Listen to the article
ICC Case Against Duterte Continues, Claims About Lack of Witnesses False
Misleading social media posts circulating online falsely claim that attorney Kristina Conti, an International Criminal Court (ICC)-accredited assistant to counsel, stated there are no witnesses to testify in the extrajudicial killings case against former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte.
The fabricated statement, which has gained significant traction with over 10,000 reactions and 1,600 shares, portrays Conti allegedly pleading with current President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. for assistance in finding witnesses for the ICC case.
“This claim is completely false,” legal experts confirm. “No credible source has reported Conti making such statements, and the post provides no verifiable evidence to support its assertions.”
The misleading post appeared shortly after the ICC renewed its appeal for direct witnesses of Duterte’s controversial drug war, which human rights organizations estimate resulted in thousands of deaths during his administration from 2016 to 2022.
Contrary to the false narrative being spread, multiple witnesses are already prepared to testify in the crimes against humanity case against the former president. In September 2025, then-Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla (now Ombudsman) publicly confirmed that retired police colonel Royina Garma had agreed to serve as a witness against Duterte at the ICC.
Remulla previously indicated that three to four witnesses are expected to testify against the former president when proceedings move forward. The identities of most witnesses remain confidential due to security concerns – a standard practice in high-profile international criminal cases.
In a January 30 television interview with journalist Pinky Webb, Conti herself confirmed that the prosecution will present witnesses during Duterte’s confirmation of charges hearing. She explained that the ICC’s public appeal for additional witnesses is a standard prosecutorial strategy to strengthen the investigation, not an indication of insufficient evidence as the misleading post suggests.
The case against Duterte has reached a significant stage in the international justice process. The former president was arrested on March 11, 2025, and is currently detained at the ICC facility in The Hague, Netherlands. His confirmation of charges hearing was initially scheduled for September 2025 but faced delays after his legal team claimed he was unfit to stand trial due to what they described as a “deteriorating cognitive condition.”
However, following an assessment by independent medical experts who determined the former president is fit to participate in proceedings, the ICC recently announced that the confirmation of charges hearing will proceed on February 23.
The ICC case centers on allegations of crimes against humanity related to Duterte’s violent anti-drug campaign, which human rights groups claim resulted in the deaths of between 12,000 to 30,000 individuals, though official government figures acknowledge only about 6,000 deaths.
This is not the first instance of misinformation surrounding the high-profile case. Fact-checking organizations have repeatedly debunked similar false claims about Duterte’s ICC proceedings, highlighting a pattern of deliberate disinformation apparently aimed at undermining the legitimacy of the case.
Legal experts emphasize that the ICC’s investigation continues based on substantial evidence gathered over several years, including testimony from families of victims, former police officers, and extensive documentation of the drug war’s implementation and impact across the Philippines.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
11 Comments
It’s disappointing to see fabricated statements being circulated, especially around such a sensitive issue as the drug war in the Philippines. The ICC investigation must be able to proceed without interference or attempts to undermine it with false narratives.
Agreed. The ICC case is crucial for ensuring accountability, and any efforts to obstruct or undermine the process should be condemned. Reliable information is key here.
This case highlights the need for robust fact-checking and a reliance on authoritative sources when it comes to high-profile legal proceedings. I hope the ICC is able to gather all necessary information to reach a fair and impartial conclusion.
Agreed. The integrity of the ICC’s work is crucial, and any attempts to undermine it through the spread of false narratives should be condemned. Maintaining public trust in the process is essential.
The claims about a lack of witnesses in the ICC case against Duterte seem highly dubious. Human rights groups have documented extensive evidence and testimony related to the drug war atrocities. I trust the ICC will carefully evaluate all available information.
Absolutely. The ICC has a responsibility to thoroughly investigate all credible evidence and witness accounts, regardless of any attempts to spread misinformation or cast doubt on the process.
It’s concerning to see false statements being amplified on social media, especially around such a serious issue. The ICC’s work must be allowed to proceed without interference or the spread of misleading narratives. Transparency and accountability are crucial.
The allegations of fabricated statements around the ICC’s investigation into the Philippines drug war are very concerning. It’s critical that the legal process is allowed to proceed based on credible evidence and testimony, without interference from misleading information.
This is a concerning case of disinformation being spread online. It’s important to rely on credible sources when it comes to such serious allegations. I hope the ICC can continue its work thoroughly and impartially, with all relevant witnesses coming forward to provide testimony.
The ICC investigation into the Philippines drug war is clearly a complex and sensitive matter. It’s important that all relevant evidence and witness testimony is carefully evaluated, without being undermined by unsubstantiated claims or disinformation campaigns.
This is a timely reminder of the importance of fact-checking and relying on authoritative sources, particularly when it comes to high-profile legal cases. I hope the ICC is able to gather all the necessary evidence and testimony to reach a fair and just outcome.