The Manila Times
Victims in the crimes against humanity case against former president Rodrigo Duterte before the International Criminal Court (ICC) could still seek justice in other jurisdictions if the Appeals Chamber rules that the tribunal no longer has authority over the case, a lawyer representing victims said on Friday. ICC-accredited counsel Gilbert Andres, one of the common legal representatives for victims, said one possible recourse outside the ICC would be the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows certain states to investigate and prosecute grave international crimes regardless of where they were committed. He cited countries such as Germany, France, Belgium, and Switzerland as jurisdictions that recognize and exercise universal jurisdiction over crimes against humanity. However, Andres stressed that the scenario remains hypothetical, noting that he was not presuming the outcome of the ICC Appeals Chamber’s upcoming ruling on jurisdiction. Andres said the Appeals Chamber decision would be crucial in determining whether proceedings against Duterte would continue at the ICC, as it will address whether the court retains jurisdiction following the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute. He explained that if the Appeals Chamber affirms jurisdiction, the case would proceed to the next stage, where the Pre-Trial Chamber would still need to decide on the confirmation of charges before any trial could begin. If confirmed, he said victim participation would later be opened by the ICC Registry on a rolling basis, allowing victims to apply at any time without a fixed deadline. Andres said preparations were already underway for various possible outcomes of the ICC proceedings, including guidance for victims on procedural steps depending on the decisions of the court. He added that the victims he represents do not need to personally travel to The Hague, citing logistical and security constraints, and noting that legal representatives attend hearings on their behalf. He also said that while physical presence is not required, victims are able to follow developments through public livestreams provided by the ICC. According to Andres, the upcoming ruling would be the first time the ICC Appeals Chamber would directly decide on the effect of a state’s withdrawal on the court’s jurisdiction over an ongoing situation. He noted that previous ICC-related withdrawal cases did not squarely address the same legal question in the context now before the court. “This will be a case of first impression,” he said, referring to the novelty of the legal issue on jurisdiction following withdrawal. Andres said the decision would carry significant weight, as it could establish a precedent for how the ICC handles similar future cases involving withdrawing states and ongoing investigations. The lawyer said the central issue before the court is whether a state party can effectively halt ICC proceedings through withdrawal, or whether safeguards under the Rome Statute continue to preserve jurisdiction over crimes allegedly committed while the state was still a party. He also noted that the case involves a unique factual circumstance, as the former head of state who initiated the withdrawal is now facing allegations of crimes against humanity. Andres said the legal team representing victims hoped the Appeals Chamber would affirm the ICC’s jurisdiction, describing it as essential to preventing impunity and advancing accountability. He added that regardless of procedural outcomes, the victims’ pursuit of truth and justice remains ongoing and dependent on several stages of the ICC process, including the upcoming jurisdiction ruling and possible confirmation of charges proceedings. The Appeals Chamber of the ICC will issue its judgment on Duterte’s appeal challenging the court’s jurisdiction on April 22, 2026.
Go to News Site