The International Criminal Court Trial Chamber III on Wednesday set 30 November as the start of the trial proper of former president Rodrigo Duterte on his crimes against humanity case. 

Initially, Presiding Judge Joanna Korner expressed a desire to postpone the scheduling of the trial date pending a fresh set of medical findings on his fitness to stand trial. However, the chamber later concurred with the parties to open the trial phase on 30 November.

The legal counsel of drug war victims staunchly opposed starting the trial of Duterte’s crimes against humanity case in January next year, arguing that the procedural window is “too long” and that the proceedings should its kickoff no later than November. 

The victims’ camp initially proposed setting the actual trial as early as September, but ICC prosecutors suggested holding it two months later, in November. At the first status conference on Wednesday, Principal Counsel Paolina Massidda of the Office of Public Counsel for Victims told the chamber that they are willing to compromise with the condition that it would not extend beyond November.

“After the submission of the parties, we had further consultation with our clients. They are amenable to start this trial [on] the 30th of November, [which] seems to them at the moment still a reasonable period of time. January 2027? No. For them, it's too long…We can start the trial already in November,” Massida asserted. 

Duterte was not present in the courtroom after waiving his attendance, leaving the procedural hearing entirely with his two new lawyers—Peter Haynes and Kate Gibson. 

The defense initially opposed setting a trial date pending unresolved questions regarding Duterte’s health and fitness to stand trial. However, during the conference, Haynes said they are amenable to starting the trial three months after the prosecution ends the disclosure of evidence, or likely in late December.

“So that would all tend to suggest that the start of the trial could not be this year. We will be ready whenever you want it to start. But our anxiety is that there should not be a date [that] leaves us with perhaps one or two months after the end of prosecution disclosure,” Haynes told the chamber. 

The court’s Registry also suggested that the trial commence at a later date in January, citing challenges in obtaining trained interpreters for the proceedings.

The prosecution team sought that the trial be broadcast in Tagalog so that it would be more “accessible” to Filipinos.

Prior to the decision, Korner expressed reluctance to set a schedule for trial “without further reports and without an assessment made by experts,” citing Duterte’s advanced age and alleged debilitating health as the reason for the proposed delay.

“At the moment, it’s a bit difficult to set a schedule for [the] trial until we’ve had an up-to-date report. But it seems to be that because of his age and potentially, medical problems, there will be a day off,” Korner stressed.

Haynes, who just assumed the post of chief counsel for Duterte earlier this month, petitioned the court on 25 May to assess his client’s condition anew to ensure that he is mentally and physically sound to participate in the trial. 

While Duterte had been allowed to skip relevant ICC proceedings in the past, including the status conference, he is mandated to be present during the actual trial under the court rules. 

In the filing, Haynes said they are willing to suggest a list of ICC-recognized doctors in case of “practical impediment” to the reappointment of the previous panel of experts who examined and found Duterte fit to stand trial earlier this year.

The rules of the court mandate a trial chamber to assess the health condition of an accused, either independently or at the request of a party. 

Meanwhile, ICC prosecutors may present up to 70 individuals to stand witness against Duterte during the trial, according to senior trial lawyer Julian Nicholls. 

Previously, the prosecution team disclosed in a filing that they intend to rely on the evidence of around 60 to 70 witnesses during the trial, subject to further probe and possible inclusion of additional witnesses.

These include 31 insider witnesses, 17 crime-base witnesses, and 12 witnesses “who are relevant to explain the background and the contextual elements of the crimes charged.”