Stating the obvious, the roiled Marcos Jr. administration saved itself heaps of political trouble, however momentary, with the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) rejection of the former strongman’s request for temporary liberty.

For months, the former strongman’s temporary liberty plea had been an incessant rallying cry for his emotional and theatrical supporters, which could have led to more political agitations had he gained temporary release.

But, as matters now stand, the ICC’s rejection barred Duterte supporters from their expected therapeutic use of the vocabulary, welded to the language of victimhood, of enhanced and renewed empowerment.

A sobering development which now makes it worthwhile to focus only on the relevant facts of the case, as well as the ICC’s strict legal processes, to make sure we access its shrewd political implications. 

Also, the same sobering development informs the Duterte family’s uncustomary caution when they quickly issued a short statement stating that they accepted the court’s decision with “peaceful hands.” 

As it is, the ICC Appeals Chamber’s rejection is the second blow Mr. Duterte received from the international court. 

Last week’s denial of the Duterte defense’s appeal reaffirmed the more crucial ICC Pre-Trial Chamber-I (PTC-I) 26 September rejection of Duterte’s interim release request, wherein the court also ordered his continued detention at The Hague’s Scheveningen prison complex. 

Nevertheless, the former strongman’s lawyers are keeping their hopes alive even after their client’s appeal was rejected. 

Lead defense counsel Nicholas Kaufman informed reporters the PTC-I is still studying the 80-year-old Duterte’s plea for release due to his supposed “debilitating” health condition. 

Before the appeals court’s decision — which also ruled that the medical reports provided by the defense to show Duterte was suffering from cognitive decline were insufficient to allow release — the PTC-I allowed a panel of three doctors to examine Duterte.  

ICC-accredited lawyer Kristina Conti said the doctors are expected to submit their findings to the PTC-I tomorrow, 5 December, on whether Mr. Duterte is still “able to understand what is happening and is able to answer questions.” 

By 12 December, the parties in the case should be able to submit to the court their comments and observations on the medical findings. 

The PTC-I’s decision on the medical findings, however, will only be forthcoming in January next year, as the court is suspending its session on 12 December.

Anyway, the ICC Appeals Chamber in its ruling said its assessments were related only to the issue of an interim release, not to the determination of whether he is fit to stand trial or not. 

The Appeals Chamber said its ruling “is without prejudice to any further determination and decision on the separate matter of Mr. Duterte’s fitness to participate in the present proceedings and confirmation of charges hearing.”

The confirmation of charges hearing is the next stop in the case, where the lawyers will argue whether there are sufficient grounds for an actual trial.

This has been postponed indefinitely while the judges decide whether Duterte’s supposed health issues have rendered him unfit to take the dock.

Should the confirmation hearings and trial finally proceed, Mr. Duterte faces three counts of crimes against humanity, which allege his involvement in at least 76 murders during the years he was Davao City mayor and Philippine president, and which ICC prosecutors alleged were all done because of his brutal “war on drugs” policies.