The prosecution and defense in the International Criminal Court (ICC) case against former president Rodrigo Duterte have asked Trial Chamber III to revise its Directions on the Conduct of Proceedings, proposing new deadlines for witness-related applications and changes in the handling of evidence ahead of the scheduled trial on 30 November.
In a filing, Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang proposed that applications under Rule 68(2) of the ICC Rules of Procedure and Evidence, which cover prior recorded witness testimony, be submitted on a rolling basis until 30 September.
For Rule 68(3) applications involving other forms of witness testimony, the prosecution proposed a 30 October deadline for witnesses expected to testify in 2026 and the same final cut-off date for all remaining applications.
The prosecution said the staggered schedule would allow it to complete remaining pre-trial obligations, including evidence disclosure, submission of its trial brief, and final witness and exhibit lists, all due by 31 August.
It argued that filing witness applications closer to the start of trial would provide more current information on witness security conditions and proposed that applications for in-court protective measures also be filed by 30 October.
According to the prosecution, the defense did not agree to the proposed Rule 68 deadlines, while the legal representatives of victims supported the timetable.
Meanwhile, Duterte's defense team, led by counsel Peter Haynes, urged the chamber to adopt a procedural framework balancing the admission and submission of evidence instead of relying on a strictly submission-based regime.
The defense cited the ICC case of Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al-Rahman, arguing that such an approach would preserve the integrity of the record while ensuring the prosecution meets its burden of proof.
It also asked the chamber to require prosecutors to provide detailed breakdowns of witnesses relying on prior transcribed interviews, saying the information would help clarify anticipated testimony and identify disputed issues early.
The defense further argued that parties should not be required to confront witnesses on every disputed fact during testimony, warning that such a practice would be impractical and consume excessive hearing time in cases involving extensive prior recorded statements.
It also proposed clearer guidance on the introduction of lengthy documentary evidence, such as reports, videos, electronic messages and call data records, to avoid repeated litigation over evidentiary disputes.
In addition, the defense asked Trial Chamber III to direct the ICC Registry to provide monthly disclosure updates containing metadata packages for all evidence used in court to ensure consistency and improve tracking of the evidentiary record.
Trial Chamber III is expected to rule on the proposed amendments as it finalizes the procedural framework for one of the ICC's most closely watched cases involving a former head of state.