THE International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecution has urged the Trial Chamber to dismiss the defense challenge to its notice of eight additional incidents in the case against former president Rodrigo Duterte, arguing that the incidents fall within the scope of the charges already confirmed by the court.
In a public redacted filing dated Sept. 22, Acting Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang said the defense's objections were unfounded and largely duplicated a pending motion under Rule 134(1) of the ICC Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
The prosecution asked the Trial Chamber to consider the two motions together.
The prosecution maintained that identifying additional incidents did not amount to an amendment of the charges against Duterte.
It said the charges had been sufficiently defined by geographic, temporal and material parameters and that the prosecution could further identify the evidence, including incidents and victims, through which the charges would be proved.
The prosecution also said it had complied with the Trial Chamber's Aug. 31 deadline for giving notice of the additional incidents.
The defense had argued that the prosecution was effectively seeking to amend the charges by introducing Incidents 50 to 57.
The prosecution rejected that argument, saying the charges remained unchanged and that any question about whether the defense had received sufficient notice of particular incidents or victims was a matter for the end of the trial.
The prosecution insisted that the eight incidents fall within the parameters of Counts 2 and 3 that were previously confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber.
It cited the geographic scope of Count 3 as covering “locations across the Philippines,” while a subsequent decision on the defense's appeal clarified that Counts 2 and 3 cover the territory of the Philippines.
The prosecution said Incidents 50 to 57 involved alleged acts committed by members of the National Network and fell within the temporal and victim-related parameters of the confirmed charges.
Incidents 56 and 57 involved alleged victims described as high-value targets and occurred during Duterte's presidency from July 2016 to July 2017, while Incidents 50 to 55 involved alleged victims described as lower-level criminals and occurred during his presidency from around July 2016 to September 2018.
The prosecution also rejected a defense argument concerning the timing of Incident 57, saying the defense had treated a date in 2017 as a fixed endpoint when the Pre-Trial Chamber had expressly used the word “around” in defining the temporal scope.
