In a landmark decision with major implications for international justice, Karim Khan has been formally disqualified by the appeals judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) from overseeing the war crimes case against former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte. The ruling, made public via a leaked court document seen by Reuters, cites a potential conflict of interest stemming from Khan’s prior associations — a decision that alters the trajectory of what was the ICC’s only major ongoing prosecution at present.
Background: The ICC’s Duterte Case & Khan’s Role
The ICC began probing alleged crimes against humanity tied to Duterte’s “war on drugs” in the Philippines, focusing on the period between November 1, 2011 and March 16, 2019, before the Philippines formally withdrew from the Rome Statute. In March 2025, Duterte was arrested on an ICC arrest warrant in connection to this case, marking a rare moment of accountability for a former head of state in Asia. For months, Karim Khan had spearheaded the prosecution.
Yet his position was already under scrutiny: in May 2025, Khan temporarily stepped aside amid a UN inquiry into allegations of sexual misconduct — allegations he has consistently denied. Even before that, he had been ordered to recuse himself from a separate investigation involving Venezuela, due to his sister-in-law’s role as a criminal defense lawyer for the Venezuelan government.
Thus, by the time Duterte’s defenders mounted a push to disqualify him, Karim Khan was already navigating a fraught path. The recent appeals chamber decision now cements his removal from this high-profile prosecution.
Why the Disqualification?
The crux of the appeals judges’ reasoning is that Karim Khan’s prior involvement with the Philippines Human Rights Commission (PHRC) — where he had, in effect, helped to flag Duterte as a suspect — undermines the appearance of impartiality. The defense argued that he should be excluded from the case because he had already communicated with the court on behalf of victims linked to the drug war, raising doubts about his ability to remain neutral.
Khan contended that there was “no conflict of interest arising from his representation of the chair of the PHRC and a group of victims” in connection with those communications to the ICC. However, in a decision issued October 2 (though not yet widely published), the Appeals
Chamber sided with the defense, concluding that Khan’s prior role could give the appearance of bias. Accordingly, the judges granted the disqualification request. In short: the decision is not premised solely on demonstrable bias, but on perceived conflict — a standard intended to safeguard the court’s integrity and public confidence in its fairness.
Consequences and Implications
The disqualification of Karim Khan from the Duterte case brings major consequences for the International Criminal Court. It raises questions about fairness, leadership, and credibility within the ICC.
1. Shift in Prosecutorial Leadership
With Karim Khan out of the case, the Duterte prosecution will now be conducted by his deputy, Mame Mandiaye Niang. Niang, however, is not without her own complications: she too faces U.S. sanctions linked to the ICC’s separate investigation into war crimes accusations in Gaza. he transition may introduce fresh legal and operational challenges for the case.
2. Damage to Court Credibility
The ICC has already been under pressure — reeling from U.S.-imposed sanctions and mounting criticism over its handling of high-profile cases. The disqualification of its top prosecutor from the marquee case casts further doubt on the court’s capacity to manage internal conflicts and maintain impartiality.
3. Boost for the Defense
For Duterte’s legal team, the ruling is a significant procedural victory. It may reopen opportunities to challenge procedural irregularities, argue for new motions, or push for delays given the reshuffling of prosecutor personnel. The defense may also seize upon the ruling as evidence that even the court’s highest offices are vulnerable to questions of impartiality.
4. Broader Precedent for ICC Governance
This case sets a precedent: that even the chief prosecutor is not immune from disqualification if past associations raise enough concern. It reaffirms that the ICC’s institutional checks must apply to all actors, regardless of rank. Karim Khan’s removal may embolden future defence motions in other ICC cases.
Broader Context: Khan’s Troubled Tenure
Karim Khan’s tenure as ICC Prosecutor has been marked by both ambition and controversy. He was elected in 2021 and undertook bold prosecutions — including arrest warrants against Israeli leaders over Gaza — that drew U.S. backlash and ultimately sanctions targeting him personally. The sexual misconduct allegations that surfaced in 2025 intensified scrutiny of his leadership, prompting calls for accountability and transparency within the prosecutor’s office. Now, with Karim Khan disqualified from the Duterte case, critics may push for further reviews or institutional reforms in how ICC prosecutors are vetted and potentially recused.
Interestingly, the court’s earlier decision requiring Khan to recuse himself from the Venezuela investigation provides a direct parallel: there, the court found that his familial links (via a sister-in-law) created an appearance of conflict. The Duterte disqualification extends that standard to past representational roles with victims’ groups. Together, these precedents may redefine expectations for overlapping professional relationships in international prosecutions.
What Comes Next?
- Publication of Full Decision: While the appeals judges handed down the ruling on October 2, the full text has not yet been publicly released. Once available, it will provide deeper insight into the legal reasoning and possibly set guiding precedent for future disqualification motions.
- Defense Motions & Delays: Duterte’s legal team is likely to file new motions or request procedural pauses to adapt to the change in prosecutorial leadership.
- ICC Internal Review: The prosecutor’s office may need to review internal policies about prior affiliations, transparency, and standards for recusal or disqualification going forward.
- Public and Political Reactions: In the Philippines, human rights groups, survivors’ families, and political actors will interpret the ruling in different ways — some as validation of procedural fairness, others as a setback to accountability.
In sum, Karim Khan’s disqualification by ICC judges in the Duterte case marks a turning point for both the case and the institution. It underscores the weight of perceived impartiality in global justice, even at the highest level, and will inject uncertainty into a prosecution already brimming with legal and political complexity. The displacement of Karim Khan does not end the case — but it changes its terrain.
Stay tuned at Juan 365 News for more updates!
