MANILA, Philippines — Lawyers for former president Rodrigo Duterte have asked judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to disregard a panel of court-appointed medical experts’ conclusion that he is fit to participate in pre-trial proceedings, arguing that the experts’ reports are riddled with internal contradictions and fail to address his alleged inability to meaningfully instruct counsel. In a public redacted filing dated Dec. 18, 2025, the defense insisted that while Duterte understood the nature of the proceedings and the charge of murder, his short-term memory impairment rendered him incapable of following hearings, assessing evidence, or giving consistent instructions to his lawyers. “Mr Duterte’s short-term memory is demonstrably impacted,” the defense said, adding that his instructions to counsel allegedly change from day to day because he cannot retain information even from the previous day. According to the filing, this undermines his ability to exercise his fair trial rights and vitiates the fairness of the proceedings. The defense traced the issue to July 2025, when it first raised concerns about Duterte’s fitness and sought a status conference. That request was opposed by prosecutors and rejected by the chamber. In August, the defense sought an indefinite adjournment of proceedings, citing findings from its own medical experts and a neuropsychologist linked to the ICC Detention Centre. The judges instead ordered further examinations and constituted an independent panel of experts, whose joint and individual reports were transmitted to the parties on Dec. 5. While the panel ultimately considered Duterte competent to take part in pre-trial proceedings, the defense argued that this joint conclusion should not be treated as decisive. It said the experts agreed Duterte was frail, elderly, and an unreliable historian of his own health, and that his test performance showed underperformance. However, the defense pointed to what it described as stark disagreements among the experts on the causes, severity, and implications of his cognitive deficits, particularly with respect to short-term and working memory. The filing also faulted the panel for allegedly failing to integrate observations from ICC Detention Centre staff, who reportedly noted repeated forgetfulness in Duterte’s daily interactions, and for not adequately considering his multiple co-morbid medical conditions that could affect cognition. The defense further argued that recommended “accommodations” — such as simplified questions, repetition, and additional time to process information — were inconsistent with a finding of only minimal impairment. In addition, the defense criticized one expert for applying what it described as an incorrect and lower evidentiary standard for assessing fitness, a standard previously rejected by ICC judges in earlier cases. It warned that this error could have influenced not only that expert’s conclusions but also the panel’s joint position. Duterte’s lawyers maintained that the central issue was not whether he could engage superficially in proceedings, but whether he could retain and process information in real time and communicate coherent, informed instructions — capacities they said were essential for complex confirmation of charges hearings involving thousands of items of evidence. The defense asked the chamber to convene an evidentiary hearing to allow the parties to question the experts on their methodologies, findings, and conclusions before the judges rule on Duterte’s fitness. It said such hearings are standard practice in international criminal tribunals. Pre-Trial Chamber I, composed of Judges Iulia Antoanella Motoc, Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou, and María del Socorro Flores Liera, has yet to rule on the defense request.