FORMER Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s fitness for trial at the International Criminal Court (ICC) has hit major procedural setbacks, with both his defense team and ICC prosecutors now challenging the constitution of the medical expert panel intended to assess him.
Panel appointment and immediate challenge
On September 24, the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber I (PTC I) formally appointed a three-member panel of neurologists and psychiatrists to evaluate the condition of former President Duterte in The Hague, to determine whether he is capable of exercising his rights to a fair trial. This step comes as the court investigates charges of murder as a crime against humanity over his administration’s anti-drug campaign.
The defense team of Duterte has requested that the PTC I disqualify two court-appointed neuropsychologists who were part of that three-member panel. Their identities remain redacted in public filings.
The basis for the request includes: first, what the defense describes as the “active and ongoing suspension” of a female neuropsychologist from medical practice by a domestic professional regulatory body, which the defense argues disqualifies her from serving as an expert at the ICC. According to the filing dated November 7, made public only recently, the expert failed to inform the ICC Registry of her suspension.
The defense wrote: “An expert suspended by a domestic regulatory board, and who displays such open contempt for judicial proceedings, should not be allowed to [redacted] the Registry’s List of Experts and cannot be permitted to provide expertise at the ICC.”
Replacement expert and further objections
According to another defense filing dated October 20, also just recently disclosed, the appointment of the female expert was revoked and replaced by an unnamed male expert. However, the defense team also “urgently” sought the disqualification of this replacement, citing the doctor’s “sickeningly offensive” tweets from the previous year. The defense submitted screenshots of these posts to support their claim concerning the practitioner’s manifestations of “lack of professionalism, respectability, and suitability to provide expertise at the (ICC).”
The defense further argued: “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 Defense submits 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 backs expert removal; Registry under scrutiny
In a development that underscores the shake-up in the expert panel, ICC prosecutors have also called on judges to remove the second medical expert from the panel, citing the doctor’s “profoundly offensive remarks” on social media. Their request, filed on October 22, and made public on November 10, followed less than a month after they asked the court to drop the first expert who had been suspended from domestic medical practice.
Prosecutors stated that these vetting failures represent another delay in the process of determining whether Duterte is fit to stand trial. The court cannot move to the confirmation of charges hearing until the medical evaluation is completed.
In earlier correspondence on October 3, the court itself had already 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.”
In the October 22 filing, the prosecution added 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 (OPCV) said it would defer entirely to the Chamber’s discretion** once further clarifications are obtained from the Registry regarding the issues raised by the defense.
Where the proceedings stand and what’s at stake
To date, the only existing hurdle before the ICC can proceed with a confirmation of charges hearing against Duterte is the medical assessment of his fitness to stand trial. His request for interim release was rejected earlier by PTC I.
If the court finds him mentally unfit, special measures or a different timeline may apply. According to legal commentary, if he is found unfit, the proceedings may be delayed, but the ICC statute allows for treatment and re‐assessment.
The charges against Duterte relate to alleged killings during his anti-drug campaign between 2011 and 2019, including his time as mayor and then president, which prosecutors say amount to crimes against humanity of murder.
The Document Containing the Charges (DCC) was publicly released in late September, albeit with redactions. It describes alleged “common plan” killings in Davao City, Manila and other localities.
Implications and outlook
The defense’s strategy of targeting the expert panel arguably seeks to slow the process, contest the basis for assessment, and possibly favor a postponement on humanitarian or medical grounds.
At the same time, the fact that both defense and prosecution now agree that at least one expert should be removed underscores deeper systemic issues in how the ICC Registry manages and vets its lists of medical specialists.
If the medical assessment goes smoothly, the next phase will be the confirmation of charges hearing, where the court judges decide whether the evidence justifies moving to trial. If it does not go smoothly, if experts are changed or challenged, or if the evaluation drags on, the case may stall further. DEF