MANILA, Philippines — The International Criminal Court (ICC) Appeals Chamber has rejected a key argument raised by former president Rodrigo Duterte’s defense, ruling that there was no legal error in the interpretation of provisions governing a state’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute.
In its judgment, the five-judge panel dismissed the defense’s first ground of appeal, which claimed that ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I erred in treating Article 127(2) of the Rome Statute as a special rule overriding Articles 12(2) and 13(c) in cases involving a State Party’s withdrawal.
The Appeals Chamber said the defense argument focused heavily on the abstract application of the legal principle of lex specialis, but stressed that the central issue was whether the lower chamber committed an error in interpreting the statute.
“The key issue in this appeal is not how the principle is classified or applied in theory, but whether the Pre-Trial Chamber made a legal error,” the chamber said in a summary of its ruling.
Judges declined to rule on the broader theoretical arguments raised by the defense, saying these did not affect the outcome of the case.
Instead, the Appeals Chamber found that the relevant provisions of the Rome Statute — particularly those governing jurisdiction and withdrawal — must be read together to determine the applicable legal framework.
It upheld the Pre-Trial Chamber’s interpretation that Article 12(2), which requires a state to be a party to the statute at the time the court exercises jurisdiction, must be considered alongside Article 127, which sets out when a withdrawal takes effect and its legal consequences.
“In the view of the Appeals Chamber, the provisions … read together with Article 127(2), settle the legal regime applicable to situations of a State Party withdrawal,” the judges said.
The chamber concluded that there was no error in the earlier ruling and unanimously rejected the defense’s first ground of appeal.
