MANILA – A panel of medical experts in The Hague unanimously” believes former President Rodrigo R. Duterte is “fit to participate” in the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) pre-trial proceedings, including confirmation hearing.
The panel members, composed of independent and qualified experts, were earlier appointed by the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I to assess Duterte’s fitness as his camp asserts that he is not fit to stand trial due to “cognitive impairment.”
According to a court document released on December 18, three different physicians interviewed, examined and assessed the former chief executive from October 8 to November 18.
“Upon completion of their assessments, panel members individually reached the same overall conclusion that, while frail and elderly, Mr. Duterte nevertheless possesses the necessary capacities to meaningfully exercise his procedural and fair trial rights,” it read.
Each of the panel member independently concluded that Duterte can understand his charges, evidence and the purpose of pre-trial proceedings, as well as instruct his counsel to prepare his defense. “These findings are clear and unanimous, and should be relied upon by the Chamber as authoritative, to determine that Mr. Duterte is indeed fit to stand trial,” their report said.
Duterte’s camp, meanwhile, asked the Pre-Trial Chamber to seek further clarification before issuing its decision on the matter, citing “inconsistencies” by which each member of the panel reached their conclusions.
“While the experts pronounce on Mr Duterte’s rudimentary ability to engage in a criminal process, it is not clear what they actually know, if at all, about the complex nature of confirmation proceedings at the ICC, which require a suspect to be familiar, through his defence, with thousands of items of evidence comprising an investigation dating back more than four years,” said Duterte’s counsel, Nicholas Kaufman.
“For this reason, the Defence seeks an evidentiary hearing whereby the parties will be able to clarify the conclusions of the experts, the reasons for such conclusions, the methodology adopted during the interviews, and the means whereby instructions were communicated to them,” he added. (With PNA)