TWO top lawyers for the defense team of former president Rodrigo Duterte have resigned even as prosecutors and victims’ representatives intensify efforts to keep him detained ahead of trial before the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity in connection to his bloody war on drugs.
In a public urgent filing dated May 8, 2026, before ICC Trial Chamber III, defense counsel Nicholas Kaufman sought permission to withdraw from representing Duterte, saying his one-year engagement had expired on March 31, 2026.
Kaufman told the chamber that Duterte released him as counsel during a May 7 visit to the ICC Detention Center and expressed his intention to appoint a new lawyer, whose identity was redacted in the filing.
Kaufman said the incoming counsel had already confirmed readiness to immediately assume representation and attend the next status conference scheduled for May 27.
The outgoing lawyer said all pending procedural deadlines had been relayed to the incoming counsel and that the transition was being carried out in an orderly and coordinated manner alongside the existing defense team.
Kaufman also assured the chamber that he would continue to comply with confidentiality and record-keeping obligations under the ICC Code of Professional Conduct should the judges approve his withdrawal.
The request remains pending before Trial Chamber III, composed of Presiding Judge Joanna Korner and Judges Keebong Paek and Nicolas Guillou.
The filing came a day after the same chamber approved the withdrawal of associate counsel Dov Jacobs from Duterte’s defense team.
In a public decision issued Friday, the judges granted Jacobs’ request to withdraw effective May 8 after noting that Duterte intended to reorganize his defense team ahead of trial proceedings.
Jacobs had sought leave to withdraw under Regulation 78(1) of the ICC Regulations, citing the planned restructuring. He told the chamber that his departure would not disrupt continuity in Duterte’s legal representation because the lead counsel and remaining team members would continue handling the case.
The chamber agreed that no prejudice or inconvenience would result from the withdrawal and reminded Jacobs of his continuing confidentiality obligations under the Rome Statute, Rules of Procedure and Evidence, and the ICC Code of Professional Conduct.
The defense team changes unfolded as Duterte’s lawyers separately informed the court that the former president’s health had significantly deteriorated during his detention in The Hague.
In another May 8 filing, defense lawyers said the 81-year-old Duterte had suffered repeated falls, memory lapses, and ongoing health complications while in ICC custody.
The defense asked the chamber to direct the ICC Registry to submit video footage and related detention records allegedly showing Duterte repeatedly losing his balance inside the detention facility.
According to the filing, Duterte had “lost his balance and collapsed several times” since being surrendered to ICC custody on March 12, 2025. The lawyers added that he was hospitalized on one occasion.
The filing further disclosed that the ICC Registrar extended Duterte’s health-related cell monitoring three times — on March 23, April 13, and April 22, 2026 — following recommendations from detention center medical personnel.
The medical officer reportedly described Duterte as “an elderly detainee with an increased risk of falling due to his age and multiple chronic medical conditions.”
Defense lawyers also cited medical notes dated March 24, 2026, indicating possible cognitive decline. One note stated that Duterte “does not know today’s date and guesses July or September for the month,” adding that his “forgetfulness becomes apparent” during conversations.
The defense argued that the new medical information constituted a “prima facie change in circumstances” that could justify reconsideration of Duterte’s continued detention under Article 58(1)(b) of the Rome Statute.
However, the lawyers clarified that they were not yet formally seeking an interim release. Instead, they asked the chamber to compel the Registry to submit surveillance footage and documentation related to Duterte’s falls and medical condition.
The filing said the information was directly relevant to whether Duterte still posed risks of flight, obstruction of proceedings, or continued commission of crimes — the factors underpinning his detention order.
At the same time, ICC prosecutors and victims’ representatives urged the chamber to reject any attempt to release Duterte pending trial.
In separate submissions also dated May 8, the Office of the Prosecutor and the Common Legal Representatives of Victims argued that there had been no material change in circumstances warranting Duterte’s release under Article 60(3) of the Rome Statute.
Prosecutors maintained that Duterte continued to meet the conditions for detention under Articles 58(1)(a) and 58(1)(b), citing risks that he could abscond, obstruct proceedings, or continue committing crimes.
“Recent events demonstrate that Mr Duterte’s continued detention is necessary,” prosecutors wrote.
Victims’ representatives told the chamber that Duterte’s detention remained “strictly necessary” after ICC judges confirmed all charges against him in April.
“Victims are particularly concerned about the prospect of Mr. Duterte being released,” the filing stated. “To ensure Mr. Duterte’s appearance at trial and prevent any kind of interference with the administration of justice, victims posit that the accused’s detention has to be maintained.”
The prosecution cited recent statements by Duterte allies and family members questioning the legitimacy of the ICC as evidence of continuing efforts to undermine the proceedings.
Among those referenced was Vice President Sara Duterte, who reportedly said on May 5 that they did not expect the ICC to abandon the case against her father.
Prosecutors also cited remarks from former presidential legal counsel Salvador Panelo, allegedly accusing the court of trying to justify its existence.
The prosecution further pointed to public criticisms made by Duterte’s own defense counsel against the ICC.
According to prosecutors, these statements formed part of an ongoing effort to undermine the court’s authority and encourage non-cooperation.
Victims’ representatives separately argued that Duterte remained an “acute flight risk” because he had consistently rejected the ICC’s jurisdiction and still retained a broad support network in the Philippines and abroad.
They also warned of potential intimidation or interference involving witnesses and victims, noting public demonstrations by Duterte supporters in The Hague.
“Families of those who were killed during the so-called ‘War on Drugs’ have waited more than a decade to see Mr. Duterte held to account,” the filing stated.
Prosecutors additionally cited earlier findings by ICC judges pointing to Duterte’s alleged resistance during arrest, his continued political influence after winning the Davao City mayoralty in May 2025, and public remarks by allies about securing his release from detention.
The Office of the Prosecutor also argued that recent ICC rulings had strengthened the justification for detention.
On April 22, 2026, the Appeals Chamber upheld the ICC’s jurisdiction over Duterte’s case, while the following day the Pre-Trial Chamber unanimously confirmed all charges against him, paving the way for a full trial.
“Mr Duterte’s case is therefore confirmed to go to trial, which increases the risk that he may abscond,” prosecutors wrote.
Duterte has remained detained at the ICC facility in The Hague since being surrendered by the Philippine government on March 12, 2025, in connection with the court’s investigation into killings linked to his anti-drug campaign as Davao City mayor and later as president from 2016 to 2022.
Earlier requests for interim release were denied by the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber in September 2025 and later affirmed by the Appeals Chamber. A subsequent detention review in January 2026 kept him in custody pending trial.
‘Indefensible’
A group of Filipinos in Europe calling for Duterte’s conviction said Kaufman’s withdrawal showed that the case against the former chief executive was indefensible.
“The withdrawal of Nicholas Kaufman as lead defense counsel for former president Rodrigo Duterte in the crime against humanity charges filed before the International Criminal Court (ICC) indicates that Duterte’s case is practically indefensible,” Panagutin Network-Netherlands said in a statement on Saturday.
“Kaufman’s tactics to file several appeals questioning the ICC’s jurisdiction and, most recently, his critique of various technicalities involved in the handling of the case have all fallen flat following the unanimous decision of the ICC judges to set aside his arguments. This demonstrates that all of the legal maneuvers of Duterte’s defense team thus far have all been mere delay tactics, and that there is no real defense to argue,” they added.
The group said it was clear that after the confirmation of charges hearing last February, the prosecution showed a “comprehensive and in-depth investigation of the case, with legal personalities commenting on the numerous pieces of evidence which showed a clear command responsibility that ended in the office of Duterte.”
“With the charges against Duterte now confirmed, we look forward to the arrest of Duterte’s co-perpetrators. They are equally responsible for carrying out one of the bloodiest and gross violations of human rights in recent Philippine history,” the group said.
On a Facebook post, ICC assistant to counsel Kristina Conti said any changes in representation for Duterte will not result in delays.
“The accused Rodrigo Duterte does have the right to counsel of choice. But victims want to be assured that the change will not result in any delay. A new lawyer does not automatically reset time or give rise to new remedies available to the accused,” Conti said.
“So far, Nicholas Kaufman has committed that the new lead lawyer will be present at the status conference on May 27, 2026. We’ll take that with a grain of salt.... Victims will course their views and concerns, as before, through the common legal representatives who will stand for them in court on May 27th. The general sentiment here is that victims prefer the trial to begin the soonest possible,” she added.
Meanwhile, Mamamayang Liberal Rep. Leila de Lima, a critic of Duterte, doubts that the former president’s new ICC lawyer will be different from Kaufman.
“This is a bitter lesson for ICC lawyers defending enemies of mankind at the ICC. There is no magic in legal practice that will enable the lawyer to make the evidence disappear. When the evidence is strong, the only viable legal strategy is procedural attack and public appeal,” the former senator said on a Facebook post.
“Unfortunately for the defense, all the professional and experienced ICC judges are not susceptible to both, and the defense lawyers know this. They also know there is no magical legal incantation that can change this. It is therefore highly doubtful that Duterte’s new lawyer will perform any differently from Kaufman,” she added.
“Whoever becomes his lawyer, the effort to hold Duterte accountable will continue until justice is achieved. He himself said that he was ready to answer for the thousands of Filipinos he had killed through the police and death squads. He should not be spineless in facing accountability,” de Lima said.
