The amendment adds a URL metadata field to Nuix Discover to help identify web addresses linked to open-source evidence in the case.
The Registry of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has submitted an amended E-Court Protocol for the case against former President Rodrigo Duterte following an order from Trial Chamber III.
The Registry filed the amended protocol on Oct. 2 in compliance with the Chamber’s Sept. 28 decision approving a request by the prosecution to modify the electronic court system.
The amendment allows the creation of a URL metadata field within Nuix Discover, which enables the parties and the Chamber to identify the web address associated with open-source evidence.
The Registry’s submission was signed by Marc Dubuisson, Director of the Division of Judicial Services, on behalf of Registrar Osvaldo Zavala Giler.
The amended protocol followed the Chamber’s June 19 adoption of the E-Court Protocol, which sets the procedures for the electronic handling of evidence and other court materials in Duterte’s case.
The prosecution sought the amendment on Aug. 31.
The Chamber subsequently granted the request and directed the Registry to submit the amended protocol by Oct. 2.
The filing came days after the Chamber rejected a separate request from Duterte’s defense team to require an “Expert Verification” metadata field for open-source and user-generated evidence.
The defense had argued that the prosecution had disclosed a large volume of evidence, including duplicate and poor-quality materials, and sought expert verification to help determine the reliability of such evidence.
The Chamber noted that the prosecution’s evidence list alone contained more than 15,000 items excluding potentially exculpatory evidence and other materials.
However, the judges said requiring expert verification for all open-source and user-generated evidence could result in unnecessary work and potentially delay the start of the trial.
The Chamber instead said the defense may raise concerns about the admissibility or reliability of specific evidence when it is submitted, after which the prosecution may provide supporting materials, including expert verification, when necessary.
The Chamber also reiterated its directive for the parties to avoid submitting repetitive, irrelevant or excessively voluminous evidence.#