The International Criminal Court has denied former president Rodrigo Duterte’s request for temporary release, ruling that his daughter’s public threat to ‘break him out’ and his recent election as Davao City mayor show he still wields the power and influence to flee or obstruct justice.
The decision sets back the Duterte family’s efforts to return the former president to the country and vindicates the position of victims’ families and their lawyers, who had opposed his release on grounds he would be a flight risk and a threat to witnesses.
The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I’s decision, dated September 26 but made public Friday, found that Duterte’s continued detention is necessary on these three grounds: to ensure he appears for trial, to prevent him from obstructing proceedings, and to stop him from committing new crimes.
None of the conditions proposed by Duterte’s lawyers – including electronic monitoring and undertakings by a third country to host him – could adequately contain the risks if Duterte is temporarily freed, according to the decision.
‘The detention of Mr. Duterte is required so as to ensure his appearance in these proceedings, that he does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the Court’s proceedings, and to prevent the commission of related crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court,’ the decision read.
Why he’s a flight risk
In rejecting Duterte’s request for temporary release, the court cited the former president’s ‘rejection of the proceedings’ of the ICC itself and his family’s ‘will to help him elude detention and prosecution.’
The court pointed to several public remarks by Vice President Sara Duterte, who told supporters in July that she would ‘break [her father] out’ of detention and accused the ICC and the Philippine government of using ‘fake witnesses.’
The vice president also said in August that her father had supposedly expressed his desire to return to Davao City if granted interim release, which the court noted contradicted the defense’s assertion that Duterte would willingly remain in the host country he would be released to.
These several off-the-cuff and public statements by Sara reinforced the view that the elder Duterte still commands loyalty and political power strong enough to undermine future proceedings, according to the court.
Duterte’s continued influence, according to the court, was on full display when he won another term as mayor of Davao City in May. This placed him once again at the helm of the city where many of the alleged drug war killings occurred.
His son, elected vice mayor, and his daughter’s position as vice president, gave Duterte the “necessary political contacts … that may help him abscond,” the court ruled.
The National Union of People’s Lawyers had said in March that while “interim release pending trial is a right of the accused,” relatives of victims of the drug war believed Duterte is “a flight risk … and a threat to the safety of witnesses and evidence.”
Risk to witnesses, ongoing obstruction
The court found the second ground for detention – preventing obstruction of proceedings – was also clearly met.
Judges cited Duterte’s “repeated history” of interfering with investigations, including “alleged involvement in briefing a witness due to testify before the Philippines Senate’s inquiry into the Davao Death Squad” and “threatening and taking retaliatory actions against individuals opposed to him.”
Releasing Duterte “would provide him with greater access to his associates and family who are actively attempting to interfere with the proceedings against him,” the judges wrote.
The court said there is “a risk that Mr. Duterte would pose a threat to (potential) witnesses, either directly or indirectly through his supporters.”
Critically, with his son Baste Duterte now serving as Davao vice mayor – in one of the locations where alleged crimes against humanity occurred – the court said the risk of witness intimidation exists “even if Mr. Duterte would be released to a location that falls outside of the geographic scope of the alleged crimes.”
Risk of continuing crimes
The third ground for detention – preventing new crimes – was also satisfied, the court found.
Duterte’s election as Davao City mayor in May concerned the court, because the charges against him include crimes allegedly committed during his previous terms as Davao mayor.
“Should he return to Davao City, Mr. Duterte would be placed in the very position that allowed him to commit the crimes for which his arrest and surrender to the Court was initially sought,” the decision stated.
The court also cited prosecutors’ evidence that Duterte “reportedly pledged to ‘double’ the killings” during the 2024 campaign if elected mayor again.
The judges said this risk continues “even if Mr. Duterte would be released to a location that falls outside of the geographic scope of the alleged crimes,” given his son’s position of power in Davao.
Medical condition, proposed conditions rejected
Duterte’s defense team submitted medical reports arguing his age – 80 – and alleged cognitive decline do not make him a threat.
But the court dismissed this entirely.
The medical documents submitted by the defense, according to the court, didn’t show how Duterte’s condition would eliminate the risks he poses. The defense’s health arguments “consist in mere extrapolation of the above-mentioned documents by the Defence – who does not have the requisite expertise to draw such a conclusion – and as such, are purely speculative and without basis,” the ruling stated.
Duterte’s lawyers also offered 16 conditions for his release to an unnamed country, including electronic monitoring, communication restrictions and limited movement.
The court found the proposal unworkable. The unnamed country lacked infrastructure for electronic monitoring – which the defense itself called “essential to mitigate the risk of flight.” Some proposed conditions would require substantial involvement from the court’s Registry, raising implementation concerns.
“The Chamber finds that the proposed conditions are not sufficient to mitigate the risks enumerated above in relation to Mr. Duterte’s interim release,” the decision stated.
What’s next? The confirmation of charges hearing initially set on September 23 has been postponed. Meanwhile, independent medical experts are assessing whether Duterte is fit to participate in proceedings – a separate legal question from whether he should be granted interim release.