(UPDATE) THE Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) confirmed the continued pre-trial detention of former president Rodrigo Duterte, rejecting a defense appeal that sought his release on health grounds, as prosecutors separately asked judges to clarify the conduct of lawyers representing him in the case. In a unanimous judgment dated March 6, the five-judge Appeals Chamber upheld the Jan. 26 ruling of Pre-Trial Chamber I that ordered Duterte to remain in custody while facing charges of crimes against humanity linked to killings during his anti-drug campaign. The decision came as the Office of the Prosecutor filed a separate request asking the chamber to clarify rules governing the actions of Duterte’s defense lawyers, particularly their communications with individuals connected to the case, including victims or potential witnesses. The developments mark the latest procedural steps in the ICC proceedings against Duterte, who has been detained in the court’s facility in The Hague, the Netherlands, since March 2025. Health-based release rejected Duterte’s lawyers had appealed the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision maintaining his detention, arguing that his deteriorating health and alleged cognitive impairment constituted a “changed circumstance” that justified his immediate release under Article 60(3) of the court’s statute. The defense relied in part on a medical report prepared by doctors it commissioned, which it said showed Duterte’s health condition significantly reduced the risks cited by judges when ordering his detention. Those risks include the possibility that the accused might flee, obstruct proceedings, intimidate witnesses, or continue committing crimes if released. However, the Appeals Chamber ruled that the Pre-Trial Chamber did not commit legal or factual errors when it declined to rely on the defense-commissioned report. Judges noted that the report did not contain new medical findings and that the doctors who authored it did not conduct a fresh examination of Duterte. The ruling said the report itself acknowledged that “no independent clinical re-examination was conducted,” and instead relied on earlier assessments by an independent medical panel appointed by the court. The Appeals Chamber said those court-appointed experts provided the most reliable and up-to-date information regarding Duterte’s health condition. While the panel’s reports constituted new medical information considered during the detention review, the judges said the findings did not amount to a change in circumstances significant enough to alter the earlier ruling keeping Duterte in custody. The Appeals Chamber also agreed with the Pre-Trial Chamber’s approach of refusing to rely on medical reports submitted by parties to the proceedings in order to preserve the neutrality of expert evidence. The judges rejected the defense’s argument that disregarding the report violated Duterte’s fair trial rights or the principle of equality of arms between prosecution and defense. According to the ruling, the defense had multiple opportunities to present arguments and observations regarding Duterte’s health condition, and the chamber had adequately explained the basis for its decision. Having dismissed all arguments raised by the defense, the Appeals Chamber confirmed the earlier decision ordering Duterte’s continued detention while the case proceeds toward the confirmation of charges stage. Defense conduct questioned At the same time, prosecutors asked the Pre-Trial Chamber to clarify issues related to the conduct and authority of Duterte’s defense counsel in dealings with individuals connected to the case. In a filing titled “Request for Clarification regarding Defense Counsel,” the Office of the Prosecutor sought judicial guidance on whether members of the defense team may contact victims or potential witnesses and under what conditions such communication would be allowed. The request followed instances in which individuals connected to the case were reportedly contacted by lawyers associated with Duterte’s defense. Prosecutors said the chamber should clarify the limits of such communication to ensure that contacts with victims or witnesses do not interfere with the proceedings or undermine safeguards protecting participants. The filing also asked judges to clarify the scope of authority claimed by individuals communicating on behalf of Duterte’s defense, including whether those individuals are formally recognized as part of the defense team before the court. According to prosecutors, judicial guidance is necessary to avoid confusion among victims and other participants about the status and authority of lawyers reaching out to them in relation to the case. Duterte was arrested in March 2025 after the ICC issued a warrant accusing him of crimes against humanity for murder. Prosecutors later filed a document containing charges alleging that he is criminally responsible for murder and attempted murder committed between November 2011 and March 2019. The prosecution alleges the killings formed part of a widespread and systematic attack against civilians during anti-drug operations carried out while Duterte served first as mayor of Davao City and later as president of the Philippines.