More cases may be presented vs Duterte – ICC lawyer

MANILA, Philippines —  The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court may present additional evidence against former president Rodrigo Duterte as the initial pieces of evidence on 43 killings were only for the application of his arrest warrant, the ICC’s spokesman said.

“This doesn’t mean that these are the only incidents that may be included in the charge,” ICC spokesman Fadi El Abdallah said yesterday in an interview with ABS-CBN News.

“These were a sample of incidents that are related, that were – for the purpose of issuing an arrest warrant – sufficient from the point of view of the judges, to sustain the charge of murder as crime against humanity, for the purpose of an arrest warrant, which is the first step in the judicial process,” he added.

In the original application for Duterte’s warrant of arrest, the ICC prosecutor cited 45 acts of murder, four acts of torture and three acts of rape as bases for the crimes against humanity charges that they are pursuing against the former president.

It said the cases were “a representative sample of the multiple acts of violence” that form part of the “widespread and systematic” attacks against a civilian population.

When it issued the arrest warrant against Duterte, judges of the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I agreed that there was “reasonable grounds to believe that … murders of persons allegedly involved in various forms of criminal activities, including drug-related ones, were committed” in the Philippines.

They specifically cited “at least” 43 killings, including 19 allegedly committed by the so-called Davao Death Squad and 24 during the drug war.

According to El Abdallah, the prosecutor may submit additional evidence during the confirmation of charges hearing, which the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I has scheduled on Sept. 23.

“The confirmation of charges hearing is not the trial. It’s the pre-trial phase, after which the judges will decide whether or not there will be a trial or if the case will stop at this pre-trial stage,” he said.

“The purpose of the confirmation of charges is to test whether the prosecutor’s evidence are sufficient to go to a trial or if the case should stop earlier. For that, the prosecutor will have to demonstrate to the judges, taking a certain sample of evidence, that these evidence are strong enough,” added the ICC spokesman.

While the confirmation of charges hearing is only expected to last a few days, El Abdallah said it was scheduled several months after Duterte’s initial appearance hearing to allow the defense to review the evidence against their client.

“Before the confirmation of charges hearing, the prosecutor will have to disclose, to transmit to the defense the evidence on which he intends to rely during the confirmation of charges hearing so that the defense would have the time to study it, to examine it,” he said, referring to the “disclosure of evidence” process.

“The prosecutor may or may not call a witness. Same for the defense. But if witnesses are called, the other party will be able to cross examine them,” he added.

The ICC prosecutor earlier confirmed the disclosure of the initial “181 items” cited in the warrant application against Duterte.

In a message to The STAR, El Abdallah said “it is part of the defendant’s right to be provided with the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely during the confirmation of charges hearing.”

“Upholding the defense rights is key to ensure the fairness of the proceedings,” he added.

Not needed

Meanwhile, not all of the families of drug war victims are required to personally testify before the ICC during the confirmation of charges hearing, one of the five Filipino ICC-accredited lawyers said.

According to Center for International Law executive director and counsel for the drug war victims Gilbert Andres, the complainants need only fill up the form for victim participation.

“Not all the victims can actually be presented before the pre-trial chamber, so the prosecutor will just choose whoever will be the witness for that case,” Andres said over ANC.

Andres noted that the witnesses to be presented before the ICC will be chosen through the Victims Participation and Reparations Section (VPRS).

“They will actually vet who will officially be admitted as the victims who will participate and then they give their recommendation to the pre-trial chamber,” he said.

“The registry, through the VPRS, will actually classify it to A,B,C. A will be the victims who are really within the scope of the pre-trial chamber’s case, that is from Nov. 1, 2011 until March 16, 2019 and then B, those who are outside of the scope and C those (who) need to be determined,” Andres added.

US author mistaken for Duterte’s lawyer

Despite a difference in the spelling of their surnames, American author Nicholas Kaufmann did not escape the attention of Filipinos who mistook him for British-Israeli lawyer Nicholas Kaufman, who represents Duterte at the ICC.

As early as March 20, days after Kaufman was formally recognized as Duterte’s lawyer, the American author already posted on his Facebook page about the matter.

“People of the Philippines, I am *not* the ICC lawyer Nicholas Kaufman who is representing (former) president Duterte! Please stop messaging me!” he wrote.

On Tuesday, Kaufmann wrote a follow-up post, saying he is flooded “with followers and commenters from the Philippines who I guess don’t believe I’m not Duterte’s lawyer.”

“Our names aren’t even spelled the same (he’s Kaufman with one N). It’s insane!” he added.

In response to a question about the nature of the messages, Kaufmann said: “They started out pro-Duterte, but lately I’m getting some anti-Duterte commenters from the Philippines who are apologizing for the others and calling many of them bots.”

The author’s original post already received over 9,000 – mostly “laugh” – reactions, with over a thousand shares and comments.

Many of the recent comments came from Filipinos who were apologetic about the mistake.– Bella Cariaso, Gilbert Bayoran