Duterte's Fitness Trial Hits Major Roadblocks at ICC
The International Criminal Court's proceedings against former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte have encountered significant procedural obstacles, with both his defense team and ICC prosecutors raising serious concerns about the medical experts appointed to assess his fitness for trial.
Medical Panel Appointment and Immediate Challenges
On September 24, the ICC's Pre-Trial Chamber I formally established a three-member panel consisting of neurologists and psychiatrists to evaluate Duterte's condition in The Hague. This crucial medical assessment aims to determine whether the former president can properly exercise his rights to a fair trial as the court investigates murder charges related to his administration's controversial anti-drug campaign.
Duterte's legal team has requested the disqualification of two court-appointed neuropsychologists from this panel. Although their identities remain confidential in public documents, the defense presented compelling arguments against their inclusion.
The first challenge centers on a female neuropsychologist who faces what the defense describes as an "active and ongoing suspension" from medical practice by a domestic professional regulatory body. According to a November 7 filing recently made public, this expert failed to inform the ICC Registry about her suspension, leading the defense to argue she should be barred from serving.
"An expert suspended by a domestic regulatory board, and who displays such open contempt for judicial proceedings, should not be allowed to remain on the Registry's List of Experts and cannot be permitted to provide expertise at the ICC," the defense stated in their submission.
Replacement Expert Faces Similar Objections
Following the initial challenge, the ICC revoked the female expert's appointment and replaced her with an unnamed male specialist. However, this substitution failed to resolve the controversy. In an October 20 filing recently disclosed, Duterte's defense team urgently sought the disqualification of the replacement expert as well.
The defense based their objection on what they characterized as "sickeningly offensive" tweets posted by the doctor the previous year. They submitted screenshot evidence of these social media posts, arguing they demonstrated a fundamental lack of professionalism and impartiality required for such a sensitive role.
"The defense considers the language in the cited posts to be so offensive, inappropriate, disrespectful, and unprofessional that it seems self-evident that the Registry cannot be aware of it," the legal team contended.
They further emphasized that "the impugned tweets are so fundamentally inconsistent with the values of this Court – integrity, professionalism, and impartiality – that the author and recycler thereof cannot, and should not, be added to the list of experts as proposed."
Prosecution Joins Challenge, Registry Under Fire
In a significant development that underscores the depth of the problem, ICC prosecutors have aligned with the defense in challenging the medical panel composition. In an October 22 filing made public on November 10, prosecutors called for the removal of the second medical expert, citing the doctor's "profoundly offensive remarks" on social media.
This marked the prosecution's second intervention in less than a month, following their earlier request to drop the first expert who had been suspended from domestic medical practice. Prosecutors highlighted that these repeated vetting failures represent another delay in determining Duterte's fitness to stand trial.
The court itself had already expressed concerns about the Registry's procedures. In October 3 correspondence, judges urged the Registry to "revise its working methods, especially with regard to the vetting process of medical experts, in order to avoid a similar recurrence."
The prosecution reinforced this concern in their October 22 filing, noting that revisions "appear to remain necessary in order for the parties, participants, and the Chamber, to trust that the list of experts contains suitable candidates."
Meanwhile, the Office of Public Counsel for Victims has chosen to defer to the Chamber's discretion pending further clarifications from the Registry regarding the defense's concerns.
Legal Stakes and Future Implications
The medical assessment represents the final procedural hurdle before the ICC can proceed with a confirmation of charges hearing against Duterte. The court had previously rejected his request for interim release, emphasizing the seriousness of the proceedings.
The charges against the former president relate to alleged killings during his anti-drug campaign between 2011 and 2019, covering his tenure as both mayor of Davao City and president of the Philippines. Prosecutors allege these actions constitute crimes against humanity of murder.
If Duterte is found mentally unfit for trial, the court may implement special measures or adjust the timeline accordingly. The ICC statute provides for treatment and re-assessment in such cases, potentially delaying but not necessarily terminating the proceedings.
The defense strategy of challenging the expert panel appears designed to slow the process, contest the assessment foundation, and potentially secure postponement on medical grounds. The unusual alignment of both defense and prosecution in questioning the experts' suitability highlights systemic issues in the ICC Registry's management of medical specialist vetting.
As the Document Containing the Charges released in late September describes alleged "common plan" killings in Davao City, Manila, and other locations, the successful completion of the medical assessment remains critical for the case to advance to the confirmation of charges hearing phase.
