Edited livestream sparks ICC dispute

The contending legal camps and the judges themselves argued over several issues in the recent confirmation of charges hearing on the crimes against humanity case of former President Rodrigo Duterte.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) Pre-Trial Chamber I judges pushed back against the complaints of defense counsel Nicholas Kaufman over redactions of his statements, saying the defense had access to all the publicly redacted material.

At one point, portions of the ICC’s public livestream were cut after Kaufman referenced details that could identify protected witnesses and victims, triggering the dispute.

Presiding Judge Iulia Motoc reminded Kaufman that the chamber had already ruled on the redactions and dismissed the defense’s objections.

“I should say that the equality of arms is ensured because the defense has access to the redacted information. It just is not available to the public,” Motoc said during the hearing.

Equality of arms is a fundamental principle in legal proceedings that requires each party in a dispute to be given a reasonable and fair opportunity to present its case, without being placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to the opposing side. It is rooted in the broader right to a fair trial.

Motoc cautioned the defense to respect prior chamber rulings, including an earlier determination that Duterte is fit to undergo pre-trial proceedings.

“As you have clarified, this issue was already addressed by the chamber and the defense must not make submissions on that point now because it is not appropriate. The decision is already available in the public domain,” she said.

Not for ‘show’

After the proceedings concluded on 27 February, Kaufman noted that the outcome now rested entirely with the judges.

“The judges will take their decision based on the evidence,” Kaufman told reporters. “The evidence has been presented by the prosecution and challenged by us, the defense, and we trust the judges to make the right decision.”

He pushed back against suggestions that the high-profile proceedings were theatrical.

“This is not a show,” he said, emphasizing that the process was grounded on legal standards and evidentiary review.

The judges of Pre-Trial Chamber I are expected to issue their ruling within 60 days.

Under ICC rules, the chamber may decline to confirm the charges — without prejudice to the prosecution presenting new evidence later — adjourn the hearing to request additional evidence or amended charges, or confirm the charges and commit the case to trial, after which the court’s Presidency will constitute a Trial Chamber to handle the next phase of the proceedings.

Asked why the defense did not renew its request for Duterte’s interim release, Kaufman said an appeal on the first detention review is pending before a higher chamber.