MANILA, Philippines—Nicholas Kaufman, lead counsel for former president Rodrigo Duterte, on Monday challenged the legal basis of the crimes against humanity charges before the International Criminal Court, arguing that the case against his client rested on “political demagoguery” and selectively presented evidence rather than proof meeting judicial standards.
In his opening remarks at the confirmation of charges hearing, Kaufman told the court that the proceedings should be guided strictly by evidence and not by what he described as efforts to influence political outcomes.
“This is a court of law which decides matters on the basis of evidence, not on the basis of political demagoguery,” he said, as he began outlining the defense’s legal position in response to the prosecution’s allegations linking Duterte to thousands of alleged extrajudicial killings related to his anti-drug campaign.
Kaufman disputed earlier submissions by victims’ counsel Joel Butuyan, saying the defense had reviewed documentation that it claimed substantiated dozens of incidents cited in the charges.
He described Duterte as a “unique phenomenon” in Philippine politics whose leadership style, rhetoric, and law enforcement policies were controversial but rooted in a commitment to public order.
The defense counsel also questioned statements made by former Justice secretary and now Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla regarding the availability of domestic investigative records, suggesting that such remarks did not reflect the totality of evidence examined by the defense.
Kaufman raised concerns about what he alleged was political interference in the case, pointing to actions by the administration of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. that he said were inconsistent with earlier commitments not to cooperate with the ICC.
According to Kaufman, newly disclosed material from the prosecution included a transcript of a covertly recorded telephone conversation which the defense claimed supported its theory that efforts were made to channel witnesses to the court while maintaining “plausible deniability” for Philippine authorities.
Turning to the substance of the charges, Kaufman argued that the prosecution relied heavily on a limited number of Duterte’s public speeches to establish alleged intent to kill, while overlooking other statements in which the former president emphasized lawful self-defense and warned police officers against abuses.
“At this stage of the proceedings, the prosecution needs to show substantial grounds to believe that the former president actually desired and foresaw that people would be killed as a result of his language,” Kaufman said.
He maintained that Duterte’s rhetoric was intended to deter criminal activity and encourage compliance with the law rather than to incite unlawful killings.
Kaufman also criticized the investigation led by ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, alleging that it failed to adequately examine exonerating evidence as required under the Rome Statute.
The confirmation of charges hearing will determine whether sufficient grounds exist to proceed to trial against Duterte.