As victims await specific instructions to participate in Duterte case – Issue of jurisdiction should not delay proceedings on the merits
Initial victims’ applications, and consequently the appointment of common legal representative/s, are expected to occur within one to two months before the target of August 3, 2025. In the meantime, victims’ views and concerns will be carried by the Office of the Public Counsel for Victims.
May 16, 2025
NUPL
The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers is a nationwide voluntary association of human rights lawyers in the Philippines, committed to the defense, protection, and promotion of human rights, especially of the poor and the oppressed.

Any delay in the proceedings against Rodrigo Duterte in the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity adds to the anguish and anxiety of victims of his “war on drugs”. Duterte’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the court is well within his rights, but is an urgent one and must be decided before the scheduled confirmation of charges hearing on September 23, 2025.

The Defence call to excuse or disqualify judges from deciding on the challenge, however, poses potential interruption to the proceedings. On May 1, 2025, they “invited” two of the three judges of Pre-Trial Chamber I, Judges María del Socorro Flores Liera and Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou, to excuse themselves from adjudicating on the challenge. The Pre-Trial Chamber I declined the invitation to excuse the judges, who had been originally assigned to the case since 2021, for lack of basis.

Aggrieved, the Defence on May 12, 2025 requested the Presidency to disqualify the same two judges. The Presidency, which deals with the proper administration of the court, is composed of a president and two vice-presidents. One of the judges sought to be disqualified in the Duterte case, Judge Alapini-Gansou, is also part of the Presidency as Second Vice-President and is also being sought to be disqualified from deciding on her disqualification.

Amidst the convolution of issues, victims urge the public to remember the core of this case: whether or not Duterte is liable for crimes against humanity, in the acts of murder, rape, torture, imprisonment, and other inhumane acts. We are confident that the preliminary issues will be considered with appropriate time, thought, and caution, in time for the September 2025 confirmation hearing. As regards the disqualification, the Presidency has ordered its members and the prosecutor to comment within a week, by May 22, 2025, and will convene a plenary session on the matter soon. As regards the challenge to jurisdiction, the Pre-Trial Chamber I will receive written observation until June 9, 2025.

Thankfully, other things are still on track. The Office of the Prosecutor is set to complete its submission for exchange of evidence by July 1, 2025. The document containing the charges (or the prosecution’s draft of the Information, as we refer to it in Philippine law) is due to be released by July 4, 2025.

Initial victims’ applications, and consequently the appointment of common legal representative/s, are expected to occur within one to two months before the target of August 3, 2025. In the meantime, victims’ views and concerns will be carried by the Office of the Public Counsel for Victims.

The ICC case is just but one flank in the struggle for justice for all victims. It is sorely limited because the temporal scope does not cover the first two decades of the Davao Death Squad operations and the second three years of Duterte’s term as president. It is incomplete at present because other co-perpetrators have not been indicted. Despite the insensitivity and the ignorance of some rabid cliques, we will continue to look into avenues of redress for victims of human rights violations wherever they may open and however long they may take.

References:
Atty. Neri Javier Colmenares
Counsel for victims with Rise Up for Life and for Rights; National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers
+639178350459

Atty. Maria Kristina Conti
Assisting counsel from NUPL for Rise Up
Registered as assistant to counsel at the ICC
+639298207000 | nupl2007@gmail.com

Read more

On the criminal charges of grave threat against VP Sara Duterte

On the criminal charges of grave threat against VP Sara Duterte

The validity of Sara Duterte’s indictment for grave threat is being questioned in light of the Supreme Court ruling in Ombudsman v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 146486, March 4, 2005). According to the ruling, an “impeachable officer cannot be criminally prosecuted for the same offenses which constitute grounds for impeachment”. In applying such ruling in relation to the indictment of Sara Duterte, the following points should be considered:

TO ALL THOSE TAKING THE BAR EXAMINATIONS BEGINNING TODAY, we honor the long and difficult work that has brought you to this moment.

TO ALL THOSE TAKING THE BAR EXAMINATIONS BEGINNING TODAY, we honor the long and difficult work that has brought you to this moment.

Behind every examinee are years of study, sacrifice, doubt, discipline, and persistence. As you enter the examination rooms, we wish you the best of health, soundness of mind, steadiness under pressure, and resilience for the days ahead. May you find the clarity to draw upon what you have learned, the composure to meet each question as it comes, and the resolve to keep going through fatigue and uncertainty.

LUDICROUS!!!

LUDICROUS!!!

Using the perjured statements of military assets, the government alleged that the Cagayan Valley activists supplied rice to NPA rebels by burying the rice in the hinterlands of Cagayan. The military assets allegedly provided the information to locate the place where the rice were buried. These were excavated, and the rotten rice is being used as a basis to file the case for terrorist financing.

Share This