ICC pre-trial chamber denies Duterte camp’s request to restrict victim identity documents

Former president Rodrigo Duterte attends first ICC hearing via videolink.

| Published April 21, 2025

the International Criminal Court (ICC) Pre-Trial Chamber rejected former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s legal team’s request to limit the types of identification documents victims could use to participate in the ongoing investigation into alleged crimes against humanity during his administration’s “war on drugs.”

Duterte’s defense counsel, led by Israeli lawyer Itay Kaufman, had petitioned the court to accept only Philippine national IDs or current passports as valid identification. They argued that this would streamline proceedings and reduce the risk of fraud, such as misidentification or double-counting of victims.

However, critics contended that such stringent ID requirements would disproportionately exclude victims from marginalized communities, who often lack access to official identification documents. Kristina Conti, Assistant to Counsel at the ICC, described the proposal as “out of touch and harsh,” noting that the national ID system in the Philippines has faced significant delays and that passports are typically accessible only to the more affluent.

International law expert Joel Butuyan also criticized the defense’s request, emphasizing that many victims of the drug war come from impoverished backgrounds and may not possess the forms of identification being demanded. He argued that denying these individuals recognition due to a lack of documentation would compound their suffering.

The ICC’s decision to deny the request underscores the court’s commitment to ensuring inclusive participation for all victims, regardless of their socioeconomic status. This move is seen as a step toward broader access to justice for those affected by the anti-drug campaign.

Despite the Philippines’ withdrawal from the ICC in 2019, the court maintains jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed while the country was still a member, from November 1, 2011, to March 16, 2019. VERA Files The investigation into Duterte’s drug war continues, with the ICC emphasizing the importance of victim participation in the pursuit of accountability.

Here are the pros and cons of the ICC’s decision to reject former President Rodrigo Duterte’s request to restrict acceptable identification documents for victims participating in the ongoing probe into his administration’s war on drugs:

PROS

1. Expanded Access to Justice

The decision allows a broader range of victims—especially from marginalized or impoverished communities—to participate in the ICC proceedings, regardless of whether they hold a government-issued ID.
It acknowledges the real-world challenges many victims face in obtaining official documentation, particularly in a country where national ID distribution has lagged.

2. Victim-Centered Approach

Upholding inclusivity strengthens the ICC’s credibility as a court that prioritizes the voices and rights of victims over procedural technicalities.
It ensures that justice isn’t limited to those with privilege or resources.

3. Avoids Re-Victimization

Denying victims a role in the process due to lack of documents would have compounded their trauma. The court’s stance affirms that administrative barriers should not prevent the pursuit of justice.

4. Promotes Transparency and Accountability

A wider pool of testimonies and evidence increases the robustness of the investigation, giving the court a fuller picture of what transpired during the anti-drug campaign.

CONS

1. Potential for Misidentification

Without standardized IDs, the risk of duplicate or fraudulent submissions may increase, potentially complicating the verification process for victim status.

2. Defense Team’s Concerns Over Due Process

Duterte’s legal team may argue that the lack of stringent ID requirements undermines their right to a fair defense, as it could open the door to unverifiable or inflated claims.

3. Administrative Burden on the Court

Validating the identities and claims of victims without uniform documentation puts additional strain on the ICC’s resources and may slow the proceedings.

4. Possibility of Political Weaponization

Critics might claim that loosening ID rules could be exploited to politically stack the case, casting doubt on the impartiality of the witness pool—especially given the charged atmosphere around the Duterte probe.

Conclusion: A Step Toward Inclusive Justice Amid Deep Divides

The ICC’s decision to reject former President Duterte’s request to limit acceptable ID documents for victims in its investigation marks a significant affirmation of inclusive justice. In a case where most of the alleged victims come from poor and marginalized communities, the court’s move reflects a conscious effort to ensure that justice is not reserved for the privileged few with access to official documentation.

While the defense’s concerns about procedural fairness and potential abuse are valid, the broader context cannot be ignored: restricting participation based on strict ID requirements would have effectively silenced thousands who already suffered systemic neglect. The ICC’s stance reinforces its role as a venue not just for legal technicalities, but for genuine accountability and healing.

Ultimately, this moment underscores the importance of balancing rigorous legal standards with the human reality of those seeking redress. As the investigation continues, the true test will be how the court ensures both integrity and inclusiveness in its path toward justice.