ALL individuals involved in former president Rodrigo Duterte's war on drugs could face legal action and potential prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC), according to Fr. Ranhilio Aquino, dean of the Graduate School of Law San Beda College.

In an interview, Aquino said the ICC's prosecution process is highly meticulous, typically beginning with those in positions of power who orchestrated, managed or directed the crimes. While Duterte and other high-ranking officials may be the initial targets, lower-ranking officers, including police personnel and executioners of extrajudicial killings, could be prosecuted later.

Aquino said the ICC follows a hierarchical approach to accountability, wherein those in leadership positions bear primary responsibility due to their role in planning and executing policies that allegedly resulted in mass human rights violations.

"High-ranking officials, including former President Duterte and top law enforcement officers, are likely to be prosecuted first, as they were responsible for crafting and implementing the antidrug campaign that reportedly led to systematic killings and abuses," he said.

Aquino said this does not mean those who physically carried out the killings — such as police officers or vigilantes — are exempt from legal consequences.

"While they may not be the initial focus of the ICC's investigations, they remain liable. If evidence emerges proving that they knowingly participated in unlawful executions under Duterte's directive, they, too, could face prosecution," he said.

Aquino emphasized that the ICC prosecutor has the discretion to broaden the scope of investigations as new evidence surfaces, potentially implicating more individuals within the chain of command.

He further noted that while the primary focus remains on Duterte and high-ranking officials, it is not uncommon for international tribunals to widen their scope over time to ensure comprehensive accountability.

Additionally, Aquino pointed out that domestic courts in the Philippines may also play a role in trying lower-ranking individuals involved in the drug war's human rights violations.

In a separate interview, former ICC judge and University of the Philippines law professor Raul Pangalangan said the Philippine Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over the ICC proceedings against Duterte.

Pangalangan said that while Duterte's legal team can challenge his detention in Philippine courts, such actions hold no bearing on the ICC, which operates independently from any domestic jurisdiction.

He said Duterte's arrest and detention in the Netherlands demonstrate the ICC's firm control over the case, dismissing any notion that domestic political maneuvers could derail the tribunal's legal process.

With Duterte now in ICC custody, the case is expected to proceed to trial. Unless acquitted or granted release under ICC procedures, he will remain detained.

His allies, including family members and supporters, have filed multiple petitions before the Supreme Court for his release and challenging the legality of his arrest.

The petitioners argue that the case should be heard in the Philippines rather than at the ICC. However, legal experts suggest these efforts serve more as political statements than viable legal challenges, given the ICC's independent jurisdiction.

Despite the high-profile nature of the petitions, the Supreme Court has yet to issue a ruling. But legal experts widely agree that any decision from Manila will not disrupt ICC proceedings. The international tribunal operates under a framework specifically designed to hold world leaders accountable for crimes against humanity, regardless of political or national pressures.

Addressing the limits of Philippine judicial power, Pangalangan reiterated that while Duterte's camp can pursue local legal avenues, the Supreme Court has no authority to order the ICC to release him.

"The ICC operates independently, and once an accused is in its custody, only its legal proceedings determine the next steps," Pangalangan said.

He also highlighted a fundamental principle of international law: the ICC does not recognize head-of-state immunity. Under the Rome Statute, no leader is exempt from prosecution, even for actions taken while in office. This principle ensures that no position of power shields individuals from accountability.

While the legal framework is clear, Pangalangan acknowledged that the greater challenges in Duterte's case are political rather than legal.

"The process will advance to trial, and Duterte will remain in detention unless acquitted or granted release under ICC procedures," he said.