Former president Rodrigo Duterte has denied direct responsibility for killings linked to his controversial war on drugs, as his legal team defended him before the International Criminal Court this week.
During a confirmation of charges hearing, Duterte’s lawyer, Nicholas Kaufman, argued that prosecutors have failed to present concrete evidence proving the former leader directly ordered anyone to commit murder.
He told the court there is “no smoking gun” linking Duterte’s speeches or policies to the 49 specific killings cited in the case.
The defense maintained that: No witness has testified that Duterte personally ordered them to kill; Prosecutors relied heavily on selected public speeches rather than direct evidence; Several speeches not highlighted by prosecutors show Duterte instructing police to follow the law and use deadly force only in self-defense; The case is built largely on circumstantial evidence, media reports, and assumptions.
Kaufman also challenged claims that the killings were “widespread or systematic” — a key requirement for crimes against humanity. He argued that the number of incidents cited does not meet that threshold and questioned whether alleged drug offenders qualify as a clearly identifiable civilian population under international law.
The defense further disputed the interpretation of Command Circular 16, issued in 2016 by then-Philippine National Police chief Ronald Dela Rosa.
Prosecutors described the document as a blueprint for extrajudicial killings, but the defense said it explicitly required officers to follow legal procedures and respect human rights.
Prosecution: Duterte played a central role
Earlier in the hearing, prosecutors argued that Duterte played a “pivotal” role in a campaign of extrajudicial killings that allegedly led to thousands of deaths. They claimed he drew up death lists, incited violence, and later boasted publicly about the killings.
Video clips were presented showing Duterte threatening suspected drug users and making remarks about killing criminals.
Duterte, 80, did not attend the proceedings, with his lawyer saying he is not mentally fit to follow the hearing. After the weeklong confirmation process, a three-judge ICC panel has 60 days to decide whether there is enough evidence to proceed to a full trial.
If the judges find sufficient grounds, the case will move forward. If not, the charges could be dismissed at this stage.
For now, the court is weighing whether prosecutors have presented enough evidence to formally try the former president for crimes against humanity.
