INTERNATIONAL Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutors have sought the admission of previously recorded statements and supporting documents of three witnesses in the crimes against humanity case against former president Rodrigo Duterte without requiring them to testify in person.
In an application dated Oct. 7 and made public in a redacted version on Oct. 12, the prosecution asked Trial Chamber III to admit the testimonies of witnesses identified as P-1370, P-1393 and P-1416, arguing that their accounts would help establish the broader context of alleged crimes during Duterte’s administration.
The prosecution said the statements concern alleged extrajudicial killings in Central Luzon and a purported police policy of “neutralizing” suspected criminals through violent acts, including murder.
Prosecutors argued that admitting the recorded statements would expedite proceedings, save court time and resources, and avoid unnecessary witness appearances. They maintained that the accounts were relevant, reliable and corroborated by supporting documents and evidence expected from witnesses who would testify in person.
One witness, P-1393, allegedly described a killing involving San Jose del Monte police officers in Bulacan and disputed police accounts that the victim had resisted arrest.
According to the prosecution’s summary, the witness alleged that officers staged a self-defense scenario by planting drugs, a firearm and money on the victim.
P-1393 also claimed that officers preferred killing suspects over arresting them during “One Time Big Time” police operations to meet quotas imposed by a police station chief. The prosecution said the account indicated that the officers involved faced no disciplinary action.
The witness’ statements also allegedly described changes in police conduct after Duterte became president and the impact of the killing on the victim’s family.
The two other witnesses recounted separate incidents involving alleged killings. The prosecution said P-1370 described circumstances surrounding an incident, efforts to locate a person who failed to return home and documents related to the death.
P-1416 reportedly described searching for a missing person and later seeing bodies bearing bullet wounds at a morgue. Details identifying the victims, locations and circumstances were withheld in the public version of the filing.
Prosecutors said all three witnesses had declared that their statements were given voluntarily and were true to the best of their knowledge and recollection. They also argued that the accounts were internally consistent and supported by associated documents.
The application invoked Rule 68(2)(b) of the ICC’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence, which allows previously recorded testimony to be admitted under specified conditions when it concerns matters other than the accused’s own acts and conduct, and is accompanied by the required witness declaration.
The prosecution argued that the proposed evidence met these requirements and would not prejudice Duterte’s rights, saying the defense could still challenge other witnesses, present contradictory evidence and contest the weight given to the recorded statements.
The request comes as the Chamber seeks to streamline the presentation of evidence in preparation for Duterte’s trial.
During a hearing on trial preparations, prosecutors said they intended to call five witnesses before the end of the year, subject to logistical changes, while considering the use of written statements and transcripts to reduce the time needed for oral testimony.
The Chamber encouraged prosecutors to classify more witnesses under Rule 68(3), particularly those whose testimony relies on contemporaneous reports and documents. The rule allows evidence to be presented through written statements or transcripts instead of oral testimony, subject to the Chamber’s requirements.
The prosecution said it had reclassified additional witnesses, reducing its estimated hearing time from 193 hours to 173 hours. It also agreed that five expert witnesses could submit their reports under Rule 68(3), subject to the necessary filings.
The Chamber urged prosecutors to identify the documents essential to their case, questioning the volume of the evidence list. The defense said the list contained more than 18,000 items, while the prosecution’s large data set alone consisted of 8,393 items.
Prosecutors said they had reorganized and prioritized the evidence, removing about 1,300 duplicate entries involving original videos, translations and transcripts.
The parties also disputed the reliability of a data set drawn from Philippine National Police records covering drug-related operations from July 2016 to November 2017.
The prosecution said its review identified 3,422 deaths and proposed that the parties agree on a figure of 3,400 to reduce the need to present the underlying material individually. It also cited a 2017 government accomplishments report that recorded 3,967 drug personalities killed in antidrug operations over a similar period.
The defense rejected the proposed agreement, questioning the data set’s reliability and arguing that it included killings unrelated to the drug war, such as murders arising from personal or property disputes.
The Chamber is considering a trial schedule that would limit court sessions to about an hour at a time, with breaks in between, partly to address concerns over Duterte’s access to his family while detained in Europe.
Defense counsel Peter Haynes said visits and telephone calls were restricted to specific hours and unavailable on Fridays, weekends and public holidays. He also cited medical evidence on the importance of family visits to Duterte’s mental well-being.
In a related development, the National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL) on Tuesday condemned the administration of United States President Donald Trump for imposing sanctions against the ICC.
”The ICC has confirmed three counts of crimes against humanity against former President Rodrigo Duterte, whose trial is scheduled to begin on Nov. 30. The families of victims of the so-called war on drugs have fought for years to hold those responsible accountable. Their pursuit of justice must not be jeopardized by Trump’s campaign against the Court,” the NUPL said in a statement.
”Our defense of the ICC is not an uncritical endorsement of the institution or of an international order marked by unequal power. International justice must be scrutinized for selectivity, inconsistency and its failure to hold the powerful to account. But these shortcomings demand more consistent accountability, not sanctions intended to obstruct proceedings against those whom powerful states seek to protect. We oppose both selective justice and selective immunity,” it added.
