The counsel said that because of the serious charges that Duterte is facing, there is a strong reason to believe that he will try to escape justice. They expressed their strong opposition to the proposals set in Duterte’s request for interim release.
Massed cited that Duterte has already access to a large amount of evidence, including the identities of some of the prosecution’s witnesses. They said this poses a risk for the security and well-being of the said individuals.
“The process of disclosure has reached an advanced stage, or is about to reach such a stage. This is a relevant factor in weighing the likelihood of the personal appearance or of the risk of flight, ‘due to its resulting in enhancing the degree of knowledge of the Prosecutor’s case,’” the victim’s opposition added.
Massed agreed that Duterte still holds power citing his recent win as mayor of Davao City and her daughter, Sara, being the vice president of the Philippines.
Read: Families of ‘drug war’ victims denounce Duterte’s bid for temporary release
She asserted that the continued detention of Duterte is necessary to prevent the commission of crimes.
In their opposition to Duterte’s bid, they cited that the ICC’s appeals chamber has held that “[t]he reason for detention…is the risk that further crimes may be committed – therefore the issue is future crimes, which by their nature cannot be specified in detail”.
The counsel said she believes there are still risks for Duterte to commit future crimes.
She pointed out that if Duterte’s interim release is granted, it “will not only be a great destabilizing factor to the volatile security situation in the country as a whole, but will pose a direct and significant danger to the victims who have demonstrated courage in applying to participate in the present proceedings in order to contribute to the search for the truth, despite risks of being threatened or otherwise stigmatized.”
She stated that under Article 68(1) of the Statute, the Court must “take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical and psychological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses”.
“Consequently, when ruling on the request, the chamber must strike a fair balance between different competing interests, with due regard to the safety and well-being of the victims and witnesses. Mr Duterte’s continued detention makes it possible to meet all of these requirements given in particular that, as demonstrated supra, all relevant criteria under articles 60(2) and 58(1) of the Statute continue to be met,” Massed said in their response.
It was June 12 when Duterte’s lawyer filed a petition for an interim request on humanitarian grounds. The prosecution has responded to the motion of Duterte’s petition also opposing his interim release.
Duterte will once again face the Court on Sept. 23 for confirmation of charges. (RBV)
