By Danielle Tiu
MANILA – The prosecution panel of the International Criminal Court has asserted that the evidence presented against former president Rodrigo Duterte meets the required threshold to advance to trial.
In closing submissions at the confirmation of charges hearing in The Hague, senior trial lawyer Julian Nicholls said the defense’s arguments highlighted issues that should be resolved during a full trial rather than at this preliminary stage.
Nicholls noted that the defense focused heavily on perceived inconsistencies among witnesses, an approach he described as typical of a final trial argument. He emphasized that for confirmation purposes, the prosecution only needs to demonstrate substantial grounds to believe the accused committed the crimes alleged.
Responding to defense claims made by counsel Nicholas Kaufman, the prosecution rejected the assertion that “neutralization” during anti-drug operations meant merely restraining suspects. Prosecutors contend there is evidence indicating the term was understood to mean killing.
Kaufman had argued that the prosecution failed to produce decisive proof and described the case as lacking a “smoking gun.” He also maintained that Duterte could not be considered an indirect co-perpetrator.
The charges stem from alleged crimes against humanity, including murder and attempted murder, tied to the government’s anti-drug campaign during Duterte’s tenure as Davao City mayor and Philippine president.
Prosecutors allege Duterte bears individual criminal responsibility under various legal theories, covering killings linked to the Davao Death Squad during his local executive term, as well as deaths of alleged high-value targets and casualties during village-level operations while he served as president.
Victims’ common legal representative Gilbert Andres also addressed the court, disputing the defense’s position on the relevance of Duterte’s public speeches. He argued that statements made by a sitting president reflect official government policy and are therefore significant in assessing intent.
The hearing’s purpose is to determine whether enough evidence exists to confirm the charges and proceed to trial. The ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber is set to decide within 60 days whether the case will move forward on all or some of the counts.
ia/
