The International Criminal Court is examining allegations of a chilling, systematic campaign of violence orchestrated during the presidency of Rodrigo Duterte. Prosecutors presented evidence Tuesday detailing what they claim was a nationwide program of state-sponsored killings, masked as anti-drug operations, reaching into the lives of thousands.
The core of the prosecution’s argument centers on the “Davao model,” a brutal strategy Duterte honed during his time as mayor of Davao City. This approach, focused on eliminating illegal drugs through lethal force, was allegedly expanded to encompass the entire nation after he assumed the presidency in 2016.
Currently, prosecutors are building a case for crimes against humanity, focusing on the deaths of 14 individuals labeled as “high-value targets” and the murders or attempted murders of 45 others during localized operations. The evidence seeks to demonstrate a clear pattern of responsibility extending to the highest levels of government.
“Mr. Duterte campaigned on a promise to replicate the Davao model nationally, and once in office, he delivered on that pledge,” stated a trial lawyer during a recent hearing. This wasn’t a spontaneous outbreak of violence, but a deliberate and calculated policy, according to the prosecution.
Central to this alleged policy was “Project Double Barrel,” launched almost immediately after Duterte’s inauguration. This project comprised two distinct components: “Tokhang,” targeting street-level drug users in impoverished communities, and “HVT,” focused on eliminating high-profile figures involved in the drug trade.
A key piece of evidence revolves around the repeated use of the term “neutralize” in official police reports. While seemingly innocuous, prosecutors argue that internal testimony reveals this word functioned as a coded order to kill, understood as such within the police force itself.
One witness, in a sworn deposition, explicitly stated that “neutralize” was used to convey President Duterte’s kill orders. This chilling detail suggests a deliberate attempt to obscure the true nature of the operations and shield those responsible from accountability.
Prosecutors also presented evidence of a document known as the “PRRD list” – a roster bearing the President’s initials, containing names and photographs of suspected drug offenders. This list, according to an insider, served as a targeting registry, effectively a “dead list” where individuals were marked for elimination.
The case of Rolando Espinosa, a mayor publicly identified by Duterte and later killed inside a jail cell, exemplifies the alleged pattern of extrajudicial killings. While authorities claimed Espinosa died in a shootout, prosecutors contend the scene was meticulously staged to conceal the truth.
The prosecution is also leveraging Duterte’s own televised speeches, where he explicitly encouraged security forces to kill suspects and offered them assurances of protection from legal repercussions. These statements, they argue, demonstrate intent and establish command responsibility.
The court has heard testimony indicating that nearly 1,500 people were killed in anti-drug operations within the first year of Duterte’s presidency. As the proceedings continue, defense lawyers are preparing to respond to these grave accusations, setting the stage for a critical examination of events that have shaken the Philippines.
