Legal team seeks inclusion of FPRRD’s evidence at ICC

THE defense team of former President Rodrigo R. Duterte has asked the International Criminal Court (ICC) Pre-Trial Chamber I for permission to include 78 additional items in its list of evidence ahead of the Confirmation of Charges hearing scheduled for February 23, 2026.

Led by lawyer Nicholas Kaufman, the defense said the request followed the Prosecution’s disclosure of 1,242 new materials after the hearing was postponed, documents the defense argues are critical to preparing its case and effectively challenging the charges.

In its filing, the defense stressed that the request was submitted on time, complied with ICC procedural rules, and would not prejudice any party. It also noted that the Prosecution has confirmed it does not oppose the inclusion of the additional evidence.

If approved, the defense said the materials would help ensure a fair and complete judicial assessment at the confirmation stage, where judges determine whether the case should proceed to trial.

Beyond the evidentiary request, Duterte’s legal team also raised broader concerns about due process in international criminal proceedings in a separate filing titled “Appeal Brief on the First Review of the Detention of Mr Rodrigo Roa Duterte.”

The defense argued that Duterte’s rights were already in question during surrender proceedings in the Philippines under Rule 59 of the Rome Statute, which governs the lawfulness and procedural soundness of a suspect’s transfer to the Court. 

Despite what it described as unresolved legal concerns, Duterte was placed on a plane and transferred to ICC custody. 

According to the filing, that moment should have prompted heightened judicial scrutiny. Instead, the defense claimed that procedural shortcuts continued even as the ICC exercised custodial authority while its jurisdiction remained under challenge before the Appeals Chamber.

As stated in the defense filing:

“Mr Duterte was surrendered to the custody of the International Criminal Court on 12 March 2025. Upon entering the Detention Centre, he was immediately admitted to the hospital. Prior to his initial appearance on 14 March 2025, Counsel had already informed the Pre-Trial Chamber that Mr Duterte’s fitness to stand trial would be at issue. The Chamber disregarded this expression of concern, instead commenting, without the benefit of any neurological or cognitive examination, that Mr Duterte was ‘fully mentally aware and fit.’”

The defense questioned whether such handling aligns with the standards expected of international justice, emphasizing that due process must be more than symbolic and must be clearly observed from the moment the Court asserts authority over an accused.

The defense emphasized that its position is not about personal loyalty to Duterte but about protecting the integrity of judicial procedures. Without due process, it argued, international justice loses its moral and legal authority.

In its request to expand the evidence list, the Duterte camp explained that the additional items were identified after reviewing the Prosecution’s disclosures, some of which were marked as potentially exculpatory or relevant to the preparation of the defense.

The defense said the request met all procedural requirements under Rule 121(6) of the ICC, having been filed 15 days before the confirmation hearing. It also described the number of additional items as modest and noted that the Prosecution, as the custodian of its own evidence, is presumed to understand the relevance of the materials.

The filing further pointed out that legal representatives for victims were only recently appointed, with their teams still being finalized and access to evidence yet to be fully facilitated.

Most importantly, the defense underscored that the Prosecution’s lack of opposition meant the inclusion of the additional items would cause no prejudice to the Prosecution, while their exclusion would significantly disadvantage Duterte.

The defense also disclosed that it has not yet completed its review of the Prosecution’s latest disclosure, made on the evening of February 5, 2026, which included 12 items marked as potentially exonerating or relevant to defense preparation. It said it reserves the right to seek further amendments to its evidence list once that review is completed. DEF