THE protection and prosecution panels offered their closing arguments through the listening to of the Worldwide Prison Courtroom (ICC) to verify fees in opposition to former president Rodrigo Duterte that he ordered the killings of hundreds of civilians in finishing up his battle on medicine.
Nicholas Kaufman, the lead lawyer for Duterte, made the presentation for the protection, whereas senior trial lawyer Julian Nicholls argued the case for the prosecution.
Kaufman instantly challenged the prosecution’s allegations that Duterte deliberate extrajudicial killings (EJKs) throughout his time period, saying the proof was inconsistent, unsubstantiated and did not immediately hyperlink Duterte to the EJKs.
He additionally rejected the assertion that the time period “high-value goal” or HVT constituted proof of a plan to kill, saying it was merely an operational classification utilized in lawful anti-drug campaigns, just like prioritization frameworks in different jurisdictions.
An HVT classification, Kaufman stated, didn’t indicate illegal intent, and plenty of such operations ended with arrests or surrenders quite than fatalities.
He stated the operations have been carried out inside legislation enforcement frameworks, together with police circulars, buy-bust operations and coordinated arrests.
Accessible information, reminiscent of arrest warrants, operational experiences, firearms restoration documentation, and judicial search warrants, indicated official police exercise, he stated.
Kaufman stated that in a number of incidents, contemporaneous experiences documented the restoration of firearms on the scene, supporting claims that gunfire was exchanged.
In Incidents 12, 13 and 14, operations have been performed beneath judicially issued search warrants, he stated.
In Incidents 10, 13 and 14, gunpowder residue was discovered on victims’ palms, in line with shootouts quite than executions. Incident 14, involving a police raid in Ozamiz Metropolis, demonstrated selective use of power, as 4 people have been arrested alive and one was later sentenced by home courts that rejected claims of planted proof.
The protection stated the prosecution relied closely on testimony from people with alleged motives to keep away from prosecution, whereas disregarding forensic and documentary proof.
In Incident 10, a witness admitted he didn’t really see weapons being planted however solely assumed it had occurred. In Incident 11, the prosecution’s alleged direct hyperlink to Duterte rested solely on a witness claiming to acknowledge his voice in an overheard telephone name, whereas the alleged recipient was by no means interviewed, and no forensic or documentary proof corroborated the account.
Kaufman stated voice recognition beneath uncontrolled circumstances with out corroboration was inadequate to ascertain substantial grounds for affirmation.
Incidents 12 via 14 additional illustrated the protection’s place. In Incident 12, the important thing witness was described as having private resentment towards Duterte, whereas contemporaneous information confirmed that the operation adopted a judicial search warrant and documented firearms restoration, with no proof of fabrication.
In Incident 13, involving the killings of Leyte mayor Rolando Espinosa and Raul Yap, the prosecution relied on a witness who admitted listening to however not seeing the occasions in query. Kaufman stated the prosecution’s personal proof confirmed that Duterte had ordered Espinosa to give up and later counseled him.
In Incident 14, involving the killing of Ozamiz Metropolis mayor Reynaldo Parojinog, police experiences indicated that six search warrants had been issued and officers have been met with gunfire, injuring one among them and prompting return hearth. Gunpowder residue was discovered on seven people, together with the mayor, and a paraffin check on one sufferer contradicted claims that firearms have been planted.
Kaufman emphasised that operational discretion rested with native staff leaders, and that deliberate killings have been uncommon and regionally motivated. The time period “neutralize,” he stated, referred to lawful enforcement and never an execution.
In Depend Three, which addresses barangay clearance operations, the protection argued that routine buy-bust actions have been authorized enforcement operations that generally concerned spontaneous exchanges of fireplace. Contemporaneous information confirmed operational experiences, ballistics testing, gunshot residue findings, instant hospital transport, inner investigations, and, in some circumstances, prosecution and conviction of officers.
Kaufman additional argued that many incidents concerned unidentified or improperly recognized victims, together with these described as minors.
Other than the broadly reported killing of 17-year-old Kian de Los Santos, no proof, reminiscent of delivery certificates or corroborating documentation, was offered to ascertain the age of different alleged youngster victims, he stated.
Nicholls argued that regardless of protection makes an attempt to painting the operations as lawful or remoted, Duterte’s phrases, actions and the testimony of witnesses demonstrated a scientific marketing campaign of violence, warranting a trial.
He rejected the protection’s declare that the time period “neutralize” was a impartial operational time period, citing a number of witnesses who confirmed that, within the context of Duterte’s orders, “neutralize” meant to kill.
He highlighted paperwork and witness statements displaying that victims have been marked as “neutralized” on official lists on the time of their deaths.
“The details can’t be denied,” Nicholls stated, emphasizing Duterte’s long-standing management of dying squads in Davao Metropolis and his public statements promising to kill hundreds of alleged criminals.
He famous that in crimes in opposition to humanity circumstances, senior leaders hardly ever depart written orders, and that this apply is widespread in worldwide trials.
Nicholls stated the killings of Espinosa and Parojinog, the place witnesses and information demonstrated that these victims have been designated for “neutralization,” undermined protection claims of lawful self-defense.
Underneath Article 7 of the Rome Statute, the time period “civilian inhabitants” applies to the victims focused in Duterte’s anti-drug operations, together with alleged drug sellers, pushers, customers and criminals, he stated.
Nicholls stated Duterte obstructed accountability by withdrawing the Philippines from the Rome Statute, limiting the ICC’s jurisdiction.
He parried protection arguments about witnesses offering exculpatory statements, noting that these have been disclosed and will nonetheless be known as at trial.
Nicholls emphasised Duterte’s personal speeches and admissions, together with a March 9 farewell deal with through which he alluded to orchestrating deaths for the “better good” and expressed a want to be commemorated with a monument holding a gun quite than a guide, demonstrating his glorification of violence.
He concluded by referencing a 2017 speech through which Duterte acknowledged he would ultimately be held accountable for the lifeless.
“He should reply for the lifeless. The victims demand it. Justice calls for it. And for functions of affirmation, the proof calls for it. We’ve confirmed it to the extent for this to be certain over for trial,” he stated, urging the court docket to permit the case to proceed.
In their very own closing arguments, the widespread authorized representatives of the EJK victims appealed to the pre-trial chamber to verify the fees in opposition to them.
The arguments, delivered by lawyer Gilbert Andres, sought to rebut protection submissions and stress the human influence on victims and their communities.
Andres described the protection’s arguments as an try to focus solely on remoted components of the case whereas ignoring the broader context, likening it to seeing solely components of an elephant with out understanding the entire animal.
He stated the phrases and public speeches of Duterte, as head of state, carried the power of coverage beneath Philippine legislation and tradition, and inspired the killings that have been carried out throughout the nation.
Victims, Andres stated, proceed to really feel the consequences of those actions as their family members are “murdered once more” by makes an attempt to attenuate the systematicity of the assaults.
He famous that the anti-drug marketing campaign disproportionately affected poor and marginalized communities.
Questioning the protection’s references to Supreme Courtroom rulings, Andres highlighted that whereas official experiences documented practically 4,000 deaths in anti-drug operations and over 16,000 murder circumstances beneath investigation from 2016 to 2017, the courts discovered no proof substantiating claims that these have been official police operations.
Andres countered claims that the Duterte administration held cops accountable, saying that solely a small fraction of circumstances have been investigated and that almost all of killings went unprosecuted.
