FORMER President Rodrigo Duterte
Former President Rodrigo Duterte’s lawyers have challenged the use of two prosecution witnesses’ recorded statements at his International Criminal Court (ICC) trial, citing inconsistencies and unverified allegations concerning police killings and payments.
In a 12-page filing made public Monday, 26 October, the defense urged Trial Chamber III to reject prosecutors’ bid to admit the testimonies of witnesses P-1393 and P-1416 without cross-examination, arguing that their accounts directly implicate Duterte in disputed drug war killings.
“Procedural efficiency must not come at the expense of his fundamental right to defend himself effectively,” the defense said.
Lead defense counsel Peter Haynes KC argued that the witnesses should face questioning because their statements concern allegations central to the crimes against humanity case.
According to the filing, P-1393 alleged that Duterte paid police officers to carry out killings and that officers operated under killing quotas. The witness also cited alleged payments from funeral parlors for bodies delivered.
But the defense questioned the account's reliability, saying P-1393 did not personally witness the killing he described and relied largely on information from unidentified third parties.
“These allegations, read in their entirety, go beyond evidence of the police’s pattern of conduct: they directly implicate Mr Duterte in the alleged killings and in the supposed system underpinning them,” the defense argued.
Duterte's lawyers also cited alleged contradictions, omissions and indications of bias in P-1393's statements, insisting that cross-examination was necessary to establish the sources of his information.
The defense separately challenged P-1416's testimony concerning deaths linked to an incident underlying Count 3 of the charges.
P-1416 reportedly described seeing bodies and bullet wounds and attributed the killings to police officers allegedly motivated by financial gain.
The defense argued that the account failed to establish whether the alleged payments came from Duterte or whether the officers acted independently.
It also cited discrepancies between P-1416's statement and other prosecution evidence, arguing that the witness possessed information that could not be independently corroborated by others.
Prosecutors sought to admit the statements under Rule 68(2)(b), which allows previously recorded testimony to be introduced without witnesses appearing in court, subject to legal safeguards.
While acknowledging the need to expedite proceedings because of Duterte's age and frailty, his lawyers maintained that admitting the disputed statements without cross-examination would compromise his right to a fair trial.
The ICC has yet to rule on the defense's objections.
Stay informed
Get Daily Tribune in your inbox
Breaking news, opinion, and business coverage for readers in the Philippines and abroad.
Or open the newsletter page. Prefer chat? Join the Viber community.