Filipino lawmakers and civil society groups are mounting a renewed campaign for the Philippines to rejoin the International Criminal Court, citing the domestic justice system's failure to hold officials accountable for alleged crimes committed during former President Rodrigo Duterte's deadly drug war.
The push comes as the ICC continues its investigation into the drug war that killed thousands of Filipinos between 2016 and 2022, despite Manila's withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2019. Current efforts in Congress seek not only to restore ICC membership but to constitutionally prohibit future presidents from unilaterally withdrawing without legislative or public consent.
"Hindi umaandar ang sistema ng hustisiya sa Pilipinas," according to discussions among Filipino lawmakers and activists. The justice system is not working, they argue, and both citizens and the ICC itself can see this—particularly as politicians employ various tactics to manipulate the courts and prevent justice for victims of the previous administration's violent policies.
The proposed legislation would require a three-quarters vote of Congress or a three-quarters majority in a plebiscite before the Philippines could withdraw from the ICC. The measure represents an attempt to prevent future administrations from evading international accountability for human rights violations.
Ten countries, 700 million people, one region—and for the first time, ASEAN's traditional non-interference principle faces a direct challenge from within. The Philippines' potential return to the ICC would set a precedent for regional accountability mechanisms that could extend to Myanmar, where the military junta faces similar allegations of crimes against humanity.
The Duterte administration's so-called "war on drugs" resulted in estimates of 12,000 to 30,000 deaths, according to human rights organizations, though official figures remain far lower. Victims' families have struggled to obtain justice through domestic courts, where investigations have stalled or failed to implicate senior officials who allegedly ordered or encouraged extrajudicial killings.
The Philippines withdrew from the ICC in March 2019, a year after the court's prosecutor announced a preliminary examination into the drug war. The withdrawal became effective in March 2020, but the ICC maintains jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed while the country was still a member state.
The renewed push for ICC membership reflects growing frustration with impunity in Southeast Asian governance structures. While ASEAN has historically prioritized sovereignty and consensus-building over direct intervention in member states' internal affairs, civil society networks across the region increasingly demand stronger accountability mechanisms.
For Filipino human rights advocates, the ICC represents a final recourse when domestic institutions fail. "Maaaring maulit muli ang mga pagpatay sa mga inosentong Pilipino sa mga susunod na henerasyon," proponents warn—such killings of innocent Filipinos could happen again in future generations, and there must be someone to fight for Filipinos even when the government becomes deeply corrupt.
The legislative proposal faces uncertain prospects in a Congress where allies of the former president retain significant influence. Yet the campaign demonstrates how regional dynamics are shifting beneath ASEAN's formal structures, as citizens increasingly look beyond national borders for justice and accountability.
Whether the Philippines rejoins the ICC may ultimately depend less on legal arguments than on political calculations—and whether current President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. sees value in distancing his administration from his predecessor's legacy. For the thousands of families still seeking answers about loved ones killed in the drug war, international justice may be the only justice available.
