FORMER president Rodrigo Duterte's latest bid to challenge the International Criminal Court's (ICC) jurisdiction over his drug war crimes against humanity case is a well-worn delay tactic, one that is doomed to fail, an ICC-accredited human rights lawyer said Monday.

In an interview from The Hague, Gilbert Andres, a seasoned international human rights attorney, dismissed Duterte's legal team's argument that the ICC no longer has authority to prosecute him following the Philippines' withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2019.

"This is not new," Andres said. "The Philippines used the same line of reasoning during its 2023 appeal to stop the ICC probe. This latest motion appears aimed at delaying the proceedings once again."

Duterte's defense insists that because the Philippines officially left the ICC in 2019, the court cannot try crimes allegedly committed during his presidency (2016–2022).

However, Andres emphasized that the ICC's investigation covers acts committed while the country was still a member.

"The alleged crimes — including thousands of extrajudicial killings under Duterte's anti-drug campaign — occurred when the Philippines was still party to the ICC," he said. "Historically, international tribunals have been hesitant to divest themselves of jurisdiction once a criminal case has been initiated."

When asked whether the motion had any real chance of success, Andres was unequivocal.

"If the ICC had no jurisdiction, why would Duterte be detained in the Netherlands?"

He cited historical cases, such as Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, tried by Israel decades after World War II, and Duško Tadić, prosecuted by the Yugoslavia tribunal post-conflict, where courts upheld jurisdiction over crimes committed before legal changes.

"International tribunals do not easily relinquish jurisdiction once established," Andres said. "Even legal scholars overwhelmingly agree the ICC retains jurisdiction here."

The ICC's Pre-Trial Chamber I now has discretion on how to proceed — whether through written arguments, a separate hearing, or by addressing the issue during the confirmation of charges.

Andres noted that victims' representatives are expected to submit responses, reinforcing the prosecution's stance.

With a critical procedural deadline looming in September, where Duterte could potentially be released if charges are not confirmed, some speculate his lawyers are exhausting every legal avenue.

Andres acknowledged the defense's duty to advocate for their client but underscored a key reality:

"Under the Rome Statute, crimes against humanity have no statute of limitations," he said. "These cases can be investigated and prosecuted anytime. It's not about when you file the case — it's about the gravity of the crime."

When pressed on whether the ICC had ever dismissed a case on jurisdictional grounds, Andres was firm.

"As far as I know, that's very unlikely. We're talking about international crimes — the gravest offenses against humanity."

As Duterte's legal team fights to dismiss the case, victims' groups and human rights advocates remain vigilant.

The ICC's next move will be crucial — either reinforcing its authority or setting a risky precedent for future accountability.

For now, Andres' message was clear: "This challenge won't stop the proceedings. The victims will have their say, and justice will move forward."