🇵🇭 ICC Status Conference: Philippines vs. Duterte

Ajouté : 2026-05-27

[00:01:21]Yes, good morning all.

[00:01:24]Can you call the case, please? Madam Registrar.

[00:01:29]Good morning, Madam President. Your Honors, situation in the Republic of the Philippines in the case of the prosecutor versus Rodrigo Roa Duterte.

[00:01:38]Case reference ICC-01/21-01/25.

[00:01:42]And for the record, we are in open session.

[00:01:47]Yes, could we have the appearances, please? Prosecution first.

[00:01:54]Good morning, Madam President. Good morning, Your Honors. Good morning to everybody in the room.

[00:01:58]Today we are Edward Jeremy, Robin Croft, Hannah Allen, Erasmus Lovell Jones, Emma Norton, our [clears throat] case manager James Merity, and Maria Berdennikova, and I'm Julian Knowles. Thank you.

[00:02:16]Thank you, Mr. Knowles. The defense, please.

[00:02:20]Good morning, your honor.

[00:02:22]Kate Gibson, my co-counsel, Alex De Silva D'Ave, legal assistant and assistant counsel Sandrine De Sena, and I'm Peter Haynes. It's a pleasure to be here.

[00:02:34]Mr. Haynes, would you sit down?

[00:02:36]Um, just so that the public understand, I think that Mr. asked to be excused from the hearing.

[00:02:45]>> Indeed, that's correct, your honor.

[00:02:47]Thank you.

[00:02:49]Yes, and finally sorry, not finally.

[00:02:51]Now, the the representatives of the victims, please.

[00:02:56]Good morning, Madam President, your honors.

[00:02:59]The common legal representative of victims' team is composed today of Mr. Joel Butuyan at my right. Behind us, Mr. Orcholona Ranseshe, and Miss Ludovica Vitruccio, legal officers. And on the other bench, Miss Angra Boschi, legal officer. And I am Paulina Masita.

[00:03:17]Thank you very much, Miss Masita.

[00:03:20]And the registry, please.

[00:03:23]Mr. Djiba Sou, thank you. Madam President, good morning, your honors.

[00:03:27]For the registry this morning, by my side, we have Fatou Baldeh Fall, who is the jurist from the VWS section. There is Nathalie Wagner, who is a coordinator within my office. There's Marie Lucas, who is a jurist for the detention. And also for my office, accompanied for more specific matters, if you seek to delve more deeply, there is Asma Yakoubi, who is the chief of the LSS. There's Fidelis Amba for the head of the VPRS. And there's also Rod Rastan, who is the head of judicial cooperation support section.

[00:04:04]I am, of course, Marc Dubuisson, director of the Division of Judicial Services, and I am representing here the registrar this morning. Thank you.

[00:04:13]Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Dubuisson.

[00:04:16]Um as everybody knows, this is the first status conference in this case. Um and the first proper hearing, I suppose you could say, of for the trial. And there are a few things I want to say before we move on to the agenda.

[00:04:36]As everybody knows, um the independent expert review, published in 2020, stated that one of the task of the experts who'd been appointed was, and I quote, "to enhance, by the making of recommendations, the performance, efficiency, and effectiveness of the court under Rome Statute as a whole."

[00:05:05]Since its publication, all organs of the court have put in place measures designed to achieve those obvious and laudable goals.

[00:05:18]In respect of trials, efficiency and effectiveness is dependent on actions taken by all parties to a trial.

[00:05:29]Uh the prosecution, the defense, the victims' representatives, the registry, and last but not least, of course, the judges.

[00:05:41]It depends on them, all of them, cooperating procedurally.

[00:05:48]Such cooperation does not in any way affect the fairness of a trial uh nor the onus on the prosecution to prove its case nor does it encroach on the rights of the accused.

[00:06:05]It is a truism but one which bears repetition to state that the overriding objectives of a criminal trial for judges in particular are first the acquittal of the innocent and the conviction of the guilty.

[00:06:23]Second, dealing with the prosecution and defense fairly.

[00:06:29]Third, recognizing the rights of the accused, particularly those under Article 67 and any other rights which are germane to a trial.

[00:06:41]Uh respecting the interests of witnesses uh and last but certainly not least, respecting the interests of victims.

[00:06:53]In order to achieve efficiency and expedition of a trial there must be uh amongst other matters, first an early identification of the real issues in the case and I emphasize that and will return to it later in this status conference.

[00:07:16]Proper use of agreed fact between parties.

[00:07:22]Presentation of evidence, whether disputed or not, must take place in the shortest and clearest way.

[00:07:31]That is particularly important in this trial.

[00:07:36]Avoidance of unnecessary and lengthy legal arguments. We encourage the participants to cooperate in these goals and generally between themselves.

[00:07:49]Uh to give but one example, any requests for disclosure uh should be discussed between the parties before rulings are sought from the judges.

[00:08:02]It is incumbent upon the prosecution to give proper reasons if they are going to refuse a request for disclosure.

[00:08:11]Finally, let me say this.

[00:08:14]Um we are delighted to see from the submissions that have already been made that the parties and um participants are represented by highly experienced counsel on all sides.

[00:08:29]Uh and we are heartened, as I say, by the responses which we've received to the scheduling order for this status conference.

[00:08:38]Uh those responses show that cooperation exists and we are optimistic that we'll be it will be unnecessary for the trial chamber to enforce compliance with directions made in the exercise of our in not inconsiderable powers of case management, which we will employ to achieve efficiency and a fair trial.

[00:09:06]So, having said that, um can we move straight away to the various issues uh in the order in which they were set out.

[00:09:18]Um Firstly, um obviously is the start of trial.

[00:09:24]Um there appear to be a number of different uh suggestions.

[00:09:30]Um the Office of the Prosecutor um says the 30th of November.

[00:09:37]Uh the defense doesn't want to give any date at all until um matters are resolved uh such as um uh the accused um fitness.

[00:09:54]Um the legal representative of the victims wants the beginning of September and the registry wants January because of interpretation um which I will come back to. Um okay.

[00:10:08]Um does anybody want to say anything more?

[00:10:12]Um there is actually one matter, Mr. Nichols. Yours is uh your date start date of of the end of November is is because you say it'll take you until September to um complete disclosure. Is that right?

[00:10:30]Thank you, Your Honors. Um you'll you'll find this a paragraphs three to five of our submissions.

[00:10:37]What I can say is that we've taken a hard look at the uh I believe 11 tasks in paragraph five that we need to fulfill um in a reasonable time before the start of trial.

[00:10:52]And so in picking the September 30 date uh that that was not random. It was made in the spirit of efficiency and expedition that that you have highlighted.

[00:11:05]And we believe that is a date that we can meet that will not be easy to meet. Um it it will require us to uh work hard and efficiently.

[00:11:19]And then we picked and of course it's up to your chambers entirely what we thought was the the soonest reasonable >> [clears throat] >> start date after that. Um but we really do think we need that time in order to accomplish all of those different things um different tasks that that we need uh to do and we think that um if we have that time, I mean I know everybody always argues this, but ultimately the trial will be more efficient um because we won't make mistakes and we'll have everything done properly and disclosed properly.

[00:11:57]Um some of that you know, we have new counsel now and uh Mr. Haynes and I have done a trial before and we know each other. So, I I do think we'll be able to cooperate um and uh as as you say, we haven't had a chance We've met and said hello and had a coffee, but we haven't sat down yet to really discuss what can be agreed on, what can be stipulated to.

[00:12:19]Um so, hopefully that will make it more efficient, but um you know, uh we we've um calculated in that um date of 30th September that the August break doesn't exist essentially um and that we will keep going through that period. That that does not include everybody taking off for 3 weeks. Um so, I can't really add more and I'm actually going on too long to be efficient, but I I rely on our submissions and we really think that is um the date the time we need.

[00:12:58]Yeah. Well, okay, Mr. Nichols, I'm going to I I I see that. I mean, you're actually assisted in one sense by the fact there has been a change of counsel um because that obviously causes um uh well, you're assisted in many senses, I feel. Um but uh because of the need for them to uh get to grips with the case. However, can I All right. Uh can I emphasize, however, um that you really must do things with expedition.

[00:13:26]Um we weren't madly impressed by the delay in asking um for the um matters in your last motion, as you saw.

[00:13:37]Um, so um we'd like you to get on with it. All right, Mr. Haines. Could Could I make just one additional point? I'm sorry, I didn't um just that [clears throat] with the schedule we proposed um other than one case, it would be the fastest from confirmation to trial. I know that doesn't mean that those other cases that that should be the measure, but uh we were we were thinking in terms of making this as as quickly as we could, and I I will uh you're correct of course about the motion you referred to, and I can address that later. Um that that was our mistake. Uh we own that. Um we there was a miscommunication where we uh believed that those items were not um in custody. Um but I I will address that if if you wish later.

[00:14:27]>> no, I think I I I think we've given you the warning, so that'll do.

[00:14:31]Um Mr. Haines, is there anything you want to add I I I or say? I appreciate Um yes, I I think what's important for us is that um whatever trial date you're on a fix upon you do not, as it were, concertina uh the gap between that date and the end of disclosure which has traditionally uh been no less than 3 months.

[00:15:01]Um and so if uh the prosecution's aspirations are to conclude that and its other tasks by the end of September then that would uh mitigate in favor of a start date in the middle of the uh Christmas vacation, the 30th of December, which would be 3 months later, which has a certain synergy with the other ball in the air, which is the interpretation, which doesn't appear to be ready until January.

[00:15:30]So, that would all tend to suggest um that the start of the trial could not be this year. Um we will be ready for whenever you want it to start, but our anxiety is that that should not be a date which leaves us with perhaps one or two months after the end of prosecution disclosure. It should be a minimum of three.

[00:15:55]Um yeah, but there are pressing reasons um which um mandate that we really should um start this trial as soon as possible, which is basically um the health of your um Lakeland.

[00:16:12]Um I and I appreciate the interpretation from games come to that in a in a moment, but um all right, Mr. Hands, I've I've got your So, your non-solutions.

[00:16:22]>> for the avoidance of of being uh unclear, um if the start date is going to be this year, then Mr. Nichols and his team are going to have to do a little better.

[00:16:35]Yeah, yes, well, we'll we'll come to that. Right, um yes, uh Ms. Masida, I'm your your submissions are I should start as soon as possible. I've got that.

[00:16:46]Thank you, Madam President.

[00:16:48]30 seconds of your time. I don't have to stress for obvious here victims would like this trial to start tomorrow.

[00:16:55]That's as simple as such. However, after the submission of the parties, we had further consultation with our clients.

[00:17:02]They are amenable to start this trial. 30th of November seems to them at the moment still a reasonable period of time.

[00:17:11]January 2027, no.

[00:17:14]For them it's too long.

[00:17:15]And going to what my learned colleague will say, while we can start the trial already in November, and if we witness this, who can speak English?

[00:17:24]This will allow to continue, to start and continue the trial, and solve the issue of interpretation starting in January 2027. Thank you very much.

[00:17:37]Yes, okay, Mr. Dubuisson. This is the same problem that arose um in uh Al Rahman, that um you don't have interpreters ready as yet.

[00:17:49]Um to deal with uh the two languages that are apparently going to be spoken by some of the witnesses.

[00:17:58]However, as we did in Al Rahman, um and as Masire has Miss Masire has pointed out, um it is possible to start the trial with witnesses who only speak English.

[00:18:11]And my understanding is that it's not as complicated as finding interpreters as it was in the Al Rahman trial in a a language that was um only spoken in a small part of Sudan.

[00:18:26]Um because presumably, um as court proceedings in the Philippines are all in English, there must be interpreters there.

[00:18:36]Um and um equally field interpreters who can be trained more speedily, I would have thought, than was possible in the Al Rahman trial.

[00:18:51]Mr. Dubuisson, thank you, Madam President. Yes, I take note of what you've just clarified. In addition to what my colleague Miss Masire just said.

[00:19:01]Indeed, there are a number of items we need to look at here. Who are we interpreting for specifically? We're We're for the witnesses.

[00:19:12]Today, we have a number of witnesses for which uh we know that they will testify in English. We have been warned that there are some witnesses that will be speaking in two other languages, languages of the Philippines. So, we need to find, if possible, interpreters who could speak these two languages. That's very important for us.

[00:19:38]To date, we do not have knowledge of who these witnesses are.

[00:19:44]So, as you have just said, we're going to try and recruit people principally from the field, that is field interpreters, but of course we do have to train them. Because field interpreters working out in the field work in the consecutive or in whispering chuchotage form, but we are going to be using simultaneous interpret- interpretation. So, they need to be prepared and trained.

[00:20:11]Not into English. Fine, but into the other languages such as Tagalog.

[00:20:17]Those languages that are used in the Philippines. But of course, it it is important also for the witnesses and for the population that outreach is conducted with regard to the trial that is ongoing in The Hague. So, it is important for those out in the Philippines to be able to follow the trial that is ongoing here in The Hague.

[00:20:41]This is something that we are always attentive to, but it is not our top priority. Our top priority is the language of the accused and the languages of the witnesses.

[00:20:54]And this is why with regard to what has just been said, yes, were we to go ahead with the opening statements, if you wanted to have these at the have these at the end of November or at the end of the year, yes indeed we could find solutions.

[00:21:18]interpretation for a number of hearing days for those opening statements, but if we're talking about bringing witnesses to testify on a regular basis, then we need to be properly equipped in terms of interpretation And that is why we would like for the trial to commence at a later date. I'm also very aware of the fact that we will need to adapt the hearings according to other criteria that you will determine yes or no to do with the accused, and this will enable us to save time. So, for example, if we have shorter hearings, we would maybe be able to improve the training terms and time, but that would only apply to maybe a month or a month and a half in terms of time. So, for us, it would be better to start after a 6-month period, that is to say 6 months after today.

[00:22:29]Well, as I say, um we're we're going to consider all these matters. We'll give um the date that we proposed to start at at at the end of the status conference um already and we've heard all the submissions.

[00:22:41]All right.

[00:22:42]Can we move then, please, to the next item on the agenda unless there's anything anybody else wants to say? No.

[00:22:52]And that's the number of witnesses.

[00:22:56]Um You um the prosecution, Mr. Nichols, um it's Um thinks that they want to uh the prosecution intends to call 60 to 70 witnesses.

[00:23:14]Um including uh approximately 31 insider witnesses.

[00:23:24]Is that right?

[00:23:28]Yes, your honor. I think uh Looking at paragraph six of your submissions.

[00:23:32]Yes. Um I think we can rely on our submissions for this question unless you have any other uh follow-up.

[00:23:42]>> No. Um yes, well, only only this one while we're on the topic of witnesses. Um Uh we'll set the number of hours at a later stage, but uh and can I say to um all parties, we will do the same um as I think most trials do now, and that is you'll just be given an overall figure as opposed to timing for every witness.

[00:24:08]Um but um there is one thing.

[00:24:11]Um What emerged as a problem in the last trial of Al-Rahman was the fact that witnesses to the same incident were called months apart.

[00:24:24]Um as a result of which um discrepancies and things which could have been resolved had had they been spotted were not spotted.

[00:24:36]Um and uh if we say as I think we'll have to give them what the registry says, that we're going to start the trial earlier, but they won't have their interpreters ready until the new year.

[00:24:50]And you deal with them in English. Uh you deal with those who can give evidence in English, rather.

[00:24:57]Um what I would still what we would all still like is for you to try and call all the witnesses to the same incident consecutively.

[00:25:10]>> [sighs] >> Um it makes life very difficult afterwards.

[00:25:14]Is that Is that something that that will or I don't expect you to answer that straight away, but I think it's something you you we'd like you to consider. Well, thank you, Your Honor. Yeah, of course we would want to do that.

[00:25:26]Without rehashing the last trial, it was the interpretation that threw that off because we had to just choose whoever could speak the standard Arabic at the time or in English.

[00:25:37]Um I think it will be less of an issue in this case because the case is different in that it's not sort of three big incidents with many witnesses for each of those. It's a lot of incidents.

[00:25:48]It's a lot of little incidents which are fairly discreet, which rely on fewer incident fewer witnesses per incident.

[00:25:55]So, uh we will try to do that. If I could just go back to the um translation, not not to uh complain, but we we did raise this early in order to try to get a head start. Um we we sent a notice on 13 March, I believe, of the languages.

[00:26:14]Um my my understanding is that they nothing can happen until after confirm the confirmation decision, but I just wonder if it can be speeded up because uh 6 months is a long time, not just for the courtroom presentation, but some of the feedback uh that we received that that my friends representing victims would know better is that um as as as Mr. Dubuisson [clears throat] said, uh there's a lot of interest in this case in the Philippines and having it not broadcast, I know that's not the main point and we don't always do that, but it'd be much much better uh for the population and the victims and people interested in this case if it could be broadcast in Tagalog or the other languages. So, if we start with all English-speaking witnesses, that will require us to jump around a bit, although we will try to keep it as coherent and and focused as possible on the particular incidents. Um but it but it means at the start of the trial that some people won't be able to follow um as as well as they should and uh that would be a shame. Um that that would be I think part of what we try to do here is make this accessible to the uh population again for the situation in question. So, if there's any way to speed that up, that would be be excellent.

[00:27:36]As well as I said to Mr. Dusollier, my understanding is that the the um the court system in the Philippines operates in English.

[00:27:45]And if there is real interpreter I I I may say I was quite surprised. I I rather was under the impression and been told by people who come from the Philippines that that most people there did speak English, but I'm told that's you all tell me that's wrong.

[00:28:00]But certainly, the court system must therefore have um ready and trained simultaneous interpreters.

[00:28:08]Uh yes, Your Honor. I I have to say it was um not something we had foreseen um till we heard after the confirmation hearing and and got this feedback. Um but it's also likely that um some of the population from which a lot of the victims in this case were drawn do not speak English. It It may be that most people do, but I I again defer to my friends, but that the that some of the poorer community where many of the victims are from uh do not do not have a good command.

[00:28:42]Yes, all right. Um there's one other thing. Well, it will be um specified in the conduct of proceedings, but um I note that a lot of these the witness evidence is in the form of um suspect interviews.

[00:29:02]>> [gasps] >> Right. Um can I make it clear straight away uh as I say, it'll appear in the conduct of proceedings.

[00:29:10]Where there are lengthy interviews, which one are all over the place in terms of topics and whatever.

[00:29:21]Um before the witness is called, the chamber will expect to have a breakdown in schedule form of the topics which are to be gone through the witness in the order of which they are to be gone through.

[00:29:38]Um with a reference in a column to the pages in the actual interview, because as I say, our experience, certainly my experience from the last trial, was that um as so often happens in such interviews, topics were returned to over and over again. So, can I make that clear right away?

[00:30:04]Absolutely, Your Honor. We expected that. Um we've discussed how to do that best, and we plan to do that.

[00:30:12]Um I would say that affects um in in the most part five witnesses especially.

[00:30:23]Um and so we uh intend to provide very detailed summaries, and and we'll put them in the format that the court um uh we will create those schedules, and we will also take care with the summaries for those insiders with lengthy transcripts. Right.

[00:30:41]Um and and the other the last thing is and and I think that's a general comment.

[00:30:47]Um, it it really is incumbent, as I say, in particular because of this case, because of the health of um the accused, that we we the evidence is kept to the minimum possible. Um, and the chamber would not expect to hear from witnesses all saying the same thing. Um, um I know Mr. Haynes objects to it, but I'll come back to that, but we'd expect as much use of of of um uh rule 683 and um 682 B, I think it is.

[00:31:28]Um, as possible. Yes, we would plan that. That that is something I was going to address. We we would like to I mean the experience of the last trials has seemed to work well. Um, I think the jurisprudence prudence, I won't go into it now, to check is I'll come >> no unfairness whatsoever in using 683.

[00:31:45]There's it's available to both parties.

[00:31:48]It makes things more efficient in every way. Uh, and and we intend to use it. In terms of um the length and and how much a witness needs to testify, I think that that may be something where we can cut that down.

[00:32:05]Some of these facts may not be in dispute about a particular murder um that that may we may be able to narrow it to the issues in dispute, which would make the testimony much shorter if the actual it fact of this murder or this incident is is not in dispute and we're talking about linkage, etc. So, we we may be able to speed it up.

[00:32:26]>> Yes, we'll come back to that when we come to your documentary. Uh, yes, right. Um, Mr. Haynes and Ms. Gibson.

[00:32:35]Nothing to add about that. All right.

[00:32:37]Uh Ms. Masid anything?

[00:32:40]No Madam President, thank you. All right.

[00:32:43]Right next then, the next topic is um Oh.

[00:32:50]Uh well, I suppose I may as well deal with it here. Yeah. I'm sorry before I move on. Mr. Nicholson, I meant to say the defense did say you should provide at the earliest possible time a provisional provisional witness list. Uh can I say I agree with that? Well, we agree too.

[00:33:08]Right. We'll do that 5 months in advance the provisional witness list. It's already the list from confirmation obviously. Yeah. But we will provide an updated one um 5 months in advance which I think is what was requested. Right. Thank you.

[00:33:23]Um okay. Expert witnesses. Um It would you seem to be Sorry, Mr. Nicholson, you again then. Um You seem to be calling an awful lot of Um Uh on the face of it. Um I think all we want to say at this stage about it um is this that um We're going to propose I think um that there is a deadline of the 24th of August to provide a list of your experts.

[00:34:03]Um and uh their reports if possible.

[00:34:07]Um it would be helpful if again as in the Al Rakan trial um defense and prosecution could agree on on on the nature and and yeah, well, I see Ms. Masid you want to say something in a moment.

[00:34:23]Um at the moment it seems to me it's the defense and prosecution that um could agree on the nature of the experts to be called.

[00:34:31]Um but um uh I will say this.

[00:34:37]Um, firstly, if if they these are going to be experts that are not on the registry list, um, you should inform the registry um, as as soon as possible who you want to uh, because more checks are being done these days on on on expert witnesses.

[00:34:55]Um, so it's really important that the registry is given advanced notice.

[00:35:00]Um, second, uh, I I I if objection is going to be taken by and this applies to experts called on by both sides to um, either the expert uh, uh, and the the expertise of the particular expert or the content of the report, again, that must be um, notified to the trial chamber well in advance um, of the expert to be called um, and if there's going to be any legal argument about it, um, and particularly involving a voir dire, then that must be um, notified as early as possible.

[00:35:48]And I say that applies to both sides.

[00:35:51]Um, Mr. Haynes, anything you want to say about that at the moment?

[00:35:55]Um, just a couple of things and and and I do hope Mr. Nichols will forgive me if we are holding a conversation across the courtroom. It it it's merely the fact that we haven't had the opportunity to have a lengthy conversation as he's already alluded to. I just wondered whether the prosecution experts have yet been instructed, how far advanced their reports are, and whether he's confident they could be served by the 30th of September of this year.

[00:36:22]Oh, well, we had in mind earlier than that actually. I I'm I'm I'm I'm grateful for that.

[00:36:28]The note I made was September. I thought I said the 24th of all 24th of August, yes. I did.

[00:36:36]Mr. Nichols.

[00:36:39]Yes.

[00:36:40]Um we have instructed some of the experts. They are underway on their reports.

[00:36:51]Um I think we will we will definitely be able to meet the 24th for the list, which um will likely be narrower than what we're looking at here. Part of it depends on a some things in the works.

[00:37:04]Um as far as the provision of the reports, I that It's hard for me to say that may be difficult for for some of them the 24th of August. Um but uh we will um Well, I think >> follow follow your orders. I as I could say we're It it's moving. We have instructed the experts. They are working. I need to I need to check. It's essentially um and I I think we can meet that very likely for most kind of important reports, but there may be a couple there there's a couple things where we're waiting on outside parties.

[00:37:48]Um and uh I I leave it there, I think.

[00:37:55]Yeah. All right. Uh yes, Mr. Masuda, you wanted to say something.

[00:37:59]Uh yes, your honor. Actually, it was the same question that my colleague asked to the prosecution about if we expect they already instructed or not for one very simple reason.

[00:38:09]Some of the expert are also interesting for us, so we were thinking of a joint instructions.

[00:38:15]Um to save time of court, maybe I we will liaise with the prosecution and see what what what can be done yet. Thank you so much. Yeah.

[00:38:26]Um all right. Now, I'll say one other thing about experts at this stage.

[00:38:29]Again, it will be it will appear in the conduct of proceedings, but um that is this. If um the uh side who's not calling the expert intends uh to show documents during the course of a cross-examination to an expert, they must be provided to the expert in advance of the hearing.

[00:38:56]Um as I say, that will appear in the conduct of proceedings.

[00:39:02]Um right. Um Uh the next item Does anybody want to say anything else on that? Um does the registrar, Mr. Dubuisson, want to say anything about experts other than obviously early early notification? Mr. Dubuisson.

[00:39:18]As you indicated, and rightly so, we currently have a vetting system, which is much more advanced to circumvent any problems. So, it would be worthwhile to be informed of experts ahead of time, so that through through these three ways of vetting an individual, we can get from A to B.

[00:39:37]Thank you.

[00:39:39]Yes.

[00:39:40]Next, uh the use of um AVL um Um the answer I mean, I I I don't think I need to say anything else about it. Mr. Haynes, um you say it should remain limited and subject to prior judicial authorization. What did you do during COVID?

[00:40:02]Stayed at home. Yes, and did everything on AVL. Yeah.

[00:40:07]Um I I I mean, I do have one I I hope helpful observation, and and that is of course the big difficult big difficulty with AVL in this case is is the time difference.

[00:40:18]Yes.

[00:40:19]>> Um ever since uh the 15th of May, my phone pings regularly from 4:00 in the morning onwards, and you can't get anybody after 4:00 in the afternoon.

[00:40:29]Um and I I think it's going to apply both to those who appear on a video screen and those who are brought here who are going to need, I think, a couple of days acclimatization to the new time zone they're in.

[00:40:40]So, I think that that is going to be a practical problem with AVL um in in terms of hearing people who are on the other side of the world. Um please don't pay too much attention uh to what appears in the submission document.

[00:40:57]You'll notice its proximity to the date of my assignment. Yes.

[00:41:02]Um uh can I say um that uh I agree with I mean, that is I was going to raise that anyhow, Mr. Cole's. It's going to be really difficult if if they are um testifying from the Philippines because we'll be sitting at something like 6:00 in the morning, won't we?

[00:41:20]We'll have to work that out, Your Honor.

[00:41:21]Um and uh my last job before here, there were sometimes video links that well, I was present and it started late at night in the other uh jurisdiction.

[00:41:33]Um we will we're cognizant of that and uh we will only apply for video link when it's impossible to get the person here. Um so, it it will be as limited as we can make it cuz we would rather they be here. There there may be some witnesses who just can't for different reasons. Yeah. All right.

[00:41:54]Well, I I as I say, I don't think there's anything else that needs to be said about that. Um it you don't need judicial authorization. Um you can subject to um the timings, um you can just to make that arrangement.

[00:42:11]Um other documentary evidence is the next item.

[00:42:17]Yes.

[00:42:19]Um Now, um let me just go through that. Um the Uh you say you're currently the H P is currently in the process of determining the overall um Yes, you've got 619 items on Um let me Let me just say paragraph 13.

[00:42:56]Oh, yes, it's um Yeah, that's the speeches.

[00:42:59]That's right. Now, I'm sorry. Query with you.

[00:43:03]Um 197 speeches seems to me on the face of it and uh without um it's probably not the right word, but it seems to me too much.

[00:43:20]Particularly if they all say the same thing.

[00:43:23]Um I I I think you need to consider fairly carefully whether you need all 197.

[00:43:33]We're definitely not going to intend to play all those in court. We'll go through them. These are the the these That will be narrowed. That was, I believe, meant and Mr. Jeremy may need to help me here in a minute, but that was meant That's sort of the universe at the moment and they're sort of um We will make careful selections. We We don't intend to introduce I'm sure all 197 of those.

[00:44:04]Right.

[00:44:06]Um Now, the point which is made in the defense submissions, um, is um, this question uh, of whether documents need to be, um, submitted uh, need to be go on to the court record through the submission or admission system.

[00:44:36]Um, I'll I'll I'll let Mr. Haynes, um, address us on this, but it the submission system of evidence getting onto the record is now, um, court-wide. I think all trial chambers accept that's the way of doing it. However, as a as a result of the experiences in our last trial, where there was a whole lot of, in our view, unnecessary and irrelevant evidence that was dumped into the court record through largely, um, the admission of, um, uh, large very large documents, even though a witness had only spoken as to one page, or even worse, through the bar table motion, um, this chamber is going to, um, try and find, um, a fine line between the two systems, >> [snorts] >> um, uh, which, um, uh, we haven't quite worked out, and but will appear in the conduct of proceedings.

[00:46:01]But one of the the the the things that um we have in mind is that where documents are relied upon heavily by either party to the proceedings, um and considered to be important, and I take into account the argument mounted um on behalf of Mr. Haines, which has been said on many occasions, um that it makes it very difficult to know at the end whether the Chamber will find the document to be persuasive or unpersuasive or even admitted at all.

[00:46:48]And so, I think we are going to say um just so that you have advanced warning that where a particular document is said to be um important, we are going to um say that we will decide on admission or not at that stage when it's presented.

[00:47:08]But, as I say, what I'm anxious to avoid is wholesale, as I say, dumping of um documents through the bar table motion.

[00:47:18]Um Videos of visits to the country did not seem to help the Chamber much in its last case.

[00:47:29]Um so, that's really all um that I want to say at this stage unless there's anything else. Oh, yes. Um I'm sorry, there is one other thing.

[00:47:39]Um uh Uh if if you're going to want to introduce uh um evidence from open sources, which includes Facebook or any other social media platforms, um then um we want to know if you're just going to put them in or whether you're going to be calling expert evidence.

[00:48:08]And when I say open source, I mean other I mean material that is not directly attributable to a witness or anybody who can speak about it.

[00:48:22]Okay, that's understood. We'll we'll look at that. Yeah. Thank you.

[00:48:26]Yes, Mr. Haynes, anything you want to say?

[00:48:29]No, thank you, Your Honor.

[00:48:31]Miss Masire, anything you want to say?

[00:48:36]No, thank you. I take it the registry has no observations on all right.

[00:48:43]Rule 68 we've more or less dealt with.

[00:48:49]I think I think we'll leave it to the parties to see what agreement can be reached on on 68. Um As I say As Mr. Nichols says It's quite a 68 three is quite a good way of of getting the evidence in.

[00:49:21]And Yes, and we encourage the parties to discuss that really.

[00:49:30]Well, I suppose um The only thing Mr. Nichols are you Are you would you be using rule 68 three for the any of the article 55 witnesses?

[00:49:42]Or trying to.

[00:49:45]Yes, that's possible.

[00:49:48]I think so.

[00:49:52]Yeah.

[00:49:53]All right, well, I think we'll see where we we get to that. Mr. Tain, I don't expect any submissions on that at the moment.

[00:50:01]Um agreed facts, next. Um happy to see that everybody is um going to talk about this still.

[00:50:12]Um and um the only I mean, we encourage, as I've already said, we really encourage agreed facts.

[00:50:24]There must be quite a lot in this case because it's a matter of public record.

[00:50:29]Uh what um the accused um said um or did.

[00:50:37]Um oh, in some stages in some senses.

[00:50:40]Um the only question um I I see that um Mr. Massidda, the um you submit that um the uh the representatives of victims should have a say on this.

[00:50:56]Um It did the the the they The article actually talks about um prosecution and defense.

[00:51:05]Um I think if you want to obviously you should be supplied with potential agreed facts. Um but I think if you want to address us um or on or if you want to make submissions on it, you'll have to apply for leave.

[00:51:23]Uh thank you, Madam President. I am guided if I have Can I have 1 minute on this issue? Yes. Thank you very much.

[00:51:31]Um first of all, um two things very briefly. One, it has been court practice to allow victims to notify the Chamber if they have or they have not any matter to raise in relation to agreed facts raised by the chamber. And second, in deciding, the chamber shall take into account also the interest of the victims. So, on that basis, we submitted already that we should at least give an opportunity to have a say on whether or not the agreed facts agreed by the parties may raise an issue for the victims. It remains, of course, entirely with the parties to discuss. We don't want to be involved in that, but we simply request the notification of the agreed facts just to check whether or not these may have an impact on the interest of the victims and eventually raise that with the chamber. And it's something that can be done in a very quick way, if I can also make this point. If we are notified of the agreed facts, it will take for us not more than a few days to verify whether or not the interest of our clients are indeed concerned. Thank you. Well, you say that's been the practice. I mean, you quote what I don't actually say which case it was, but I'm assuming from the date that it was Lubanga that in your footnote 12 um paragraph 10.

[00:52:58]Um but what you rightly say is that rule 69, which deals with that, apart from saying it's the prosecution and the defense, >> [clears throat] >> it's for the chamber to decide whether uh the chamber may consider such an alleged fact as being proven unless the chamber is of the opinion >> [cough] >> that a more complete presentation is required in the interest of justice, in particular, interest of the victims. So, before we even get to that, we have to decide whether it's if we're satisfied that um something is proven, >> [snorts] >> uh then it's for us to decide before um and it's only if we take the view that we need more information or more complete presentation the victims come into it.

[00:53:58]Well do you don't know we've all due respect sometimes the chamber may not be aware of facts or circumstances that the legal representative are aware of because we maintain the direct contact with the victims. So in this sense for us the notification is important because we can confront what the parties have agreed with what the views and concerns of the victims are.

[00:54:23]And second going back to the practice of the court in the Abd al-Rahman case we notified twice our agreement in the pre at the pre-trial stage.

[00:54:37]I remember now the filing looking behind me if someone can find that at pre-trial in the Abd al-Rahman there were already list of agreed facts and if my memory is still good I hope so.

[00:54:51]In both cases there is a filing of the then appointed legal representative notification notifying the chamber about no opposition of the agreed facts reached by the parties. So it's not an ancient practice of the court it's a practice that has been prolonged in a number of cases before the court.

[00:55:15]I leave it to the discretion of the chamber but I wanted you to make the point because particularly in this case it's important for victims to be fully appraised of what's going on. Victims are very interested in this case and for them it has an impact if a fact is already agreed or not agreed.

[00:55:36]Thank you.

[00:55:39]Yes, well, we'll take that, Tom, your submissions under consideration.

[00:55:44]Um, yes, thank you. Unless there's anything else on that, um, before uh yes, Mr. Nichols.

[00:55:49]>> Just I think in in in the last trial I I think agree with your honor that the defense and I agree what and and the prosecution agree what they can.

[00:56:00]And then the LRVs are notified the disagreement has taken place and we submit them, but I think that's where that's where it ends. Um Well, that's my my impression, but um I hear what Miss Miss Maceda said. Um I I just think it would be unfortunate um were there to be intervention um when um facts which have been agreed uh between the defense and prosecution, who are the parties to this trial, um and with the laudable view of increasing the efficiency, um I I I would be reluctant to see it being derailed at any stage. But, as I say, we'll return to you on that, uh Miss Maceda.

[00:56:48]Um all right, finally, before we take the break, um languages, I think we've really discussed that, hadn't we?

[00:56:55]Except the only thing that um Mr. Haynes, I was slightly surprised to see was that um you wanted um interpretation for your lay client uh who, as I understand it, is president of the Philippine ex-president of the Philippines an ex-lawyer in the Philippines, speaks fluent English.

[00:57:25]Um he won't need interpretation. Right, thank you.

[00:57:31]Um Yes, uh unless there's anything else on interpretation, I think we've actually discussed that um uh already.

[00:57:41]Uh anybody else want to add anything?

[00:57:43]No. All right. It seems to me um because we're then coming on to disclosure um which will be slightly longer, I think. Um uh we'll take the break at this stage and sit again at 11:00.

[00:58:02]All right. We will be