Former President Rodrigo Duterte’s legal counsel, Nicholas Kaufman, opened his defense of his client at the pre-trial confirmation hearing at the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Monday by challenging both the credibility of the prosecution and the sufficiency of the evidence against Duterte.

Kaufman began by highlighting Duterte’s current medical condition, emphasizing that he “stands behind his legacy resolutely and maintains his innocence absolutely.” He framed his argument around the fairness and objectivity of the investigation, calling into question the ICC prosecution’s methods.

“As an ex-prosecutor myself, I am used to investigations pursuing all reasonable lines of inquiry, assimilating all testimonies, digesting documentation and forensic evidence, and recommending targets for prosecution,” Kaufman said.

“But not so with this prosecution. chief prosecutor Karim Khan failed to examine exonerating circumstances, and we allege he contaminated the investigation by pursuing a one-track crusade with a predetermined objective,” he said.

Kaufman traced the investigation back to 2018, when a key witness, referred to as P1, was allegedly handed to the prosecution “on a silver platter.” He said Khan had previously interviewed P1 in his capacity as a private lawyer, a fact that was concealed from the ICC up to the issuance of Duterte’s arrest warrant.

Although the ICC officially authorized an investigation in late 2021, the core investigation into the so-called Davao Death Squad began years earlier, with the aim of targeting Duterte.

“The Appeals Chamber has now disqualified chief prosecutor Karim Khan, a welcome development, but too late to salvage the integrity of the investigation,” Kaufman said.

The defense also challenged the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence, noting that the case relied on 20 speeches allegedly showing an incitement to kill.

Kaufman said that after reviewing other speeches, the defense identified 35 additional speeches that contradicted the prosecution’s narrative, in which Duterte emphasized lawful self-defense and restraint.

When combined with 10 of the original 20 speeches that also contained exonerating content, the defense cited 45 speeches versus 10 relied on by the prosecution — a 350-percent increase in exonerating evidence.

Kaufman provided examples, including the infamous “Pietà” speech, where the prosecution cited Duterte as inciting violence.

He quotes an excerpt from the prosecution: “Those of you who are still sober, those who haven’t tried illegal drugs, if you don’t want to die or get hurt, don’t rely on the priest, including human rights advocates, they won’t be able to prevent deaths.”

He gave the defense context later in the same speech: “Do your job and you will have the unwavering support of the Office of the President. Abuse your authority and there will be hell to pay, for you will have become worse than criminality itself.”

“This is exonerating evidence within the prosecution’s own material,” Kaufman said.

Kaufman argued that Duterte’s rhetoric targeted those poisoning society with illegal drugs, not innocent civilians and that any deaths were not a result of criminal intent but the lawful enforcement of self-defense and public order.

He stressed that “the burden of proof is on the prosecution” to show Duterte desired or foresaw killings resulting from his statements, and that no evidence of such intent exists.

The defense also addressed political interference, alleging documents showed covert coordination by parties linked to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to “neutralize” Duterte and his legacy while maintaining Marcos’ plausible deniability.

Kaufman also criticized the media coverage, NGOs and academics abroad for amplifying Duterte’s rhetoric while ignoring its context, turning selected speeches into “fertile fodder” for claims of crimes against humanity.

Kaufman further defended Duterte’s public service record, highlighting his 20-year tenure as mayor of Davao City, during which he and his family transformed a city plagued by communist insurgency and criminal violence into one of the safest cities in the world, the so-called Davao model.

He said Duterte’s election to the presidency in 2016 reflected the Filipino people’s desire for a firm, uncompromising law and order leader.

Kaufman concluded by urging the ICC judges to critically examine the evidence.

“We hope that when you conclude your deliberations, Your Honors, you will dismiss these grievously misplaced and politically motivated charges. We will ask you to send Rodrigo Duterte back to his family, and to give back to the Filipino people their Tatay Digong.”