Highlights: Day 4 of Duterte’s pre-trial

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – Does the prosecution have enough to move Rodrigo Duterte, former Philippine strongman, to a trial at the International Criminal Court (ICC)?

The prosecution gives a very confident “yes.”

“For whoever was in the courtroom, I think that there is no doubt we have put really a strong case, and I am pretty confident that in the two months to come, the judges will vindicate us by committing this case to trial,” Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang told Rappler in a one-on-one interview right after the conclusion of the hearings on Friday, February 27.

Duterte’s lead defense counsel, Nicholas Kaufman, said everything the prosecution presented had been “hearsay.” Kaufman’s presentation on Day 3 was acknowledged even by victims’ lawyers for “finally being legal,” however, in his closing statement, the British-Israeli lawyer made an emotional appeal that prosecution lawyers wanted to strike off the record.

Kauman talked of his latest conversation with the detained Duterte and how the former president supposedly said, “I’ve never murdered anyone.” Duterte had mentioned times before of instances he had killed, telling reporters in 2016, for example, that he had personally shot three men while mayor of Davao City.

“Mr. Kaufman, Nick, I have done my duty, and I have left my legacy. Go to court and do your job, but I can no longer help you. I no longer remember much at all,” Duterte supposedly told his lawyer.

The prosecution’s trial lawyer, Julian Nicholls, quickly requested to strike that part off the court’s records, saying Kaufman cannot testify on behalf of Duterte.

“[Duterte] could have come here and talked about whatever he wanted to, but he chose not to,” said Nicholls.

Here are the highlights of the fourth and final day of Duterte’s pre-trial proceedings.

Hearsay?

In his closing statements, Kaufman highlighted that, of the 49 incidents in the prosecution’s charges, only in two incidents had there been a witness to infer Duterte’s direct involvement.

One is Incident 1 of the charges, involving three killings by the Davao Death Squad. The prosecution has an insider witness “who heard Mr. Duterte on the phone, who heard that the order came from ‘Superman,’ his client’s codename and nickname,” trial lawyer Julian Nicholls told the court.

The name of this witness is still a secret.

Kaufman said, citing records, that the witness wasn’t actually the person on the other end of that supposed phone call. It was another person, a third party. When the witness asked who was on the other side of the call, the third party said it was ‘Superman’ (or Duterte).

“So, I repeat my submission with even more emphasis: pure, unadulterated, and undiluted hearsay,” said Kaufman.

There’s another prosecution witness, this time involving the killing of former Albuera City, Leyte mayor Rolando Espinosa while he was detained. He was killed in November 2016 by police officers enforcing a search warrant on his detention cell to supposedly seize guns.

Kaufman revealed that the prosecution has a witness “who claimed to have heard but admitted not to have seen anything.” The name of the witness is still also a secret. However, a former prisoner has testified to the House of Representatives quad committee in 2025 that he heard Espinosa plead with the cops before he was killed. Another quad committee witness, a jail guard, said they were all made to “face the wall.”

“There is nothing in the prosecution’s evidence to contradict the alternative theory proposed for this incident, which is that there was a firefight between the victims and the officers in the police station Leyte Sub-Provincial Jail,” said Kaufman.

To that, Nicholls reiterated why they believed that “neutralize” in all of the Duterte-sanctioned circulars and memoranda meant to kill. Espinosa had been on Duterte’s list, which Kaufman said was not a kill list but a prioritization list on who to hunt to ensure public safety.

“These victims were noted neutralized on the list, not on the day they are arrested, not on the day they go to jail. They’re marked neutralized on the days they’re killed. So, they were neutralized at the time they were murdered, per Mr. Duterte’s government at that time,” said Nicholls.

Also on Rappler

• SPECIAL COVERAGE: Duterte’s pre-trial hearing at the ICC
• HIGHLIGHTS: Day 1 of Duterte pre-trial
• Highlights: Day 2 of Duterte’s pre-trial
• Highlights: Day 3 of Duterte’s pre-trial

Are there substantial grounds to believe?

How substantial is substantial to move this case to trial? In ICC case law, the prosecution “must offer concrete and tangible proof demonstrating a clear line of reasoning underpinning specific allegations.”

Kaufman said the prosecution’s evidence thus far has not met that standard.

“Layered hearsay, conjecture over reliance on accomplice evidence with offers of virtual immunity at the ICC, contradicting statements between participants in a crime, absolute lack of any linkage whatsoever to Mr. Rodrigo Duterte, and a total lack of support for an alleged crime both in the documentary and forensic record,” said Kaufman.

The prosecution said that at trial, they will show that Kaufman’s official government records are falsified, and that judges ought to hear witnesses cross-examined on their testimonies.

Nicholls chose to end his closing statement by once again playing a video of Duterte, his last public speech to migrant Filipinos in Hong Kong days before he was arrested and brought to The Hague.

In that speech, Duterte asks, “They say I did it?” and makes a throat-slashing gesture, suggesting a kill. The crowd laughed and cheered. “Assuming totoo, totoo talaga naririnig ninyo, bakit ko ginawa ‘yan? Para sa sarili ko? Para sa pamilya ko? Para sa inyo at ang inyong mga anak.”

(Assuming it’s true, and it’s really true what you heard, why did I do it? Is it for myself? Is it for my family? It’s for you and your children.)

The speech goes on to show Duterte making his final wish if he is ever jailed in the ICC: that is, when he comes home, a monument is erected for him, not holding a book like the national hero Jose Rizal, but holding a gun.

“He’s just taking credit for killing his own people,” said Nicholls.

“He must answer for the dead. The victims demand it. Justice demands it. And for purposes of confirmation, the evidence demands it. We have proven it to the level for this to be bound over for trial,” said Nicholls. – Rappler.com