The Arrest of Duterte by the ICJ – A Step Toward Justice, But Hypocrisy Lingers

The arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is a landmark moment in the fight for global accountability. Duterte, infamous for his brutal "war on drugs," faces charges of crimes against humanity for the extrajudicial killings of thousands during his presidency. The ICJ’s indictment alleges that he incited violence, fostered a culture of impunity, and failed to prosecute perpetrators, leading to an estimated 12,000 to 30,000 deaths. This case sends a powerful message: no leader is above the law. Yet, it also exposes the glaring double standards of international justice, particularly when compared to the impunity enjoyed by other leaders accused of similar crimes.

Duterte’s arrest echoes past efforts to hold authoritarian leaders accountable. Slobodan Milošević, the former Serbian president, was tried by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity during the Balkan conflicts. His trial was historic, marking the first time a former head of state faced such charges. However, his death in prison in 2006, before the trial concluded, left justice incomplete. Similarly, Charles Taylor, Liberia’s former president, was convicted in 2012 by the Special Court for Sierra Leone for atrocities committed during Sierra Leone’s civil war. These cases set important precedents but remain rare exceptions in a world where many dictators evade accountability. The Nuremberg Trials, which held Nazi leaders accountable after World War II, laid the foundation for modern international justice, proving that even the most powerful can be brought to justice. Yet, decades later, the promise of Nuremberg remains unevenly applied.

While Duterte’s arrest is a victory for justice, it highlights the hypocrisy of selective enforcement. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for example, has been accused of war crimes and human rights violations related to Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank. Yet, he remains untouched by international courts, shielded by powerful allies and geopolitical interests. This inconsistency undermines the credibility of institutions like the ICJ and fuels perceptions that international justice is wielded as a political tool rather than a universal principle.

The ICJ’s action against Duterte is a step forward, but it must be part of a broader, more consistent effort to hold all leaders accountable, regardless of their power or political connections. True justice requires courage and impartiality. Until the Netanyahus of the world face the same scrutiny as the Dutertes and Miloševićs, the promise of international justice will remain unfulfilled. The world is watching, and the stakes for global accountability have never been higher.