The Prosecution and the Victims : Former president Rodrigo Duterte masterminded the killing of thousands of mostly poor Filipinos and there is evidence to support this. Charges against the detained former leader must be confirmed so he can face trial for his crimes.
The Defense: Duterte murdered no one. Charges against him must be dismissed and he should be allowed to go home to Davao.
On the fourth and last day (Feb. 23) of the dramatic confirmation of charges of crimes against humanity against former president Rodrigo Duterte at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, the prosecution set out to demolish defense lawyer Nicholas Kaufman’s vigorous attempts to undermine its position.
Represented by senior trial lawyer Julian Nicholls, the prosecution held that between 1 November 2011 and 16 March 2019, “Duterte and his co-perpetrators shared a common plan or agreement to ‘neutralize’ alleged criminals in the Philippines (including those perceived or alleged to be associated with drug use, sale or production) through violent crimes, including murder.”
“We have proven it to the level for this to be bound over for trial, “ Nicholls stressed
This was followed by Gilbert Andres, one of the two Filipino legal representatives of the victims. He told the court, “The victims submit that the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that Mr. Rodrigo Roa Duterte committed each of the crimes charged. Consequently, all charges should be confirmed and Mr. Rodrigo Roa Duterte committed to trial.”
Documents submitted by the prosecution to the Pre-Trial Chamber 1 showed that Duterte’s approval was required for Davao Death Squad members to conduct killings in Davao City.
Named co-perpetrators are Sen. Ronald de la Rosa, former chief of the Philippine National Police; Sen. Christopher Go, Duterte’s personal aide and special assistant; former Manila Police District director Vicente Danao, chief of staff in the PNP Office of the Chief of Directorial Staff Camilo (deceased); former PNP chief Oscar Albayalde; former director of the National Bureau of Investigation Dante Gierran; former chief of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency Isidro Lapeña; former justice secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II; and other members of the PNP and high-ranking government officials.
But Kaufman pushed for the dismissal of all the charges, insisting that. “Out of that huge database of evidence on which the prosecution relies, I repeat that there is absolutely nothing to directly link Rodrigo Duterte to the 78 deaths alleged.”
“If Rodrigo Duterte is to be faulted for anything, it is for his inappropriate choice of language. But he murdered no one, “ he added.
The charge of crimes against humanity against Duterte covering the period 1 November 2011 to 16 March 2019, when the Philippines was a member of the ICC, is divided into three counts:
- Count 1: Murders in or around Davao City by the Davao Death Squad when Duterte was mayor
- Count 2: Murders of high-value targets when he was president
- Count 3: Murders and attempted murders in barangay clearance operations during Duterte’s term as president.
The prosecution cited public statements made by Duterte, many of them in video clips where he admitted responsibility for killings. These included his speech before Filipinos in Hongkong two days before his March 11, 2025 arrest upon his arrival in the Philippines. The PNP had acted on the strength of an ICC warrant implemented by the International Police.
In that clip played by Nicholls, Duterte was heard and seen justifying the killings in his war on drugs by pointing out that these were for the benefit of the Filipino people.
Upon his death, the controversial former leader told the audience to raise funds and build him a monument next to Jose Rizal, the country’s national hero. Noting that in his monument, apparently in Luneta Park, Rizal is holding a book, the former leader said his monument should show him holding a gun.
Kaufman pounded on what he noted is the lack of general records to substantiate the prosecution’s “theory of wanton execution.”
Andres shot back, referring to the Feb. 23 presentation of Joel Butuyan, his co-legal counsel for the victims, quoting Ombudsman Crispin Remulla, previously secretary of justice, on the absence of records of the killings.
“There is nothing, not even a police report…You don’t have a scene of the crime. You don’t have ballistics. You don’t have DNA,” Butuyan had quoted Remulla. “Everything that could be erased was erased so that the cases would not push through. That is why this has reached the ICC.”
Neutralize
There was a lengthy exchange among Kaufman, Nicholls and Andres on the term “neutralize” used by the police in their drug operations.
Kaufman argued that the term referred to “lawful enforcement, not killing the prosecution’s own witness.”
In reply, Nicholls shared an interview with an “insider witness” who explained that to “neutralize” meant “kill. You have to kill, whether it is a legitimate operation or not a police operation.”
Children victims of Duterte’s drug war
The defense team shot down the claim on the alleged killing of children in the bloody campaign, noting a lack of evidence.
“On the subject of the killing of children, of course, it ticks the right boxes for the prosecution insofar as it pulls the heartstrings, but apart from Kia de los Santos, the prosecution has not, despite its emphasis on children, presented to this chamber during these proceedings, any evidence that even one victim, apart from Kian, in its 49 incidents, was a minor. No birth certificates, no corroborative evidence, nothing. While incidents presented as involving minors are indeed grave, Article 61 requires proof, not emotion,” Kaufman said
Andres put his foot down: there were children systematically murdered.
“They were not mere collateral damage,” he said.
Andres used the records of the Supreme Court to set the number of those killed.
“The Duterte administration’s 2017 year-end report states that there were 3,967 drug personalities who died in anti-drug operations from July 1, 2016 to November 27, 2017, and 16,355 homicide cases under investigation from July 1, 2016 to September 27, 2017. This is a total of 20,322 deaths during the Duterte administration’s anti-drug war from July 1, 2016 to November 2017, or an average of 39.4deaths every day,” he said.
Kaufman’s melodrama
At the end of his closing remarks, Kaufman turned melodramatic and related that during his last visit to Duterte, who waived his physical and virtual presence in the four- day hearings, he showed the detained former leader pictures of his children.
The defense lawyer said his famous client, who is turning 81 on March 28, looked at him “solemnly” and said, “Nick, I have done my duty and I have left my legacy…I was a faithful servant of the people and that is how I wish to be remembered. I have now accepted my fate and I realized that I could die in prison.”
Seemingly unimpressed, Nicholls asked that Kaufman’s remarks be stricken out. Duterte had the opportunity to attend the hearings but waived that right. Kaufman cannot testify on behalf of Duterte, he argued.
Kaufman countered that Duterte’s statements were not testimony.
In closing, he implored the Chamber: ““I beg you, not to confirm any of the charges. I ask you to let Rodrigo Duterte return to the Philippines-not to govern, but simply to let him live out the rest of his days in peace, in his humble dwelling in Davao.”
Andres, on the other hand, asked for the opposite: “Your Honor, the victims want these charges to be confirmed because they want to be reintegrated to their communities because they are still in the shadows of fake news, of fear, and of threats from Mr. Duterte’s supporters. Hence, it’s important, Your Honor, that all of these charges be confirmed against Mr. Duterte so that the victims of these crimes will be taken out of the shadow of darkness into the light of truth and justice because in the end, Your Honors, the victims are also created in the image of God and they also believe that the God of the universe is the God of justice. “
What’s next?
The judges have 60 days to deliberate on the charges. The Pre-Trial Chamber may decide on any of three options:
- confirm those charges for which the Chamber has determined that there is sufficient evidence, and commit the suspect to trial;
- decline to confirm those charges for which it has determined that there is insufficient evidence and stop the proceedings;
- adjourn the hearing and request the Prosecutor to provide further evidence, to conduct further investigations or to amend any charge for which the evidenc submitted appears to establish a crime other than the one charged.
(With inputs from Valerie Joyce Nuval)
