The legal team of former president Rodrigo Duterte has asked the International Criminal Court (ICC) to suspend its adjudication on its interim release application, citing the need to submit additional information, but the prosecution has since objected the request.

In two documents uploaded separately on the ICC website, with the defense’s request dated July 14 and the prosecution’s request dated July 18, the two sides clashed over the interim release application that the defense has made last month.

Signed by lead counsel Nicholas Kaufman, the defense formally requested that the Pre-Trial Chamber I (PTC I) suspends its adjudication on Duterte’s interim release application because it plans to submit pertinent information relevant to its decision to grant the former president interim release.

“The Chamber, so it is submitted, should be in possession of all relevant materials, including [REDACTED], before making its first crucial determination on interim release,” the document read.

Specific details of the document are withheld or redacted because of confidentiality.

The defense cited the “slow-walked and stymied” process of receiving vital information from unspecified sources about the former chief executive’s interim release. An information, which is believed to be vital to PTC I’s decision regarding the interim release petition, has apparently been made available recently.

“In light of the aforementioned, the Pre-Trial Chamber is respectfully requested to suspend its adjudication of the request for interim release until such time as the Defence has assembled all information necessary to permit [REDACTED] to complete [REDACTED],” the conclusion and relief sought part of the document read.

However, in a separate filing, the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor asked PTC I to “reject” the defense’s request.

“The Defence chose when to file its urgent application for interim release (the ‘Request for Interim Release’), knowing that the submitted [REDACTED] was incomplete,” the document, signed by Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang, said.

“The Defence should not be permitted to suspend issuance of the decision on the basis that that it may, at some unknown point in the future, attempt to supplement its submission,” it added.

It argued that contrary to the defense’s claims that it has been “prejudiced,” it is the defense’s fault that “it is unable to substantiate assertions made in its own, urgent motion” because of filing the request “prematurely.”

The prosecution pointed out that it was the defense that previously said the Chamber should decide on the interim release application urgently and even requested that the Chamber reduce the prosecution’s time to respond.

It described the defense’s claim that the new information will be “vital” to the adjudication on the case as “speculative,” explaining that the defense can renew its application for interim release “should it have good cause to do so” if PTC I deny its first application.