Ex-President Duterte Arrested Over ICC War Crimes Warrant

Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s arrest at Manila’s international airport made history as the first Asian leader detained under International Criminal Court charges. Authorities captured Duterte on March 11, 2025, following an ICC warrant that accused him of crimes against humanity during his controversial anti-drug campaign.

The ICC warrant details systematic killings throughout Duterte’s presidency from 2016 to 2022. Official records reveal more than 6,000 deaths, while human rights groups estimate a staggering 30,000 casualties. The Philippines pulled out of the ICC in 2019, but the court still holds jurisdiction over crimes committed during the country’s membership period. Philippine authorities later transferred Duterte to The Hague. His daughter, Vice President Sara Duterte, condemned the arrest and called it political persecution.

ICC Issues Historic Arrest Warrant Against Duterte

The International Criminal Court released a landmark 15-page arrest warrant for Rodrigo Duterte on March 7, 2025. The warrant details charges of crimes against humanity and lists systematic killings throughout his roles as mayor and president.

How ICC Built Case Against Former President

ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda started the investigation in 2021 after analyzing evidence of widespread extrajudicial killings. A pre-trial chamber gave approval to investigate alleged crimes between November 2011 and March 16, 2019.

The court’s investigation covered two time periods. The first period focused on Duterte’s time as Davao City mayor, where he allegedly led the Davao Death Squad. The second period examined his presidential term and his oversight of national law enforcement operations. Investigators collected substantial evidence and testimonies from victims’ families. Llore Pasco gave significant testimony to the ICC in 2021 about her two sons who died in an alleged police operation.

What Crimes Does Warrant Cover?

The ICC warrant charges Duterte with “the crime of murder as a crime against humanity”. Court documents show reasonable grounds to believe Duterte bears criminal responsibility for at least 43 murders between 2011 and 2019. These killings shared common patterns:

• Similar locations and methods of execution
• Consistent victim and perpetrator profiles
• Systematic targeting of alleged criminals, especially those suspected of drug involvement

Investigators found that Duterte contributed to these crimes through several actions. He created the strategy targeting suspected criminals, supplied weapons and ammunition to enforcement units, and gave financial incentives to police officers and “hitmen” who carried out killings. The warrant also states that he promised immunity to perpetrators and protected them from investigation and prosecution.

The ICC maintains its authority over these crimes despite the Philippines’ withdrawal from the court in 2019. ICC rules allow the court to retain jurisdiction over crimes committed while a country was still a member state. The ICC pre-trial chamber reviewed materials from the Philippine government in January 2023 and concluded that domestic authorities failed to conduct genuine investigations into the killings.

Police data shows more than 6,000 people died in anti-drug operations. Independent monitors and human rights organizations believe the actual numbers are higher. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights calculated at least 8,663 deaths in a 2020 report.

Philippine Police Execute Dramatic Airport Arrest

Dramatic scenes unfolded at Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport when Philippine authorities arrested former President Rodrigo Duterte as he returned from Hong Kong on March 11, 2025.

Authorities Catch Duterte Returning from Hong Kong

The 79-year-old former president walked with a cane and spoke briefly to a small group of aides and supporters before police took him into custody. Duterte showed his characteristic defiance in his final moments before detention. “You would have to kill me first, if you are going to ally with white foreigners,” he declared.

Family Claims ‘Forceful Abduction’

The former president’s daughter, Vice President Sara Duterte, quickly condemned the arrest and called it a “state kidnapping”. She tried to enter Villamor Air Base where authorities held her father but security blocked her access. Duterte’s youngest daughter, Veronica, shared her distress on social media. “They took dad from us, put him on a plane and wouldn’t say where to,” she wrote.

Duterte’s legal team strongly protested after officials blocked them and a doctor from reaching him post-detention. Senator Bong Go, one of Duterte’s closest allies, called the situation “a violation of his constitutional rights”.

Supporters Clash with Security Forces

News of the arrest prompted authorities to deploy over 370 police officers at strategic locations near the airport to maintain order. Duterte’s hometown Davao City saw more than 1,000 supporters gather at Rizal Park for a candlelight vigil. Hundreds more protesters voiced their anger in Cagayan de Oro City and Iligan City.

Authorities held Duterte briefly at the airport before moving him to a chartered aircraft. President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. later confirmed the plane left Manila at 11:03 p.m. heading to The Hague. Duterte questioned the legitimacy of his arrest throughout these events. “What is the law and what is the crime that I committed?” he asked.

Marcos Administration Facilitates ICC Transfer

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. confirmed former President Rodrigo Duterte’s transfer to the International Criminal Court, which marks a fundamental change in Philippine cooperation with international law enforcement.

President Cites Interpol Obligations

Marcos emphasized in a televised statement that Philippine authorities acted only on their commitments to Interpol instead of working directly with the ICC. “Interpol asked for help, furthermore we obliged because we have commitments to fulfill. Without meeting these obligations, they would cease assistance in cases involving Filipino fugitives abroad,” Marcos explained.

The administration balances international obligations carefully with domestic politics. Marcos stated that the Philippines would “disengage” from ICC contact and cited national sovereignty concerns. Over the last several years, after political tensions grew between the Marcos and Duterte camps, the administration changed its stance on potential ICC warrants.

A chartered aircraft with Duterte left Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport at 11:03 p.m. and headed to The Hague. Authorities held the former president at Villamor Air Base in Manila before departure. Government officials assured that Duterte’s health remained stable throughout the process.

Duterte’s legal counsel, Salvador Panelo, questioned the transfer’s legality. He plans to ask the Philippine Supreme Court to make authorities justify the detention and transfer. Marcos responded firmly that the arrest was “proper and correct” rather than political persecution.

The administration’s choice to help with the transfer comes from its Interpol membership obligations, even as the Philippines stays outside ICC jurisdiction. This move happens while other nations challenge the ICC’s authority, drawing international attention.

Human rights organizations and victims’ families see this cooperation as a vital step toward accountability. Amnesty International asked the Philippine government to take more steps. They specifically want the country to rejoin the Rome Statute and keep working with ongoing ICC investigations.

How Will The Hague Trial Proceed?

The International Criminal Court prepares to hear what could become a landmark case against former President Rodrigo Duterte at The Hague.

ICC’s Jurisdiction Despite Philippines Withdrawal

The court retains legal authority over alleged crimes from November 1, 2011, to March 16, 2019, even after Manila pulled out of the Rome Statute. This jurisdiction covers alleged crimes during Duterte’s time as Davao City mayor and his early presidential years.

A fundamental principle gives the ICC its authority – a country’s exit does not affect cases that started before withdrawal, the Pre-Trial Chamber emphasized. The Philippine Supreme Court backed this stance in 2021 by ruling that Duterte lacked power to end international agreements alone.

Potential Timeline for Proceedings

The legal process will move through several stages at The Hague. Duterte must first appear before ICC judges. A detailed proceeding follows where prosecutors show their evidence and defense lawyers present their response.

Justice could take substantial time:

• Pre-trial procedures range from two months to two years
• Defense teams can contest jurisdiction in both ICC and Filipino courts
• Duterte can request temporary release during the proceedings

The case holds special weight given ICC’s history. The court has issued only 60 arrest warrants with 21 people appearing before it. A conviction could mean up to 30 years behind bars.

Prosecutors must prove systematic attacks resulted in dozens of murders. The ICC warrant claims Duterte created, funded, and armed ‘death squads’ while serving as president. Police records show 6,200 deaths from anti-drug operations, though activists say the actual numbers are much higher.

ICC judges ordered Duterte’s arrest because he might interfere with investigations and threaten witness safety. A conviction would send him to prison not in The Hague but in another country.

Duterte’s arrest represents a defining moment for international justice in Asia. His transfer to The Hague shows a radical alteration in the Philippines’ approach toward international law enforcement, even after withdrawing from the ICC. Official records document 6,000 deaths during his anti-drug campaign, but human rights organizations believe the actual toll is nowhere near these numbers. These stark differences highlight the severity of charges against him.

The legal landscape ahead poses several challenges. The proceedings could take years and will test both ICC jurisdiction and Philippine sovereignty. President Marcos chose to honor Interpol obligations while facing pressure from human rights organizations. His decision reflects the careful navigation between national interests and global commitments.

This groundbreaking case proves that former heads of state must answer for alleged crimes against humanity. The final verdict will shape how international justice works in the future, especially in regions where domestic and international laws clash.