27/06/2025
WHEN RODRIGO DUTERTE was arrested morning on March 11th, as he stepped off a plane in Manila, hundreds of supporters thronged outside the airbase to protest. Their hero, a former president of the Philippines, had been denied due process, they claimed.
Mr. Duterte was detained by Philippine officials acting on an arrest warrant from the ICC in The Hague. By evening on March 11th, his lawyers said, he had been forced to board a flight to the Netherlands. His arrest highlights both the strengths and the weaknesses of international justice—mainly the weaknesses.
The ICC pursues a noble aim: to prosecute individuals suspected of committing war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity or crimes of aggression, such as invading a neighbor. However, it is often hamstrung by politics, both national and global.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) operates under the principle of complementarity, meaning it only intervenes when national judicial systems are unwilling or unable to genuinely investigate and prosecute grave crimes like genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The question now, does the Philippines judicial system not functioning?
It generally lacks jurisdiction over countries that have not signed up to it. So it cannot do anything about China’s persecution of the Uyhgurs in Xinjiang, for example. And since Duterte pulled the Philippines out of the treaty underpinning the court halfway through his time in office, it can only prosecute him for alleged crimes committed before that date.
The ICC has no powers of coercion. It cannot arrest people without the co-operation of the country where they are, which is often refused. So far, its successful prosecutions have all been of Africans, and mostly warlords rather than government officials. The court is trying hard to bring justice to other parts of the world, but it is not easy.
When it issued an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin for war crimes in Ukraine, one of his henchmen threatened a surgical application of a hypersonic missile on the courthouse in The Hague, adding: So, judges, look carefully to the sky. The case file on the ICC website notes helpfully that Mr. Putin is still at large.
Nonetheless, the arrest warrant has made it harder for him to travel: he could not attend a Brics summit in South Africa in 2023, since his hosts, as ICC members, would have been obliged to arrest him.
Under Donald Trump, America has grown dramatically more hostile to the court. It has never signed up to the ICC, for fear that American soldiers overseas might be subject to politicized prosecutions. Moreover, Mr. Trump has gone further than previous presidents.
On February 6th he announced sanctions on the ICC’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, over what he called illegitimate and baseless actions targeting America and their close ally Israel. Mr. Khan had called for the arrest of three senior Hamas officials for murdering Israelis, and of two Israelis for alleged crimes in Gaza: Binyamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant. The two Israeli cases are outstanding; the three Palestinian ones are moot, since the men in question have all been killed by Israeli forces.
Meanwhile, China on Tuesday warned the International Criminal Court against politicization and double standards, after former Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte was arrested in Manila by police acting on a warrant tied to his deadly war on drugs.
China has noted the relevant information and is closely monitoring the development of the situation, foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning told a briefing when asked about the arrest.
