International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutors vehemently opposed a move by former president Rodrigo Duterte’s camp for another review of his fitness to stand trial, asserting that it would only cause further delays in the proceedings, “which have already been postponed by five months.”

Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang argued that the four grounds raised by Duterte’s lawyer, Nicholas Kaufman, in challenging the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I’s decision—which declared Duterte fit to stand trial—are “not appealable” under the court’s rules.

Recall that last week, Kaufman petitioned the Appeals Chamber to reverse the PTC-I’s 26 January ruling and ordered Duterte’s immediate release from ICC custody. 

He accused the chamber of committing a legal and factual error by disregarding the medical report prepared by the neurologist and neuropsychologist commissioned by the defense. 

Kaufman argued that the findings could have provided evidence for their claims that the 80-year-old Duterte is already suffering from alleged cognitive impairment, making him unlikely to be a flight risk, reoffend on the crimes, and obstruct the ongoing investigation into his bloody drug war.

The hearing for the confirmation of charges against Duterte was initially scheduled for 23 September last year, but was deferred in favor of the defense’s petition for an indefinite postponement of the proceedings, citing the need to assess Duterte’s alleged debilitating cognitive impairment that could jeopardize their legal strategy.

The PTC-I, as a result, commissioned a panel of medical experts to examine Duterte’s health. The December findings, however, revealed that the ex-leader remains capable of participating in the pre-trial proceedings, a finding subsequently affirmed by the PTC-I. 

Still, the defense was not convinced and sought the intervention of the Appeals Chamber, or the final arbiter.

In disputing Kaufman’s claims, Niang argued that the PTC-I did not ignore the medical report provided by the defense, but rather served “as the very basis for the chamber’s decision to request further medical examination” by the court-appointed panel of experts.

On the contrary, the prosecutor said an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber would also not materially advance the proceedings because the conclusions regarding Duterte’s fitness are limited to the pre-trial stage.

“In fact, the Defence already notes the potential of Mr. Duterte’s fitness to stand trial being revisited again at trial,” Niang said in a nine-page submission dated 12 February. 

“In any event, even if the Appeals Chamber were to find that the chamber committed an error in rejecting the defence report, it would not have materially impacted the outcome of the decision. The appeal should therefore be dismissed,” the prosecution said in a separate 13-page filing.

Ultimately, the prosecution contended that an appellate intervention at this early stage would only prolong the already delayed proceedings caused by the defense’s plea for a review of Duterte’s fitness to stand trial.