Engaging in a campaign to drum up the coming confirmation hearing on the crimes against humanity charges against former President Rodrigo Duterte, the International Criminal Court (ICC) went on overdrive, naming other high-profile figures in the “lesser redacted” document containing the charges (DCC).

The ICC considers the Duterte case a make-or-break chapter in its current ordeal of slipping relevance, as it fails to enforce its decisions on key figures such as Russian President Vladimir Putin and former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu while reeling under unrelenting sanctions from the United States.

Duterte’s lead counsel, Nicholas Kaufman, viewed the DCC’s release just 10 days before the confirmation hearing as the international tribunal’s move to resort to sensationalism.

The timing is strategic, as the involvement of two senators and allies of the former President generated headlines that influence public opinion rather than advance legal proceedings quietly.

It is a calculated move to influence domestic politics, especially amid ongoing debates over the country’s non-cooperation with the ICC and feelers from the current regime, which has a fierce feud with the Dutertes, that it may consider rejoining the Rome Statute.

The timing of the release also smacks of political motivation, as the ICC seeks to create a narrative of widespread culpability to bolster the case’s international presence, distracting from weaknesses such as the jurisdictional dispute or Duterte’s fitness challenges.

The ICC is widely criticized as an institution struggling for legitimacy and impact, which has led it to rely on high-profile, attention-grabbing actions, such as sensationalizing the Duterte report.

Established in 2002 to prosecute mostly war crimes, the ICC has faced mounting accusations of inefficiency and bias, leading to perceptions of declining relevance in global affairs.

For instance, over 23 years, the ICC has handled only 33 cases, issued 61 arrest warrants, and secured just 13 convictions, despite an annual budget exceeding $227 million and cumulative spending of over $3 billion.

Its poor track record, worsened by lengthy proceedings and a focus on economically weak nations, has eroded its credibility, with some labeling it a “failed, institutionally corrupt” body that risks losing support and recognition.

World powers like the US, Russia, and China remain non-members, often opposing or sanctioning the court when it targets their interests, further isolating it.

The ICC considers the Duterte case a push forward, despite the Philippines’ withdrawal and non-cooperation, reflecting a desperate bid for validation.

Releasing the provocative list of names amid a politically charged environment reveals an effort to reassert its authority and generate public pressure for compliance, especially as it grapples with enforcement failures and shameful sexual assault allegations against Prosecutor Karim Khan.

The ICC’s desperation signals overreach and selectivity through the Duterte case, where the court pursues cases against non-cooperative states like the Philippines while struggling against more powerful nations.

Kaufman dismissed the list of co-perpetrators as “completely lacking in truth” because none of the individuals named are subject to ICC arrest warrants, which he said makes the allegations baseless.

He said it would be “illogical” for ICC prosecutors to seek the release of arrest warrants before the ICC Appeals Chamber rules on Duterte’s jurisdictional challenge, which questioned the ICC’s authority after the Philippines withdrew from the Rome Statute in 2019.

The connection to Philippine politics is undeniable, as the ICC’s latest release of information was designed to complement efforts to undermine the Senate, which is already being emptied through the prosecution of those suspected of involvement in the corruption scandal.

Through collusion with political groups in the country, the ICC wanted a role in perverting the democratic will by targeting incumbent politicians.