THE DEFENSE team for former President Rodrigo Roa Duterte has formally filed a Notice and Grounds of Appeal with the International Criminal Court (ICC), challenging the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision to deny him interim release.
The appeal, submitted by the defense team led by Atty. Nicholas Kaufman specifically targets the Sept. 26, 2025, decision (referred to as the Impugned Decision) that ruled against the former President’s temporary release from detention.
The filing was made under Article 82(1)(b) of the Rome Statute, which governs appeals against decisions concerning release or detention.
The defense is seeking a reversal of the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision and the immediate interim release of former President Duterte to the State that has offered guarantees, under proposed terms and conditions.
Grounds for appeal
The defense team is challenging the entire decision, claiming the Pre-Trial Chamber committed both errors of law and fact in its assessment of the release request.
The appeal is based on three primary grounds:
1. Insufficient reasoning and speculative findings
The defense argues that the Impugned Decision was insufficiently reasoned, contending that the Pre-Trial Chamber based its findings regarding potential flight or risk factors on speculation and irrelevant considerations.
The appeal asserts that the risk findings are fundamentally flawed because they rely on factors that are not materially linked to former President Duterte himself, but rather to external circumstances or third parties.
2. Failure to weigh state guarantees
The defense claims the Pre-Trial Chamber failed to give sufficient weight to the strong State guarantees and proposed conditions for release put forward on behalf of the former President.
The appeal argues that the Chamber abused its discretion by undervaluing powerful assurances provided at the State level, which the defense believes are adequate to neutralize any alleged risks associated with his release.
3. Humanitarian and medical concerns
The third ground of appeal focuses on humanitarian considerations and objective medical evidence.
The defense contends that the Chamber failed to give sufficient weight to these factors and did not properly consider the prejudice caused by prolonged detention.
The defense argues that the former President’s deteriorating health significantly reduces the likelihood of his being able to fulfill any alleged risk factors, thereby mitigating the need for continued detention.
The appeal was filed within the required timeframe as stipulated by Rule 154 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
The ICC Appeals Chamber will now review the grounds presented and determine whether to overturn the Pre-Trial Chamber’s ruling.
