(UPDATE) THE Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) gave assurances that the disqualification of Chief Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan KC from the case against former president Rodrigo Duterte will not affect ongoing proceedings, emphasizing that Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang continues to lead the prosecution team. “The work of the Office of the Prosecutor on the situation related to the Philippines is led by Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang,” the ICC said on Thursday, shortly after the Appeals Chamber publicly released its redacted decision disqualifying Khan. “We do not anticipate a significant interruption in the work of the Office of the Prosecutor even with this decision. Khan has been on voluntary leave.” Niang has overseen the Duterte case since May 2025, when Khan began his leave, according to Kristina Conti, Assistant to Counsel for victims before the ICC. Conti said Niang “ably carried out” the prosecution’s work, including the assembly of evidence and the finalization of the Document Containing the Charges (DCC), which sets the scope of the case and Duterte’s potential criminal liability. “The disqualification of Khan, who assisted a group of victims prepare a communication in 2018 prior to his appointment as prosecutor, was intended to ensure fairness and preserve the integrity of the proceedings,” Conti said in a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter). The ICC spokesman likewise clarified that Khan’s removal “does not have an impact on the case against Mr. Duterte,” adding that prosecution efforts continue under Niang’s leadership. Appeals Chamber ruling In a 19-page decision issued on Oct. 2 and released publicly on Oct. 15, the ICC Appeals Chamber unanimously ruled to disqualify Khan from the Duterte case, granting a motion filed by the former president’s defense team over what it described as an “irreconcilable conflict of interest.” The five-member Chamber, presided over by Judge Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza, held that Khan’s prior role as legal counsel for victims in a 2018 communication to the ICC created a reasonable appearance of bias, thereby undermining his required impartiality in prosecuting Duterte. “The Prosecutor is disqualified from the case of The Prosecutor v. Rodrigo Roa Duterte,” the Chamber declared, directing the OTP to release a redacted version of its response within five days. Defense motion and background The decision stemmed from a motion filed by Duterte’s defense on Aug. 6, 2025, seeking to bar Khan “from any further role” in the case. The defense argued that Khan’s earlier participation in preparing an Article 15 communication — which helped initiate the ICC’s probe into Duterte’s “war on drugs” — constituted a direct conflict with his subsequent role as prosecutor. Defense lawyers said Khan had represented a group of victims of alleged extrajudicial killings linked to Duterte’s anti-drug campaign and later supervised the same investigation as ICC Prosecutor, effectively “overseeing a fair and impartial investigation of that very sa me policy of killing.” They noted that Khan’s prior involvement included interviewing witnesses and submitting evidence to then-prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, with Duterte named as a primary target for prosecution. The defense contended that such actions could lead a “fair-minded observer” to perceive bias, regardless of Khan’s denials. Khan rejected the allegations as “speculative and wholly untrue,” maintaining that he had no continuing obligation to former clients and that his prior work did not compromise his impartiality. The Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) also opposed the motion, describing it as “untimely and moot” since Khan had already gone on voluntary leave months earlier. The OPCV argued that the 2018 communication did not amount to formal legal proceedings and that Khan’s previous role as victims’ counsel could not be equated with that of an opposing party to Duterte. Despite acknowledging the presumption of prosecutorial impartiality, the Appeals Chamber concluded that Khan’s “significantly intense and multifaceted” involvement in the 2018 submission created an objectively reasonable perception of bias. “The Appeals Chamber considers that a reasonable observer would conclude that in light of the nature and extent of the Prosecutor’s involvement in the Article 15 Communication, he could be expected to have formed an opinion on the individual criminal responsibility of Mr. Duterte,” the judges wrote. The Chamber noted that Duterte was “the first person to be named as a potential target for investigation,” and said that the circumstances met the threshold for disqualification under Article 42(7) of the Rome Statute and Rule 34(1)(c) of the ICC’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence. While emphasizing that the ruling “is not to be undertaken lightly,” the Chamber said it was necessary to preserve the appearance and reality of impartiality. The Duterte case stems from allegations of crimes against humanity arising from thousands of killings during his administration’s anti-drug campaign between 2016 and 2019. The former president was arrested and surrendered to the ICC on March 12, 2025, to face trial in The Hague.