Listen to the article
Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s refusal to attend his upcoming International Criminal Court (ICC) hearing represents both a calculated legal maneuver and a propaganda effort, according to Mamamayang Liberal Party-list Representative Leila de Lima.
Duterte formally waived his right to attend the confirmation of charges hearing in a statement released by his legal counsel, Nicholas Kaufman, on February 17. The document, bearing Duterte’s signature, has become a focal point of debate regarding the former president’s legal strategy and mental fitness.
De Lima, a longtime critic of Duterte and former detainee during his administration, argued that the signed waiver contradicts claims about Duterte’s inability to stand trial. In a social media post on Thursday, she pointed out that the very act of signing the document demonstrates that Duterte possesses the mental capacity to understand legal proceedings.
“Its legal effect is based on the premise that he understood the statement so as to affix his signature to it,” De Lima stated. “It is evidence against Kaufman’s own argument that Duterte is not fit to stand trial because he is supposedly unable to give instructions for his defense. The statement is clear evidence that Duterte is able to defend himself.”
According to the former justice secretary, Duterte’s decision serves two distinct purposes. As propaganda, it portrays the former president as defiant while appealing to public sympathy by suggesting he could die in custody. As legal strategy, it prevents potential damage from Duterte’s notoriously unpredictable behavior in formal settings.
“Duterte’s appearance will not serve any positive purpose but might endanger his defense in case Kaufman is not able to control him before the ICC judges,” De Lima explained, noting Duterte’s history of inappropriate outbursts regardless of venue. “Duterte is unpredictable even in structured proceedings like Senate and House hearings.”
De Lima also cast doubt on the authenticity of the statement’s content, suggesting it does not align with Duterte’s typical speech patterns or previous public positions on his controversial drug war. Throughout his presidency, Duterte openly boasted about the deadly anti-drug campaign rather than denying it occurred.
“The statement was obviously not prepared by Duterte. Duterte does not speak in such a controlled manner,” she asserted. “Duterte would have boasted that he implemented the drug war to save his country, rather than deny that any state-sponsored mass execution ever happened.”
The ICC is investigating allegations of crimes against humanity related to Duterte’s drug war, which human rights organizations estimate resulted in thousands of extrajudicial killings between 2016 and 2022. The Philippine government officially withdrew from the ICC in 2019, but the court maintains it has jurisdiction over crimes committed while the country was still a member.
De Lima, who was imprisoned for nearly six years on drug charges widely considered politically motivated, has been one of the most vocal critics of Duterte’s drug war. She was released from detention in 2023 after key witnesses recanted their testimonies against her.
The former president’s refusal to acknowledge the ICC’s authority reflects his continued defiance of international accountability mechanisms. “The statement reveals that up to now he cannot accept that human beings are subject to accountability for their actions, that the ICC is real, that there is such a higher power and authority that can put him on trial and hold him to account,” De Lima said.
The confirmation of charges hearing at the ICC is scheduled to take place from February 23 to 27, 2026, though the Philippine government under current President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has maintained that it will not cooperate with the investigation. The proceeding represents a critical step in determining whether the case against Duterte will advance to trial.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
It’s not surprising that Duterte’s former critic De Lima would view this as more propaganda than a legitimate legal strategy. But she raises some valid points about the implications of the signed waiver document. The ICC will have to weigh all the evidence carefully.
Interesting that Duterte would formally waive his ICC appearance. Seems like a calculated legal move, as De Lima suggests, rather than just a propaganda tactic. Curious to see how this plays out in the legal proceedings.
This seems like a high-stakes game of legal maneuvering between Duterte’s team and his critics like De Lima. Both sides are making arguments about his mental capacity and the implications of the signed waiver. The ICC will have a lot to unpack as they try to sort out the truth and ensure a fair process.
De Lima’s perspective as a longtime Duterte critic is understandable, but she does raise some valid points about the contradictions in his legal team’s arguments. The ICC will need to be very thorough in its assessment of Duterte’s condition and motivations to ensure justice is served.
The signed waiver does raise questions about Duterte’s mental capacity and fitness to stand trial. De Lima makes a fair point that the act of signing demonstrates some level of understanding. This will be an important issue for the ICC to examine further.
The question of Duterte’s mental fitness is a crucial one that the ICC will have to grapple with. De Lima makes a fair point that the signed waiver suggests he has some capacity to understand the legal proceedings. But there may be more nuance to his condition that the court needs to assess.
Agreed. The ICC will need to carefully evaluate all the medical and psychological evidence regarding Duterte’s condition. His legal team’s arguments may not tell the full story, so the court will have to dig deeper to determine his true fitness to stand trial.
This is a complex legal and political situation. I’m curious to see how the ICC handles Duterte’s refusal to appear, given the signed waiver. De Lima’s comments suggest there may be more to this than meets the eye in terms of Duterte’s motivations and strategy.
Yes, the ICC will definitely need to scrutinize all the details and evidence here. Duterte’s legal team seems to be taking an aggressive approach, which could backfire if the court sees it as an attempt to avoid accountability.