ICC prosecutor told: Disclose evidence by July 1

MANILA, Philippines, April 22 ------ The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been given until July 1 to complete the disclosure of evidence that would be used during the hearing in September on confirmation of charges of crimes against humanity against former president Rodrigo Duterte. 

In a 20-page order dated April 17, the ICC Pre-Trial I stressed the need for the prosecution to “expeditiously discharge its disclosure obligations as soon as practicable” to allow the defense to prepare for the confirmation hearing. Disclosure of evidence is required by the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC. “It is part of the defendant’s right to be provided with the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely during the confirmation of charges hearing,” ICC spokesman Fadi El Abdallah said in an earlier message to The STAR. “Upholding the defense’s rights is key to ensure the fairness of the proceedings,” he added. 

In an earlier filing, ICC prosecutor Karim Khan said they intended to “complete the review and disclosure of evidence currently in its possession” no later than 30 days before the confirmation hearing on Sept. 23. But the judges ruled that disclosure of evidence, at least for the purposes of the confirmation of charges, should be completed much earlier. “Any items of evidence submitted after that date will not be taken into account for the purposes of the confirmation of charges hearing,” read the ruling. 

In the same ruling, the pre-trial chamber judges also reminded parties that “the confirmation of charges procedure is of a limited scope and should not devolve into a mini-trial.” “The Chamber also reiterates that, as established in numerous decisions issued in other cases, the Prosecution should only disclose evidence that is of true relevance to the case and capable of supporting a particular factual allegation underlying the requisite legal elements,” it said. “The disclosure of a considerable volume of evidence for which it is difficult or impossible to comprehend the usefulness and relevance for the case merely puts the Defense in a position where it cannot genuinely exercise its rights,” it added. 

Source: philstar.com