China Calls for Caution as Duterte Faces ICC Custody

In a significant development that has drawn international attention, China has urged the International Criminal Court (ICC) to exercise caution and avoid “politicization or double standards” following the arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte. The arrest, linked to allegations of crimes against humanity during his controversial drug war, marks a pivotal moment in the global discourse on accountability and human rights.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning addressed the issue during a regular press conference in Beijing on Tuesday, shortly after news broke of Duterte’s detention at Ninoy Aquino International Airport in Pasay City, upon his return from Hong Kong. “This is an important sudden incident. China has noted the news and is closely following how this might develop,” Mao stated, as reported by multiple outlets. She reiterated China’s long-standing position that the ICC should adhere to the principle of complementarity—respecting national jurisdictions before intervening—and act “prudently in accordance with the law” to prevent bias or political influence.

Duterte, who arrived in the Netherlands on Wednesday night (Manila time) and was transferred to the ICC Detention Center in Scheveningen, The Hague, faces an arrest warrant over his role in a drug war that claimed thousands of lives during his presidency from 2016 to 2022. The arrest has reignited debates over sovereignty, international justice, and the legacy of his hardline policies, both as president and earlier as mayor of Davao City.

A Drug War Under Scrutiny

The drug war, a hallmark of Duterte’s tenure, was marketed as a tough-on-crime initiative aimed at curbing the Philippines’ drug epidemic. Official government figures claim at least 6,000 deaths resulted from the campaign under his presidency. However, human rights organizations and the ICC prosecutor have painted a grimmer picture, estimating the toll to be between 12,000 and 30,000 from 2016 to 2019 alone, with many deaths classified as extrajudicial killings. These allegations form the backbone of the ICC’s case against Duterte, accusing him of orchestrating a systematic campaign of violence against suspected drug users and dealers.

The scale of the violence has long been a point of contention. Critics, including international human rights watchdogs, argue that the drug war disproportionately targeted marginalized communities, often bypassing due process. Reports of police-led “nanlaban” (fought back) narratives—where suspects were allegedly killed for resisting arrest—have fueled accusations of state-sanctioned murder. Duterte, for his part, has remained defiant, recently stating he is “responsible” for the campaign’s outcomes, though the full context of his remarks remains under scrutiny as legal proceedings unfold.

China’s Position and Regional Dynamics

China’s response to Duterte’s arrest is notable given the complex relationship between Beijing and Manila during his presidency. Duterte pivoted Philippine foreign policy towards closer ties with China, often downplaying territorial disputes in the South China Sea in favor of economic cooperation and infrastructure deals. This shift contrasted sharply with the more confrontational stance of his predecessor, Benigno Aquino III, who sought international arbitration against China’s maritime claims.

Mao’s call for ICC prudence could be interpreted as a diplomatic signal of support for Duterte, or at least a wariness of international overreach into domestic affairs—a stance China has consistently championed in global forums. Beijing’s emphasis on avoiding “double standards” may also reflect its broader critique of Western-led institutions like the ICC, which it views as tools for geopolitical agendas. However, China has stopped short of outright condemning the arrest, adopting a wait-and-see approach as the case develops.

Adding to the narrative, Vice President Sara Duterte, Rodrigo’s daughter, has publicly denied rumors that her father sought asylum in Beijing. This speculation arose due to Duterte’s travel to Hong Kong, a special administrative region of China, prior to his arrest. Her statement aims to quash narratives of foreign interference or sanctuary-seeking, though it does little to quiet the political storm surrounding the case in the Philippines.

International and Domestic Reactions

The arrest has polarized opinions both within the Philippines and abroad. Supporters of Duterte argue that the ICC lacks jurisdiction over the Philippines, which withdrew from the court’s Rome Statute in 2019 under his administration. They view the arrest as an infringement on national sovereignty and a politically motivated attack on a leader who prioritized security over diplomatic niceties. Critics, however, see it as a long-overdue reckoning for a campaign that left families shattered and communities terrorized.

Internationally, the case tests the ICC’s credibility and reach. The court has faced criticism for its perceived focus on leaders from developing nations while struggling to hold powerful states accountable. If Duterte’s prosecution moves forward, it could set a precedent for how the ICC handles high-profile cases involving former heads of state, particularly in regions skeptical of its mandate.

In Manila, the political fallout is immediate. Sara Duterte, a potential successor to her father’s political legacy, faces the challenge of navigating public sentiment while distancing herself from the legal repercussions of his policies. Meanwhile, current President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has maintained a cautious silence, likely wary of alienating either Duterte’s loyal base or international partners advocating for accountability.

Legal and Ethical Implications

The legal road ahead for Duterte is fraught with complexity. The ICC must prove that crimes against humanity were committed under his direction or with his complicity—a high bar requiring evidence of systematic intent. Preliminary investigations by the court have already documented patterns of violence, but translating those findings into a conviction will hinge on witness testimonies, forensic data, and potentially damning internal communications.

From an ethical standpoint, the case raises broader questions about the balance between national sovereignty and universal human rights. Duterte’s defenders argue that the drug war, however brutal, was a response to a genuine crisis, with drug-related crime plaguing urban centers like Davao long before his presidency. Opponents counter that no crisis justifies extrajudicial measures, especially when they disproportionately harm the vulnerable.

China’s commentary, while measured, adds another layer to this debate. By framing the ICC’s actions as potentially politicized, Beijing taps into a narrative resonant with many Global South nations wary of international judicial overreach. Whether this perspective gains traction will depend on how the court handles Duterte’s case in the coming months.

What Lies Ahead?

As Duterte settles into custody in The Hague, the eyes of the world remain on the Philippines. The case could redefine how leaders are held accountable for domestic policies with international ramifications. For the ICC, a successful prosecution would bolster its legitimacy; a failure could further erode trust in its mission.

In the Philippines, the arrest may galvanize both supporters and detractors of Duterte’s legacy. Grassroots movements advocating for victims of the drug war are already mobilizing, demanding justice and reparations. Conversely, Duterte’s political allies are framing the arrest as a witch hunt, potentially deepening divisions in an already polarized society.

China’s role, though peripheral for now, underscores the geopolitical undercurrents at play. Beijing’s cautious language suggests it is unlikely to intervene directly, but its rhetorical support for “prudence” aligns with its broader foreign policy of non-interference. If tensions between Manila and the ICC escalate, China could position itself as a counterweight to Western influence, further complicating the regional landscape.

For now, the story of Rodrigo Duterte is far from over. His arrest marks not an endpoint, but the beginning of a legal and political saga that will test the boundaries of justice, sovereignty, and international cooperation. As events unfold, the world watches, waiting to see whether accountability will triumph—or whether the shadows of the drug war will continue to loom large over the Philippines.