The Philippine Palace has raised concerns over a statement made by Atty. Nicholas Kaufman, legal counsel for former President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, in a petition to the International Criminal Court (ICC) seeking Duterte’s interim release.
During a press briefing on Friday, June 13, Palace Press Officer Atty. Claire Castro cited a passage in the petition that she said appears to indirectly acknowledge Duterte’s involvement in alleged crimes.
“We’ve read a portion of the petition which says something to the effect of, ‘Mr. Duterte will not have imperial proceedings if released. Mr. Duterte will not continue to commit crimes,” said Castro. “So, in one way or another, the counsel admitted that the former president had committed such crimes.”
Castro clarified that her remarks were posed as a question, not a conclusion. “Just a question,” she emphasized. “Because if they include in their motion that Mr. Duterte will not continue to commit crimes, then the question is—does this imply an admission that crimes were previously committed?”
She further stated that if this was a strategic move by Kaufman’s legal team, then it is up to them to convince the ICC judges of its merit. “If this is part of their legal strategy, then I hope it works for them. But from a legal standpoint, it’s natural to ask whether such wording could be interpreted as an admission,” Castro added.
Former President Duterte is currently detained at the ICC detention center in The Hague, Netherlands. He faces charges of “crimes against humanity” related to his controversial war on drugs during his presidency. The ICC has scheduled a confirmation of charges hearing for September 23, 2025.
Legal analysts are expected to closely monitor the ICC’s response to Kaufman’s petition, as well as any further clarification from the defense regarding the potentially incriminating phrasing. The Palace has yet to receive an official response from the Duterte camp following Castro’s statements.
As the international legal proceedings continue, questions surrounding Duterte’s accountability and the interpretation of legal language in ICC filings are expected to remain in public and legal discourse.