Former Philippines President Duterte's Failed ICC Appeal Sparks Claims Putin and Netanyahu Could Be Next

Former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte's unsuccessful attempt to secure provisional release from the International Criminal Court's custody has intensified global debate over the ICC's reach and its willingness to pursue influential leaders. The court confirmed that Duterte would remain detained after rejecting his appeal, a decision detailed by DW News in its coverage of the ruling.

The decision has prompted renewed scrutiny of how international law may apply to figures such as Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, both of whom are subjects of active ICC arrest warrants. Their cases have resurfaced in global debate as observers examine the implications of Duterte's continued detention.

Calls for Broader Accountability Grow

In an online press conference reported by the Inquirer, former Australian senator Janet Rice said Duterte's arrest proves the ICC still holds meaningful influence. She argued that the move 'gives hope' for accountability in cases involving Putin and Netanyahu.

Rice pointed to the scale of the alleged crimes under both leaders, adding that international law should apply consistently, even in geopolitically complex cases. She acknowledged the emotional toll of observing conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza and said the Duterte ruling provided a rare moment where global justice appeared to move forward.

However, experts quoted in the same report warned that expectations must remain grounded. Academic Gill Boehringer noted that the ICC has historically prosecuted leaders from the Global South, highlighting a structural imbalance in international legal systems. He said this imbalance reflects unequal global power dynamics, which can influence how and when the ICC enforces its warrants.

Why Duterte Remains Under ICC Authority

Duterte's detention stems from allegations linked to thousands of killings during his anti-drug campaign. The ICC maintains jurisdiction because the alleged crimes occurred between November 2011 and March 2019, when the Philippines was still a member of the Rome Statute. His government withdrew from the treaty in 2019, yet the court continues to investigate actions taken before that date.

As DW reported, Duterte's lawyers argued he should be released due to health concerns, but appeals judges found no error in the lower court's ruling that required him to remain detained. The court postponed an earlier pretrial hearing to allow for a full medical assessment, although this did not affect the outcome of his appeal.

Duterte was arrested in March at Manila's main airport and flown to The Hague, where he is currently held in an ICC detention centre. His confirmation of charges hearing is scheduled for September.

Could Putin or Netanyahu Face Similar Action?

Despite speculation, experts caution that the circumstances surrounding Putin and Netanyahu are dramatically different. Both leaders represent nations that do not recognise ICC jurisdiction, and both command significant military and geopolitical leverage. Enforcement requires cooperation from states, which limits the ICC's ability to act independently.

Human rights advocate Peter Murphy, quoted by the Inquirer, said real accountability may ultimately depend on internal pressure within Russia, Israel and Palestine rather than reliance on international bodies alone.

Still, Duterte's case has become a symbolic moment. It shows the ICC remains willing to pursue high-profile figures and reinforces that withdrawal from the Rome Statute does not erase past accountability. As proceedings continue, the ruling has already shaped global expectations of how far the ICC may go in future cases.