Third-Supplemental-Pleading-by-Rise-Up-for-Life-and-for-Rights_January-22-2021

Communication and Complaint Situation in the Philippines MS. FATOU BENSOUDA Prosecutor Office of the Prosecutor The International Criminal Court The Hague, The Netherlands Perpetrator

:

RODRIGO ROA DUTERTE President Republic of the Philippines Malacañang Palace, Manila Philippines

Victims/Complainants

:

Rise Up for Life and for Rights, Irma J. Locasia, Dennise B. David, Maria C. B. Lozano, Mariel F. Sabangan, Normita B. Lopez, Purisima B. Dacumos, and Christine L. Pascual

Communication Reference :

Situation in the Philippines OTP-CR-408/18

Madam Prosecutor Bensouda, MOTION TO ADMIT THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADING On Facts, Information and Evidence on Events that Transpired after the Communication-Complaint was filed Complainants filed a Communication and Complaint regarding the Philippine “war on drugs” on August 28, 2018; a Supplemental Pleading on October 7, 2018; and a Second Supplemental Pleading on October 4, 2019. We respectfully ask the Honorable Prosecutor to ADMIT this Third Supplemental Pleading.

Complainants ask the Honorable Prosecutor to admit herein new facts, evidence and information in the exercise of her continuing jurisdiction and powers over the Situation in the Philippines as provided under Article 127 of the Rome Statute despite the withdrawal of the Philippines from the International Criminal Court (ICC) effective March 17, 2019. Particularly, we submit the Report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights dated June 4, 2020 on the situation in the Philippines, where the issue on the “war on drugs” is given a significant highlight.

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

Despite its repudiation of the Court’s jurisdiction, the Philippines is compelled by law to cooperate with the ICC in the preliminary examination, investigation, and any proceedings resulting from a validly instituted complaint and timely lodged communications. Non-cooperation by the Philippines implicates state responsibility, and is addressed in Article 87, paragraphs 5 and 7 of the Rome Statute. Complainants reaffirm that they, along with other victims, will continue to cooperate in any of the processes of the ICC subject to confidentiality and security.

Complainants respectfully reiterate charges against the President of the Republic of the Philippines Rodrigo Roa Duterte of committing, ordering, inciting, goading, encouraging, tolerating or sanctioning acts of Murder and Other Inhumane Acts under Article 7, subparagraphs (a) and (k) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

We must also raise that President Duterte’s threats against officials of the International Criminal Court constitute Offences against the Administration of Justice under Article 70 of the Rome Statute. Thus, an investigation under the ICC Rules of Procedure and Evidence because the acts of respondent Duterte amount to “[i]mpeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties,” and/or to “[r]etaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official.”1 Complainants support the fact-finding and consideration of the Honorable Prosecutor as to any other responsible person, and crime, consummated or continuous, which may be deemed within the jurisdiction of the Court.

I.

The Report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Philippines issued in June 2020 clearly detailed widespread, unrelenting human rights abuses and violations related to the “war on drugs”, as well as of persistent impunity.

To recall, eleven (11) United Nations (UN) human rights experts jointly called on the UN Human Rights Council to establish an independent investigation into human rights violations in the Philippines.2 On June 4, 2020, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) issued a Report3 on the situation of human rights in the Philippines, which made the following findings: a) Since the Philippine government launched its campaign against illegal drugs in 2016, official figures indicate that at least 8,663 people have been killed, with some estimates putting the real toll at almost 30,000.

Article 70, Rome Statute.

Press release from the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights: UN human rights experts call for independent probe into Philippines violations, June 7, 2019. Available at https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=24679 3 REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE PHILIPPINES, 29 June 2020, A/HRC/44/22. The full text is available at: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/PH/Philippines-HRC44-AEV.pdf.

1 2

2

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

b) Based on an examination of 25 operations in which 45 people were killed in Metro Manila between August 2016 and June 2017, it was found that post operational police reports contained strikingly similar language and that the “police repeatedly recovered guns bearing the same serial numbers from different victims in different locations,” suggesting that these guns are planted and recycled as evidence by police. c) Despite calls coming from different domestic stakeholders and the international community, the Philippine National Police has consistently refused to implement transparency and accountability mechanisms relating to the killings.

The UNHRC report stressed that given the failure of domestic mechanisms to ensure accountability thus far, there is a need for independent, impartial, credible investigations into all allegations of serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. a) At least 8,663 people have been killed according to official figures, with 73 of them children. The killings have continued in the midst of the pandemic crisis in the country.

The report on the situation of human rights in the Philippines issued by the UNHCHR on June 4, 2020 cited official figures that at least 8,663 people have been killed, and acknowledged that some estimates put the real toll at more than triple that number at 27,000. The UNHCHR report is based on 893 written submissions, legislation, police reports, court documents, videos, photos and other open source material, as well as interviews with victims and witnesses. 4 In conjunction with the Second Supplemental Pleading submitted by complainants on the killings of minors, the UNHCHR report also made note of the documentation by the Philippine Commission on Human Rights (CHR). As of April 2020, the CHR documented the killings of 73 children or persons below 18 years old, with the youngest victim at only five months old.

The main component of the “war on drugs” operations, as embodied in the official police directive5, is “tokhang” or “house-to-house visitations” designed to eradicate illegal drug personalities in the “barangays” or local small communities in the Philippines.

These “house-to-house visitations” are usually conducted without search or arrest warrants and are based solely on the basis of an individual’s inclusion on unverified drug watch lists compiled by barangay officials and passed on to the police. Respondent Duterte Press statement by the OHCHR: Philippines: UN report details widespread human rights violations and persistent impunity, 4 June 2020, Available at https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=24679. Last accessed on January 20, 2021.

5 Philippine National Police Command Memorandum Circular No. 16-2016 on “Project Double Barrel”. The full text is available at https://didm.pnp.gov.ph/images/Command%20Memorandum%20Circulars/CMC%20201616%20PNP%20ANTIILLEGAL%20DRUGS%20CAMPAIGN%20PLAN%20%20PROJECT%20DOUBLE%20BARREL.pdf. The memorandum was attached to the original Communication and Complaint as Annex “H”.

4

3

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

even published his own list of government officials allegedly involved in the drugs trade. 6 Aside from the fact that these individuals have no legal recourse to challenge their inclusion in the list, these house-to-house visitations systematically forced suspects to make self-incriminating statements or risk facing lethal force. The UNHCHR report found that only 1.2% of all anti-illegal drug operations by the Philippine police in the period between July 1, 2016 and November 30, 2017, were conducted based on an arrest warrant.

Even amidst the pandemic, the Philippine government pressed hard with the “war on drugs”.7 According to Amnesty International, “[r]eports of drug-related killings continuing amid the lockdown order are deeply concerning, but not surprising”.8 Rachel Choa-Howard of its Southeast Asia office added that “the climate of impunity in the Philippines is so entrenched that police and others remain free to kill without consequence.”

Even worse, local government units in the Philippines have now adopted the same tactics used in the war on drugs to control the spread of COVID-19.9 Similar to the war on drugs, the police, basing their assessment only through hearsay by neighbors, will conduct house-to-house searches for people who might have been infected with the novel coronavirus and then forcibly relocate them to government-run isolation facilities.

These searches will make people who reside in impoverished urban areas even more susceptible to police abuses considering how the police and local government officials have severely trampled on the rights and dignities of those who failed to abide by the quarantine and curfew regulations imposed by the national and local government in various cities since mid-March 2020.10 As a result of the ongoing war on drugs that has seen thousands sent to prison with 71% of inmates held on drugs-related charges, the prison system in the Philippines finally reached its “breaking point” 11 when one of its most congested jails became the venue of the biggest known COVID-19 cluster outbreak in the Philippines.12

President Duterte bares names of narco-politicians, Presidential communications Operations Office, 15 March 2019, Available at https://pcoo.gov.ph/news_releases/president-duterte-bares-names-of-narcopoliticians/ 7 Ted Regencia, Duterte presses on with 'drug war' despite coronavirus lockdown, Al Jazeera, April 1. 2020, available at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/03/duterte-presses-drug-war-coronavirus-lockdown200325073658942.html. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

8 Id. 9 Phil Robertson, Philippines uses ‘drug war’ tactics to fight COVID-19: Police to go house-to-house, rely on neighbor reporting, July 5, 2020, available at https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/07/15/philippines-usesdrug-war-tactics-fight-covid-19, Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

10 Ryan Thoreson, Philippines Uses Humiliation as COVID Curfew Punishment: LGBT People Ordered to Dance and Kiss on Video, Human Rights Watch, April 8, 2020, available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/04/08/philippines-uses-humiliation-covid-curfew-punishment. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

11 Neil Jerome Morales, Jails, justice system at breaking point as Philippine drugs war intensifies, Reuters, September 1, 2017, available at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-philippines-justice/jails-justicesystem-at-breaking-point-as-philippine-drugs-war-intensifies-idUSKCN1BB39F. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

12 Coronavirus outbreak in Philippines jail sees 123 inmates infected, Reuters, April 22, 2020, available at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-philippines-prison/coronavirus-outbreak-inphilippines-jail-sees-123-inmates-infected-idUSKCN2241G3. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

6

4

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

b) Based on an examination of 25 operations in which 45 people were killed in Metro Manila between August 2016 and June 2017, it is found that post operational spot reports contained strikingly similar if not verbatim language and repeatedly mentioned the same serial numbers of guns from different victims in different locations.

The UNHCHR report found that post-operational spot reports submitted to the Supreme Court all claim that the targets had been killed after resisting arrest and contain strikingly similar language to describe each victim’s alleged words such as “putang ina mo pulis ka pala”, which roughly translates as “so you’re a police (officer), son-of-a-bitch” and actions such as the “suspect drew his weapon, fired at the lawmen but missed”.

The UNHCHR report also found that the Philippine police "repeatedly recovered guns bearing the same serial numbers from different victims in different locations". “Seven handguns with unique serial numbers” were identified with each handgun appearing in at least two separate and different crime scenes and two of these handguns re-appearing in five separate and different crime scenes. According to the report, there is a pattern that suggests the planting and recycling of gun evidence by the PNP, which casts doubt on the “nanlaban” or “resisted arrest” narrative being peddled by the PNP.13 Prodded by the aggrieved and the public, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) investigated one such operation and eventually recommended the filing of charges against eleven (11) Philippine National Police (PNP) officials including the former anti-drug section chief of the San Jose del Monte City police in Bulacan province for killing six people in a “fabricated’’ war on drugs operation in February 2020. 14 There is no final action on the prosecution as yet. c) Despite calls coming from different domestic stakeholders and the international community, the Philippine National Police has consistently refused to implement transparency and accountability mechanisms relating to the killings.

Over and above credible and frequent allegations of widespread and systematic extrajudicial killings in the context of the campaign against illegal drugs, the PNP has repeatedly invoked the “presumption of regularity” rule of evidence in its conduct of war on drugs operations to justify the lack of prosecutions. 15 However, as the Supreme Court of the Philippines has emphasized, the police cannot claim presumption of regularity in official functions because “deaths are not supposed to occur during any police operations”.16 The PNP has also consistently refused to disclose documents relating to the killings to the Supreme Court and the Commission on Human Rights. It has insisted that the Internal Affairs Service of the PNP routinely investigates deaths that occur during police Supra, note 3.

Dona Z. Pazzibugan, NBI tags 11 Bulacan cops for killing 6 in ‘fabricated’ drug bust, August 13, 2020, available at https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1320916/nbi-tags-11-bulacan-cops-for-killing-6-in-fabricateddrug-bust#ixzz6Ve3Cbqjl. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

15 Supra, note 3.

16 Almora v. Dela Rosa, Supreme Court Resolution dated April 3, 2019, p. 47, available at: https://lawphil.net/sc_res/2018/pdf/gr_234359_2018.pdf. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

13 14

5

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

operations.17 The UNHCHR however noted that out of the 4,583 investigations supposedly launched by the Internal Affairs Service between July 2016 and May 2019, it has cited only one, which is the case of the 17-year-old Kian delos Santos, where three police officers were convicted of murder,18 mainly due to the availability of closed-circuit television footage of the circumstances surrounding the killing and the public outrage that ensued. 19 The UNHCHR has called on the Philippine government to cancel Command Memorandum Circular No. 16-2016 or “Project Double Barrel” and to allow an independent, impartial, and effective investigation into the killings in order to hold those who are accountable and provide reparations to the victims and their families.20 Taken together with previous submissions, these are sufficient to prove that the Philippine government’ has repeatedly and insistently failed to fulfill its obligation to investigate and prosecute perpetrators and that respondent Duterte is guilty of Crimes against Humanity. We urge the speedy disposition of our case in the hope that said decision may somehow stem the rising number of deaths.

II.

RESPONDENT DUTERTE’S THREATS AGAINST OFFICIALS OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT CONSTITUTE OFFENCES AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

Article 70 of the Rome Statute provides that the Court has jurisdiction over various offences against the administration of justice. In the case of The Prosecutor v. Jean-Pierre Bemba, where the first Article 70 conviction was handed for interference with witnesses, Presiding Judge Bertram Schmitt emphasized that while such offenses are not the core crimes, “preventing offenses against the administration of justice is of the utmost importance for the functioning of the ICC.”21 These offences include “[i]mpeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties”22 and “[r]etaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official[.]”23 Notably, “an official of the Court” encompasses representatives of all four organs of the ICC, which includes the members of the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP).24 Respondent Duterte has manifestly violated Article 70 of the Rome Statute. As early as April 13, 2018, in a press conference, respondent Duterte threatened to have ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda arrested 25 if she were to continue with the investigation of the Supra, note 18.

Supra, note 18.

19 Marc Jayson Cayabyab, Cops convicted in Kian delos Santos murder, Philippine Star, 29 November 2018, Available at https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/11/29/1872756/cops-convicted-kiandelos-santos-murder.

20 Supra, note 18.

21 See: Bemba et al. case : Judgment, ICC Trial Chamber VII, 19 October 2016, from the Youtube channel of the ICC, available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4cuVgQPue8.

22 Article 70(d), Rome Statute 23 Article 70(e), Rome Statute 24 Article 34, Rome Statute 25 See: Regine Cabato, Philippines leaves International Criminal Court as Duterte probe is underway, The Washington Post, March 18, 2019, available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/philippines-leaves-international-criminal-court-as17 18

6

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

Duterte administration’s anti-drug campaign26 — an act which, if consummated upon orders of the respondent only on such grounds, would constitute the crimes of Arbitrary Detention27 and/or Unlawful Arrest28 under the country’s Revised Penal Code.

Respondent Duterte has cited numerous reasons why he believes the ICC has no jurisdiction over him, and erroneously suggested that any doubts about that should have been dispelled by his withdrawal. His threat to arrest the ICC Prosecutor or her team if they go to the Philippines was heavily reported in the media.29 Duterte threatens to arrest ICC prosecutor if she goes to PH30 Still smarting from the decision of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to conduct preliminary examinations into his anti-drugs campaign, President Rodrigo Duterte threatened to have ICC chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda arrested if she sets foot in the country to proceed with her probe.

"You cannot exercise any proceedings here without basis. That is illegal and I will arrest you," he warned Bensouda during a press conference in Davao City upon his arrival from trips to China and Hong Kong on Friday, April 13.

Kaya ikaw, Ms Fatou, huwag kang pumunta dito kasi (So, Ms Fatou, don't come here because) I will bar you," the Philippine leader added.

Duterte made the statement as part of his lenghty response to a question on Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno's pronouncement that the Duterte administration was devoting its resources to oust her. He began his response by hitting Sereno's position early in his administration that people should not allow their warrantless arrest.

ICC chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, however, has no reason yet to head to the Philippines as the court has only begun preliminary examinations into killings being linked to Duterte's campaign against illegal drugs.

Respondent Duterte has heaped abusive language on the ICC, its personnel, as well as the United Nations and other international human rights bodies:

duterte-probe-underway/2019/03/18/f929d1b6-4952-11e9-93d0-64dbcf38ba41_story.html. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

26 'I will arrest you': Duterte warns ICC lawyer to steer clear of Philippines, Reuters, April 12, 2018, available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-philippines-duterte-icc/i-will-arrest-you-duterte-warns-icclawyer-to-steer-clear-of-philippines-idUSKBN1HK0DS. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

27 Article 124, Act. No. 3815 ‘An Act Revising the Penal Code and Other Penal Laws’, The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines.

28 Article 269, Revised Penal Code.

29 See also: ‘I Will Arrest You’: Duterte Warns ICC Prosecutor. “What is your authority now? If we are not members of the treaty, why are you ... in this country?” he told reporters, in comments aimed at Bensouda.

“You cannot exercise any proceedings here without basis. That is illegal and I will arrest you.” April 13, 2018, Voice of America, available at: https://www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/i-will-arrest-you-dutertewarns-icc-prosecutor. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

30 Pia Ranada, Duterte threatens to arrest prosecutor if she goes to PH, April 13, 2018, Rappler.com, available at: https://www.rappler.com/nation/duterte-arrest-international-criminal-court-prosecutor-fatoubensouda. Video report available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcEwl0dEarE&feature=youtu.be.

Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

7

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

Duterte attacks rights officials Callamard and Bensouda31 UN human rights chief labels Philippine president’s insults ‘unacceptable’ and calls for his ‘psychiatric evaluation’.

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has unleashed a barrage of insults against international human rights officials, calling a UN special rapporteur “malnourished”, and referring to an International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor as “that black woman”, prompting the UN human rights chief to call for his “psychiatric evaluation”.

Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said in Geneva on Friday that Duterte’s attacks on UN officials are “unacceptable” and “cannot go unanswered”.

It makes one believe that the president of the Philippines needs to submit himself to some sort of psychiatric evaluation,” Zeid said.

“This is absolutely disgraceful that the president of a country could speak this way, using the foulest of language against a rapporteur that is highly respected.”

Zeid was referring to Agnes Callamard, who is leading a UN investigation into the extrajudicial killings related to Duterte’s drug war.

“Human rights, human rights, son of a bitch, human rights,” Duterte said angrily in a mix of Filipino and English.

“Don’t f**k with me, girls,” he said, calling Callamard “skinny” and “malnourished”, while referring to the ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda as “that black woman”.

The ICC has separately initiated legal steps to investigate Duterte for possible crimes against humanity related to the deadly drug war.

According to an opposition Filipino senator, the death toll in the Philippine drug war had surpassed 20,000, since Duterte came to office on June 30, 2016.

That number is being disputed by government officials, who insisted only 3,967 “drug personalities” were killed for resisting arrest during legitimate police operations between July 1, 2016, and November 27, 2017.

An Al Jazeera investigation, however, revealed that police officers were involved in attempted killings of unarmed drug suspects. Al Jazeera also recorded cases of children being killed by police officers.

Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/3/9/duterte-attacks-rights-officials-callamard-andbensouda. Last accessed on January 2, 2020.

31

8

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

“Look at the crime rate! Who are the victims? Kids. Drug addicts raping a six-month-old baby,” he said. “Son of a b***h, I will really kill you. You do not deserve a minute longer.”

Addressing the ICC, Duterte called the international body, “foolish”, adding “I don’t know if they even passed the law examination, these devils.” Duterte had been under fire several times for making misogynistic comments against female critics and making jokes about rape. In February, he also said that female communist rebels should be shot in their genitals. xxx Earlier on Wednesday, Zeid, the UN human rights chief, had criticised Duterte for telling police officers not to cooperate with international human rights investigators.

He also condemned a statement issued by a Duterte spokesman, who said Callamard is welcome to “swim in Pasig River”, a highly polluted body of water in the Philippine capital, if she comes to Manila to do the investigation of the deadly drug war.

Article 70 finds application during any phase of the proceedings, whether during the investigation, pre-trial proceedings, sentencing, or appeal.32 These threats having been made by reason of the OTP’s decision to investigate the extra-judicial killings in the Philippines, and respondent Duterte appears to be seeking to intimidate ICC officials and to retaliate against them, in contravention of Article 70 (d) and (e) of the Rome Statute.

Furthermore, said conduct constitutes non-cooperation and non-compliance with the Court, and thus implicates state responsibility under Article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute.

When the Office of the Prosecutor recently reported in December 2020 that it had found “reasonable basis” to believe that crimes against humanity had been committed in the Philippines33, government officials proceeded to undermine the OTP and the prosecutor herself.

Presidential spokesperson Heminio “Harry” L. Roque, Jr. commented on the report in a radio interview: “Alam ninyo sa totoo lang po, talagang namumulitika lang itong si Bensouda... Gumawa siya ng paraan para masabi, 'Oh, mayroon naman akong ibang pinuruhan.’[You know, Bensouda is politicking. She made a way to say, 'I am investigating other countries.']”. The chief presidential legal counsel also claimed misleadingly that the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute “removed [the Philippines] from its jurisdiction.”34 The Secretary of Interior and Local Government publicly denounced the report of the Prosecutor for being “false, biased, and without factual and legal basis.”35 Rules 63 and 163, ICC Rules of Procedure and Evidence ICC Office of the Prosecutor, REPORT ON PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION ACTIVITIES 2020, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/itemsDocuments/2020-PE/2020-pe-report-eng.pdf.

34 Jamaine Punzalan, Duterte aides accuse ICC prosecutor of 'playing politics' with drug war inquiry, ABSCBN News, December 16, 2020, available at: https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/12/16/20/duterte-aidesaccuse-icc-prosecutor-of-playing-politics-with-drug-war-inquiry. Last accessed on January 3, 2020.

35 Official Statement of the Department of Local and Interior Government on the ICC-OTP 2020 Report, December 17, 2020, available at: https://dilg.gov.ph/news/OFFICIAL-STATEMENT-OF-THE-DILG-ON-THEICC-OTP-2020-REPORT/NC-2020-1411.

32 33

9

Communication and Complaint by Rise Up for Life and for Rights (Third Supplemental) Situation in the Philippines

Pursuant to Rule 165 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, and within the reglementary period prescribed in Rule 164, the ICC Prosecutor should immediately initiate an investigation in relation to these offences against the administration of justice.

Respondent Duterte should be held accountable for his blatant attempt to pervert the course of justice by intimidating and retaliating against the officials of the Court.

PRAYER Complainants respectfully pray of the Honorable Prosecutor to ADMIT the additional evidence submitted through this Third Supplemental Pleading and CONSIDER the same in her decision on the disposition of herein Complaint.

Complainants respectfully REITERATE the prayer in the original complaint, and stress on the urgent need to OPEN an investigation into crimes against humanity in the Philippines.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hand on January 21, 2021 in Quezon City, Philippines.

IRMA J. LOCASIA

DENNISE B. DAVID

MARIA C. B. LOZANO

MARIEL F. SABANGAN

NORMITA B. LOPEZ

PURISIMA B. DACUMOS CHRISTINE L. PASCUAL

FR.GILBERT S. BILLENA Rise Up for Life and for Rights Assisted by: NATIONAL UNION OF PEOPLES’ LAWYERS (NUPL) Counsel for Complainants 3rd Floor, Erythrina Building 1 Maaralin corner Matatag Streets Central District, Quezon City, 1101 Metro Manila, Philippines Telephone number: +63 (2) 89206660 Email address: nupl2007@gmail.com 10