(UPDATE) The Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Friday rejected the request of the camp of former president Rodrigo Duterte to disqualify the external legal representatives of the victims, ahead of the scheduled confirmation of charges hearing next week.
In a decision released February 20, the Chamber rejected the Defense’s request to disqualify lawyers Joel Butuyan and Gilbert Andres as external legal representatives of the victims on the grounds of “an impediment to representation” and “on the basis of conflict of interest”.
The defense likewise questioned the inclusion of Ms. Nicolene Arcaina, who was appointed as the case manager for the victims, to the team.
The defense filed its request on 11 February 2026, asking the Chamber to revoke the appointment of Butuyan and Andres and suspend their access to the case record.
It argued that there was an “impediment to representation” and, alternatively, “a conflict of interest,” citing provisions of the ICC’s Code of Professional Conduct for counsel.
The case dates back to April 17, 2025, when the Chamber ordered the Registry to organize common legal representation for victims.
On January 26, 2026, the Registry appointed Butuyan, Andres, and a counsel from the Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) as common legal representatives.
On the same day the defense filed its challenge, the CLRV team informed the Chamber that Arcaina had joined as case manager.
The defense alleged that Arcaina’s “current role as a victim’s case manager” was “structurally incompatible,” and claimed that Butuyan and Andres “should have been aware” of her situation but instead “actively promoted it.”
Butuyan and Andres opposed the request, stressing that “the Code does not apply to Arcaina’s role as case manager, as such role does not fall under the provisions of the Code.” They further argued that her position was not incompatible with ICC rules.
In its ruling, the Chamber criticized the defense’s submissions, saying they lacked clarity and legal grounding. It emphasized that Article 12 of the Code applies only to counsel or associates of counsel, not to case managers.
“The Defence’s arguments misconceive such distinctions and attempt to raise an issue of impediment to representation under article 12 of the Code against a team member of the CLRV who does not act as counsel,” the Chamber said.
On the alleged conflict of interest, the Chamber found the defense’s claims “speculative and hypothetical,” noting that differences in roles or mandates “do not per se indicate the existence of a conflict of interest.”
REQUEST TO DISCLOSE WITNESS DETAILS REJECTED
Meanwhile, the Chamber also denied a request from the Defense seeking to lift redactions in prosecution documents and publicly disclose information about witnesses in the ongoing case.
In its ruling, the Chamber sided with the Prosecution and Common Legal Representative of Victims (CLRV), emphasizing that publicity is not absolute. “The right to a public trial and the principle of publicity of the proceedings does not equate to an absolute right for the public to know all the details of a case,” the Chamber said, adding that redactions are justified to safeguard individuals at risk.
The judges noted that the lesser redacted versions of the Document Containing the Charges (DCC) and Pre-Confirmation Brief (PCB) already provide “sufficient information to allow the public to contextualize the crimes alleged against the suspect.” They stressed that parties must ensure arguments are framed to minimize private sessions, but confidential information must remain protected.
On the defense’s demand for a declaration about witness availability, the Chamber ruled that “nothing in the Court’s legal framework warrants for such declaration.”
On 16 February 2026, Duterte’s legal defense team filed their observations under Rule 122(3) of the ICC’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence, asking the Chamber to order the Prosecution to release a “lesser redacted” version of its DCC and PCB. The defense argued this would allow the confirmation of charges hearing to be conducted “in public session to the maximum extent possible.” They also asked the Court to compel the Prosecution to disclose specific witness information and declare the availability of witnesses for trial.
The Prosecution opposed the request, citing safety concerns. It argued that the redactions were necessary to protect victims and witnesses, stressing that “information regarding witnesses’ cooperation with the Prosecution should remain confidential.”
The CLRV supported transparency but warned against full disclosure. They noted that while victims “favour the publicity of the proceedings as much as possible,” the Court must balance this with its obligation under Article 68(1) of the Rome Statute to protect the safety and privacy of victims and witnesses.
Duterte was arrested on March 11, 2025 on his arrival from Hong Kong at the request of the ICC as part of its probe into his "war on drugs" that defined his presidency.
The ICC warrant for Duterte's arrest said that as president, Duterte allegedly created, funded, and armed death squads that carried out murders of purported drug users and dealers.
He was brought to The Hague in the Netherlands on the same day he was arrested.
Duterte on March 14 appeared via video link before ICC judges.
Duterte’s confirmation of charges hearing, which was supposed to be held last September 23, was postponed to a later date, citing a request from Duterte's defense team.
The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber has rejected the request of Duterte's defense team for his interim release.
The chamber has scheduled the confirmation of charges hearing for Duterte to take place from February 23 to 27, 2026, at The Hague, Netherlands.
ICC says Duterte's pre-trial hearing can proceed even without his presence