“The Chamber finds that there are substantial grounds to believe that Mr Duterte is criminally responsible for the crimes charged in Counts 1-3 as an indirect co-perpetrator, and/or for ordering and/or inducing, and/or for aiding and abetting the commission of the crimes, pursuant to articles 25(3)(a), (b) and (c) of the Statute,” said the pre-trial chamber in its decision. Must Read TIMELINE: The road to Duterte’s trial at the International Criminal Court It was a unanimous decision by an all-women chamber composed of judges Iulia Antoanella Motoc, Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini Gansou, and Maria del Socorro Flores Liera.

Unlike other decisions, this is not automatically appealable, meaning Duterte cannot go straight to the appeals chamber to file a challenge. If Duterte wants to appeal, he first has to request authorization to do so. The ICC will now have to constitute a trial chamber, which will then proceed to holding status conferences among all parties.

“Trials in the ICC are fair and impartial and the defense would have sufficient time to prepare its case while respecting the rights of victims,” said ICC spokesperson Oriane Maliet. The usual timeline for a trial to start at the ICC after charges are confirmed is anywhere from six months to one and a half years. The trial chamber would be composed of judges different from the pre-trial chamber.

When trial starts, Duterte would have no choice but to appear in court. Whether that’s in person or online would have to be decided by the court should Duterte request a different modality. ‘Justice is coming’ This decision was made only a day after the appeals chamber confirmed jurisdiction on the case.

“Dalawang araw na pagkatalo ng defense. Dagdagan pa ng impeachment. Justice is coming,” said Randy delos Santos, uncle of Kian Delos Santos, whose killing by policemen in 2017 sparked public outcry.

The Delos Santos case is part of the charges against Duterte. (The defense has lost for two consecutive days. Add to that the [revelations in Sara Duterte’s] impeachment hearing. Justice is coming.) During the pre-trial hearings, Duterte’s lawyer Nicholas Kaufman argued that there was no single evidence to prove that Duterte ordered the killing of anyone listed in the charges.

For example, he did not say ,”Kill Kian.” But Kaufman did not mention that it is not ICC jurisprudence to provide such a direct link. The pre-trial chamber repeated that again on Thursday, saying that “there is no requirement that an order be given in writing or in any particular form.” The standard has always been “virtual certainty.” Did Duterte have virtual certainty that people were going to be killed because of his actions and words? “Contrary to the Defense’s assertion it is thus not required that the implementation of the common plan led to the killing or attempted killing of all individuals targeted pursuant to that common plan.

Rather, it suffices that the execution of the common plan rendered the commission of the crimes charged virtually certain in the ordinary course of events,” said the decision. Kaufman also tried to undermine Duterte’s speeches. He said those same speeches contained parts where Duterte explicitly told policemen to use force only in self-defense.

The pre-trial chamber said those parts should not be read in isolation. “The Chamber finds that the mere inclusion of references to lawful conduct is not, in and of itself, determinative of the legal characterisation of the facts or the suspect’s intent,” said the decision. This is a validation that their move to go to the ICC was the right one, said Kristina Conti, an ICC-accredited assistant to counsel.

“Walang pagsidlang tuwa at pasasalamat sa ICC sa mabilis at pulidong mga desisyon…. Tama ang pasya natin na dumulog at magreklamo sa ICC,” said Conti. (We are overjoyed and grateful to the ICC for a fast and comprehensive decision. It was the right decision to go and file our complaints with the ICC.) – Rappler.com