Defense seeks live testimony and cross-examination of two witnesses whose accounts the prosecution links to alleged drug war killings and a policy to “neutralize” suspected criminals
MANILA (October 30) — Former president Rodrigo Duterte’s defense team is challenging the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecution’s bid to use previously recorded testimony from two witnesses in his crimes against humanity case, arguing that their accounts concern disputed issues that require in-person testimony and cross-examination.
In a 12-page filing dated Oct. 26, defense lawyer Peter Haynes asked the court to require witnesses identified as P-1416 and P-1393 to testify in person rather than admit their prior recorded testimony under Rule 68(2)(b) of the ICC’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
The rule allows the court, under specified conditions, to admit previously recorded testimony without requiring the witness to appear again during trial.
The defense argued that cross-examination is necessary because the witnesses’ accounts concern Duterte’s alleged acts and conduct in connection with the crimes charged against him.
The dispute highlights a key issue in the upcoming trial: how the court will weigh previously recorded accounts against the defense’s right to challenge evidence presented by the prosecution.
Witness accounts linked to alleged drug war killings
According to the prosecution’s earlier filing, witness P-1416’s recorded testimony covers specific incidents involving alleged killings during Duterte’s anti-drug campaign.
The prosecution considers the testimony relevant to what it describes as a policy to “neutralize” suspected criminals through violent crimes, including murder, in the Philippines.
Witness P-1393, meanwhile, was present during a police operation in San Jose del Monte, Bulacan, where an alleged drug user was killed.
The prosecution filing said P-1393 did not witness the killing but heard gunshots and was later told by neighbors that police officers involved had first spoken to the victim and brought the matter to the barangay. The neighbors were reportedly afraid to testify about what they had seen.
The account therefore includes information attributed to other people rather than a direct observation of the killing itself.
The distinction matters because the court must assess the nature and reliability of each witness’s knowledge, alongside other evidence presented in the proceedings.
Prosecution says testimony is corroborative
The prosecution argued that the recorded accounts could be admitted because they are “cumulative to, and corroborative of, evidence to be provided” by other witnesses who are expected to testify in person.
The defense disagreed, maintaining that the testimony concerns matters that are “materially in dispute” and that the witnesses should appear so it can question them directly.
The ICC must resolve the dispute under its procedural rules, weighing the conditions for admitting prior recorded testimony against the defense’s opportunity to challenge the evidence.
The prosecution’s allegations and the defense’s objections remain distinct from a judicial finding of guilt.
Duterte faces charges of crimes against humanity linked to killings during his anti-drug campaign. He is presumed innocent unless and until his guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt under the applicable law.
His trial is scheduled to begin on Nov. 30.
