Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has opted not to attend the International Criminal Court (ICC) hearings regarding accusations against him related to his controversial anti-drug campaign. The ICC's prosecution has called for the opening of a trial, citing that during his time in office from 2011 to 2019, Duterte oversaw a violent campaign that resulted in thousands of deaths. Faced with charges of crimes against humanity, his defense team claims that Duterte's actions were necessary for self-defense against a perceived drug threat in the country.

In the hearings, Duterte's attorneys argued that the use of force was justified as a means of protecting society from the rise of drug-related crime. They maintained that the former president acted within the bounds of governing his city of Davao, as well as nationally, asserting that the harsh measures were taken in response to a significant national emergency. This case highlights the complexities surrounding law enforcement practices and the implications of such violent policies on human rights within the context of the Philippines.

Prosecutors, on the other hand, label Duterte as an 'indirect author' of these killings, aiming to hold him accountable for the widespread violence associated with his campaign against illegal drug activities. The situation raises critical questions about the balance between maintaining public safety and safeguarding human rights, presenting a significant challenge for both the ICC and the Philippine legal system as they navigate international law and domestic policies relating to crime and justice.