Israel are parties to the Rome Statute and have long rejected the authority of the court. In a statement, the ICC said it deplored the sanctions against Khan and the four judges. It said it stood fully behind its personnel and would continue its work undeterred. 'These measures are a clear attempt to undermine the independence of an international judicial institution which operates under the mandate from 125 States Parties from all corners of the globe,' it said. The court recently ordered that any further warrants issued in relation to its Palestine investigation cannot be publicised.
Filipino Times
8 hours ago
- Filipino Times
78% of Filipinos support impeachment trial for VP Sara Duterte — OCTA survey
A majority of Filipinos support subjecting Vice President Sara Duterte to an impeachment trial, according to a new national survey conducted by OCTA Research. The survey, conducted from April 20 to 24, revealed that 78% of respondents favor the conduct of a Senate impeachment trial for Duterte, while 13% oppose it and 9% remain undecided or expressed no opinion. Regional and Demographic Breakdown Support for the impeachment trial was strongest in the Visayas (87%), followed by the National Capital Region (83%), Mindanao (77%), and Balance Luzon (73%). Notably, unanimous support was recorded in the Cordillera Administrative Region (100%), while high levels of support were also observed in Western Visayas (95%) and the Davao Region (95%). Disagreement was relatively low across most regions, though notable dissent was seen in Zamboanga Peninsula (34%), CARAGA (25%), Central Mindanao (25%), CALABARZON (21%), and BARMM (20%). Support remained consistently high across all socio-economic classes, with the strongest backing from adults aged 25–34 (84%) and 65–74 (82%). OCTA also noted that 91% of Filipinos are aware of the impeachment case filed against Vice President Duterte. Background and Legal Developments The impeachment complaint, signed by 215 members of the House of Representatives in February, accuses Duterte of graft and corruption, betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, and other high crimes. While the House transmitted the articles of impeachment to the Senate the same day, the upper chamber deferred its deliberation, with Senate President Chiz Escudero saying the reading of the complaint was postponed to June 11, ahead of Congress' sine die adjournment on June 13. Vice President Duterte has publicly welcomed the opportunity to address the allegations, stating she is 'thankful for the chance to clear her name.' However, she has also filed a petition before the Supreme Court, seeking to block the impeachment trial on constitutional grounds. A separate Social Weather Stations–Stratbase poll released on May 29 found that 88% of Filipinos believe Duterte should directly respond to the charges and clarify issues of corruption.
