The defense team of former president Rodrigo Duterte has questioned the prosecution’s addition of eight incidents to its trial brief before the International Criminal Court, arguing that the incidents, sourced from former senator Antonio Trillanes IV, were not among the facts and circumstances covered by the charges confirmed against him.
In a request filed on Sept. 15, defense lead counsel Peter Haynes said the prosecution should first obtain authorization from Trial Chamber III before including the incidents in the trial brief or remove them because they “exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges.”
On April 23, Pre-Trial Chamber I confirmed three counts of murder and attempted murder against Duterte based on 49 incidents.
The prosecutors notified the court on Aug. 31 that it had added eight incidents to its trial brief: six under Count 3 and two under Count 2.
The defense argued that the incidents constitute new material facts rather than a “further specification” of the confirmed charges.
“The eight additional incidents are in no way connected to the 49 confirmed incidents. Each of them occurred in an entirely new location, not mentioned in the confirmed charges, with a distinct set of facts: different primary perpetrators, different victims, different dates, and different circumstances,” Haynes said.
One of the incidents, the defense said, falls outside the confirmed period for Count 2.
The confirmation decision set the period for Count 2 from July 2016 to July 2017, but the new evidence occurred in August 2017, according to the filing.
The defense further questioned the authenticity of the evidence, which it said were sourced from Trillanes, a prominent critic of Duterte.
“This source is a former senator with no known legitimate means of accessing internal PNP documentation, but who has produced all of the newly disclosed PNP Incident Record Forms underpinning these eight incidents,” the filing said.
The defense said the documents were unsigned and did not bear an official stamp indicating that they were certified true copies.
“In light of these evidentiary deficiencies, questions may be raised as to whether these eight incidents would have passed the lower standard of proof applicable at confirmation, had they been included in the original,” it said.
Haynes also objected to the timing of the addition of the incidents, with less than three months before the start of trial.
“The defense will be required to investigate these new incidents in the less than three months before the opening of trial, without having received any prior notice that these new locations, victims, perpetrators and circumstances would be part of the case,” he stated.
Victims oppose Duterte’s release
Meanwhile, the common legal representatives for victims urged the court to keep Duterte in custody while awaiting trial.
“Mr. Duterte remains capable of absconding, interfering with the investigation and proceedings, and accessing and/or instructing a network of supporters and resources for such purposes,” lawyers Gilbert Andres, Joel Butuyan, and Paolina Massida said in an eight-page submission.
“Victims and their families attach considerable importance to these proceedings, viewing them as the only avenue to obtain justice. They also place significant importance on the accused appearing before the judges of this court in person,” they added.
Duterte has not appeared in person before the court throughout the proceedings on his crimes against humanity case. He was presented virtually to the Pre-Trial Chamber on March 14, 2025, two days after he was flown to The Hague.
The ICC’s third status conference, which will address matters related to the trial, is scheduled for Sept. 16. It was not immediately clear whether Duterte would attend.
