> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.wwconemedia.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# ICC Prosecutors Want P-1100’s Testimony in Duterte’s Trial — What the Witness Allegedly Knows Goes to the Heart of the DDS Case
- URL: https://www.wwconemedia.com/icc-prosecutors-want-p-1100s-testimony-in-dutertes-trial-what-the-witness-allegedly-knows-goes-to-the-heart-of-the-dds-case/
- Published: 2026-09-08T07:28:49.000Z
- Updated: 2026-09-08T07:28:49.000Z
- Author: WWC NEWSDESK
- Tags: ASIA, PHILIPPINES, POLITICS

**THE HAGUE/MANILA — International Criminal Court prosecutors are seeking to place previously recorded testimony from an unidentified witness into evidence in the upcoming trial of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, arguing that the account could help establish how an alleged policy of “neutralizing” suspected criminals operated and what Duterte allegedly knew about it.**

The request, made public in redacted form on September 7, 2026, adds another potentially important piece to the prosecution’s case just weeks before Duterte’s trial is scheduled to open at The Hague on November 30.

ICC court records identify the witness only as **P-1100**. Prosecutors have asked Trial Chamber III to admit the witness’s previously recorded testimony and accompanying materials under Rule 68(3) of the court’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

But the filing does **not** mean the testimony has already been accepted as evidence—or that the allegations contained in it have been proven.

The judges must first rule on the prosecution’s request.

## Why P-1100 matters to prosecutors

According to the prosecution, P-1100’s earlier testimony relates to its allegation that there was a policy to “neutralise” alleged criminals in the Philippines through violent acts, including murder.

Prosecutors also say the testimony contains evidence concerning the alleged **modus operandi of the Davao Death Squad, or DDS**, and could be relevant to Duterte’s alleged individual criminal responsibility, including questions surrounding his knowledge and intent.

Those assertions remain prosecution allegations that will have to be tested during the trial.

That distinction is important.

The filing is not an ICC judgment declaring that P-1100’s account is accurate, nor is it a judicial determination that Duterte operated or directed the DDS. Duterte is entitled to challenge the evidence, question witnesses and present a defense before the Trial Chamber ultimately determines guilt or innocence.

## Witness would still appear before the court

The prosecution is not asking judges to replace P-1100’s appearance entirely with a written record.

Instead, prosecutors have proposed using the previously recorded testimony while conducting a more focused supplementary examination when the witness appears before the court.

The prosecution said the arrangement could reduce its direct examination of P-1100 from approximately **seven hours to two hours**, saving at least five hours of courtroom time.

VERA Files reported that prosecutors said P-1100 would remain available for questioning not only by the prosecution but also by Duterte’s defense team, the judges and legal representatives of participating victims.

That could become significant if Duterte’s lawyers challenge the reliability, interpretation or context of the witness’s earlier statements.

## The case has already moved beyond the pre-trial stage

The latest filing comes after ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I unanimously confirmed the charges against Duterte on April 23, 2026 and committed him to trial.

The ICC says there are substantial grounds to believe that Duterte bears responsibility for crimes against humanity involving **murder and attempted murder** allegedly committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians between November 1, 2011 and March 16, 2019.

Reuters reported after the confirmation ruling that the case encompasses the alleged murders of **76 people and attempted murders of two others**. ICC judges said the evidence at the confirmation stage supported the existence of an alleged common plan involving Duterte and other alleged co-perpetrators to kill suspected criminals, including people perceived to be involved in illegal drugs.

Confirmation of charges, however, is not a conviction. The evidentiary threshold for sending a case to trial is different from the standard required to establish criminal responsibility at the end of a trial.

Duterte has denied criminal wrongdoing.

His lawyers have previously challenged the prosecution’s interpretation of his public statements and argued that remarks attributed to him about killing criminals should not automatically be treated as instructions to commit unlawful killings. Duterte has also repeatedly maintained that police were permitted to use lethal force in self-defense.

## From Manila to The Hague

Duterte was arrested by Philippine authorities in March 2025 following an ICC arrest warrant and was surrendered to the court in The Hague on March 12, 2025.

The ICC says the warrant concerned alleged crimes against humanity committed during a period covering Duterte’s years in Davao City and the first part of his presidency. The court’s jurisdictional period ends on March 16, 2019, when the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute took effect.

After the charges were confirmed in April 2026, the case moved to **Trial Chamber III**, composed of Judge Joanna Korner, Judge Keebong Paek and Judge Nicolas Guillou. The opening of trial is scheduled for **November 30, 2026**.

## Why the latest filing could matter

The battle over P-1100 is ultimately about more than saving several hours of courtroom testimony.

If the judges admit the earlier statement, prosecutors would be able to place a more extensive version of the witness’s account into the evidentiary record while concentrating live questioning on specific points.

For prosecutors, the testimony appears intended to help connect several central elements of their case: the alleged existence of a “neutralization” policy, the alleged operating methods of the DDS and Duterte’s alleged knowledge and intent.

For the defense, it creates another opportunity to challenge whether those connections can actually be established beyond reasonable doubt.

And that is where the real significance of P-1100 may emerge.

With Duterte’s trial approaching, the contest is moving away from whether prosecutors have enough evidence to bring him before a Trial Chamber.

The far more difficult question is now beginning to take shape:

**Can that evidence survive the scrutiny of a full international criminal trial?**

WWC ONE MEDIA M.J.E