ICC judges disqualify Khan from Duterte war crimes case
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has disqualified Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan from involvement in the war crimes case against former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte. The decision by the ICC Appeals Chamber, reported by Reuters, cites a possible conflict of interest stemming from Khan’s past representations tied to victims and the Philippines’ Commission on Human Rights (CHR).
The ruling and its implications
According to a copy of the ruling seen by Reuters, the Appeals Chamber granted the defense’s request to remove Khan from participating in the Duterte prosecution. The judges concluded that Khan’s prior role representing the chair of the CHR and a group of victims in communications with the ICC could give the appearance of bias, undermining the impartiality essential to the case.
The decision marks another setback for Khan. He had stepped aside in May amid a separate United Nations inquiry into allegations of sexual misconduct, and this latest disqualification compounds the challenges facing the ICC’s most prominent active case.
What prompted the challenge?
In August, Duterte’s defense argued that Khan’s involvement in communications to the ICC from victims of the numbers game in the Philippines’ war on drugs created a conflict of interest. They contended that Khan’s representation of the CHR chair and a group of victims in relation to those communications could compromise his ability to conduct an impartial investigation.
Khan had maintained that there was no conflict of interest arising from his prior representation, asserting that his duties in those communications did not affect his role as prosecutor in the Duterte case.
The court’s reasoning and next steps
While the decision has not been made public, the panel’s conclusion that Khan “might appear to be biased” led to his disqualification from the Duterte prosecution. The ICC Office of the Prosecutor did not immediately respond to our request for comment.
With Khan barred, Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang is handling the Duterte case. Niang herself faces sanctions from Washington as part of broader geopolitical tensions surrounding ICC proceedings. The current state of the Duterte case remains a focal point for the court, which is already contending with various sanctions and international scrutiny.
The broader ICC context
Duterte, who led the Philippines from 2016 to 2022, was arrested and brought to The Hague on an arrest warrant linked to dozens of killings in his aggressive drug crackdown. Duterte has rejected the charges as unlawful and characterized the case as politically motivated. The involvement of key ICC figures has frequently drawn international attention given the court’s role in addressing alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The Duterte case sits within a broader spectrum of ICC activity, including past and ongoing investigations into conflicts in other regions. The court has faced its own set of challenges, including sanctions from the United States and internal inquiries that periodically recast the balance of power among prosecutors, judges, and defense teams.
What this means for victims and for due process
For victims and advocates, the disqualification of a lead prosecutor raises questions about impartiality and the integrity of the process. Proponents of strong, independent prosecutions argue that maintaining strict ethical boundaries is essential to upholding accountability for alleged crimes. Critics may view procedural disqualifications as distractions from the pursuit of justice, but the ICC emphasizes that perceived bias can undermine the legitimacy of its proceedings.
Conclusion
The ICC’s decision to remove Karim Khan from the Duterte case underscores the court’s commitment to ensuring that prosecutions are conducted with rigorous independence. As the Duterte matter continues under Deputy Prosecutor Niang, observers will be watching how the court navigates these ethical concerns while managing a complex web of sanctions, political pressures, and international scrutiny.
