Victims’ counsel to ICC: Dismiss Duterte’s bid to delay jurisdiction ruling

The Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) has urged the International Criminal Court (ICC) to reject the request of former President Rodrigo Duterte’s defense team to postpone a decision on its challenge to the Court’s jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed during his administration’s war on drugs.

In its “Public Redacted Version of the Victims’ Response to the ‘Defence Request to Postpone the Decision on the Challenge with respect to Jurisdiction’” dated July 24, 2025 signed by Paolina Massidda, principal counsel for the victims, the OPCV said the request “lacks any proper procedural foundation” and is contrary to victims’ interests.

“The Request should be dismissed,” Massidda wrote, arguing that the bid was “at best premature.”

Massidda said in the document that the defense arguments concern “a separate matter that has no bearing on the question of the Court’s jurisdiction” over the alleged crimes for which the Pre-Trial Chamber issued a warrant of arrest for Duterte in March.

According to the OPCV, the defense’s bid to delay the jurisdiction ruling is “speculative.” The Chamber, the document read, is “currently not seized of any concrete application” related to the matters raised by the defense, some of which remain redacted in the public version of the filing.

The OPCV also noted that victims have a statutory right to legal certainty and to participate in jurisdictional questions.

“Justice demands that such rulings are not subject to undue delay,” the document read. Curtailing these rights “on the basis of a mere possibility that the Defence may raise [REDACTED]” “would not only be unprecedented and legally unsound, but ultimately prejudicial to the victims exercising their statutory rights before this Court, setting a dangerous precedent in this regard.”

The victims’ counsel further argued that the jurisdictional challenge “has been fully briefed and is duly before the Chamber,” which is required under the Rome Statute to rule on it. 

“As previously underscored by the Defence, adjudicating the challenge at the earliest opportunity will further ‘prevent the unnecessary expenditure of resources incurred,’” the document read.

The OPCV’s response supports the Prosecution, which also opposed the Defence’s request on July 22 to delay the ruling.

The Principal Counsel seconds the Prosecution’s submission that “a prompt ruling on jurisdiction can only promote the efficiency and expeditiousness of the proceedings,” the OPCV filing read.

The filing added that “the only legally available remedy for the Defence would be to withdraw its Jurisdictional Challenge. The Defence has not done so.”

The OPCV, an office within the ICC, provides assistance to victims and external legal representatives before the court.

Duterte team to present info in September hearing

In another new document published by ICC Registry on the same day, Duterte’s lead counsel Nicholas Kaufman reiterated a “request to [a redacted issue] as a bar to the holding” of such a hearing.

Kaufman cited a previous submission dated July 17, in which he specified that the defense received information that was “much-awaited [redacted] by an unknown [redacted], selected by [redacted] and whose name and qualifications have not been disclosed to the Defence.”

In the latest document, Kaufman outlined their conduct of the upcoming confirmation hearing but reiterated that the defense “will not call witnesses” to testify at the hearing. 

“[T]his is a principled decision because credibility is given little weight at confirmation,” Kaufman argued.
“Furthermore, the Defence does not wish to give advance notice of the many potential Defence witnesses who would counter the evidence provided by the Prosecution’s discrete and carefully selected band of witnesses—to be counted on the fingers of one hand [REDACTED] who [REDACTED] directly incriminate Mr Duterte [REDACTED],” Kaufman added.

The new document also specified that Duterte’s defense team “will not supply written testimonial evidence at confirmation,” citing the same reason as the above, “thereby permitting the Prosecution to adapt its investigation accordingly, should charges be confirmed.” 

The defense also provided the following information on their conduct of the upcoming hearing:

• [REDACTED], there is no alibi to present to the Pre-Trial Chamber. There is, furthermore, no ground that will be raised for the exclusion of criminal responsibility pursuant to Article 31 of the Rome Statute.
• The Defence is conducting investigations [REDACTED], but these investigations need not hold up the hearing on the confirmation of charges.
• The Defence will present documentary evidence at the confirmation hearing
• The Defence has no books, documents, photographs, or other tangible objects that the Prosecution is entitled to inspect pursuant to Rule 78 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

Duterte’s lawyers previously asked the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I for an “urgent” status conference to “facilitate the procedure” for the litigation of their requests, including about the September confirmation hearing. The Chamber has yet to release a decision on this.

Last week, the tribunal granted in a majority decision a separate defense request to suspend the decision on the former president’s bid for interim release until his lawyers collate all the needed information. — BM, GMA Integrated News