“For the victims, the witnesses, and the principle that no one is above the law, Duterte’s interim release must be denied”
On June 12, Rodrigo Duterte’s lawyers, led by international counsel Nicholas Kaufman, filed a petition before the International Criminal Court requesting that the former Philippine president be granted interim release from detention.
They argued that continued detention violates due process, that Duterte no longer holds office and therefore cannot obstruct justice, and that his surrender was both unlawful and politically motivated.
They further claim the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2019 casts doubt on the ICC’s jurisdiction.
In a recent development, the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber announced it would delay its decision on Duterte’s interim release request, granting Kaufman’s motion for additional time to submit supplementary documents supporting his client’s plea.
Kaufman has insisted that “President Duterte deserves a fair hearing and should not be subjected to unjust detention while these procedural questions remain unsettled.”
The Pre-Trial Chamber, in its brief order, stated “in the interests of procedural fairness and full consideration of all arguments, the Chamber will defer ruling on interim release until the defense has presented its complete evidence.” Meanwhile, the ICC Prosecutor’s Office has reiterated its strong opposition, warning that Duterte’s release would pose “an immediate and credible threat to the safety of witnesses and the integrity of the proceedings.”
This delay does not change the fundamental facts: Duterte’s interim release should ultimately be denied.
Under Article 60(2) of the Rome Statute, interim release is not a right but a privilege that must meet strict conditions.
A detainee must show they will not flee, obstruct justice, or commit further crimes. Duterte’s record, public statements, and enduring political clout make it impossible to believe these risks no longer exist.
The defense argues that Duterte is powerless—an elderly politician with no way to interfere in legal proceedings.
Reality tells another story. In the 2025 midterm elections, Duterte’s bloc won five of 12 contested Senate seats, more than any other alliance.
He himself was elected Davao City mayor yet again, and his son was elected vice mayor. His daughter, Vice President Sara Duterte, remains among the country’s most popular political figures and is widely expected to run for the presidency in 2028.
This is not the profile of a private citizen in retreat. This is the machinery of a powerful political dynasty still deeply embedded in the country’s institutions.
The threat this influence poses is not abstract.
Duterte’s brutal war on drugs left thousands dead and many families devastated—many of whom now serve as witnesses before the ICC.
These witnesses, often poor and vulnerable, have already faced intimidation for daring to speak out.
If Duterte is allowed to await trial under loose supervision in an undisclosed state, the risk of witness tampering or worse is not only plausible—it is likely.
Kaufman and Duterte’s defenders compare this request to the ICC’s interim release of former Ivory Coast President Laurent Gbagbo.
But the comparison collapses under scrutiny. Gbagbo’s political influence had waned dramatically when he was released.
Duterte’s remains potent. He has repeatedly dismissed the ICC’s legitimacy and threatened to evade its reach.
The Pre-Trial Chamber was right to hear the defense’s full arguments.
But the basic test under the Rome Statute remains the same: no interim release should be granted if the accused poses a flight risk, a threat to the proceedings, or a danger to victims and witnesses.
On all three counts, Duterte fails.
This case is bigger than one man’s fate. It is about whether the world still believes that no leader is too powerful to answer for crimes against humanity.
The families left behind by Duterte’s drug war deserve justice that is credible, uncorrupted by intimidation, and seen through to its rightful end.
The ICC Prosecutor’s warning is clear: Duterte’s release would undermine witness safety and risk the entire case.
The Pre-Trial Chamber’s duty is equally clear: to protect the integrity of this process and prove that the international community can hold even the most powerful to account.
When the Chamber finally rules, it must send the right message – that no amount of political power or legal maneuvering will shield an accused from facing justice.
For the victims, the witnesses, and the principle that no one is above the law, Duterte’s interim release must be denied. Website: tonylavina.com
