The International Criminal Court (ICC) is facing a heated dispute in its case against former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte as the Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OVPC), which represents victims in the proceedings, has asked the judges to reject a request from the Defense that could reveal the identities of victims.
The OVPC said the defense is trying to reopen issues already being reviewed by the Appeals Chamber, which is not allowed.
In its filing, the OVPC said the request “calls for litigation in parallel of a matter sub judice pending before the Appeals Chamber and contravenes the Chamber’s Order by attempting to modify its core ruling and practical effects.”
Victims’ lawyers also warned that granting the Defense’s request would put people at risk.
The filing stressed: “Granting the relief sought will put in danger the security and well-being of the victims in violation of Rule 89(1) of the Rules and Article 68(1) of the Rome Statute.”
The ICC’s involvement in the Philippines began in 2018, when then-Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda opened a preliminary examination into alleged crimes linked to the government’s war on drugs.
Karim Khan was later elected Prosecutor in 2021. Under his leadership, the ICC issued a warrant of arrest for Duterte on March 7, 2025.
The chamber has already set rules for how victims can take part in the case, known as the “A-B-C approach.”
Victims’ applications were divided into groups, with Group A and B applications sent only to the judges.
On August 27, 2025, the Registry transmitted fifteen Group A applications. Days later, the Defense filed its request to access them.
The OVPC argued that the Defense’s filing repeats old claims, including attempts to disqualify Prosecutor Khan, but without any legal basis.
“The Defence did not demonstrate that Mr Khan conducted himself in an unlawful or unethical or otherwise inappropriate manner,” the OVPC said, adding that Khan has acted within the ICC’s rules since his election.
The victims’ lawyers also pointed out that the Defense’s request would overturn the Chamber’s earlier decision and could expose sensitive information. “The information the Defence seeks would potentially lead to full disclosure of the identifying information of the victims belonging to Group A,” the OVPC warned.
The Appeals Chamber has previously ruled that while victims’ applications can sometimes be shared, exceptions are allowed to protect their safety and privacy. It explained: “While Rule 89(1) of the Rules provides that copies of victims’ applications should be provided to the parties for them to make observations, it also allows for exceptions… The only limit in this regard is that the procedure put in place… cannot be prejudicial to, or inconsistent with, the rights of a suspect or an accused to a fair trial.”
The OVPC reminded the judges that victims’ applications are not meant to help the Defense prepare its case. If victims are later called as witnesses, the Prosecutor would provide the Defense with necessary documents, but only in redacted form to protect identities. “At present, the Defence has no right to receive the information in question… since said information is not necessary for the preparation of its case,” the OVPC concluded.
It asked the Chamber to reject the Defense’s request outright: “For the foregoing reasons, the Legal Representative respectfully requests the Chamber to reject the Request.”
Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested on March 11, 2025, upon his arrival from Hong Kong, following a warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in connection with its investigation into his administration’s deadly “war on drugs.”
On the same day, Duterte was flown to The Hague in the Netherlands, where the ICC is based, to face proceedings. Months later, after the Defense sought to suspend hearings citing health concerns, ICC?appointed medical experts examined him. In December 2025, the medical experts stated that Duterte was fit to stand trial, rejecting claims of mental impairment and clearing the way for the continuation of the case.