Former President Rodrigo Roa Duterte (FPRRD) was arrested at Manila's international airport and transferred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. He faces charges of crimes against humanity related to his "war on drugs," which claimed thousands of lives between 2016 and 2022. This is the first time a Philippine head of state has been held for international prosecution.
A historic first of development wherein a former president was arrested on an international arrest warrant shook the politics of the country and mobilized critics, admirers, government officials, and international organizations into action. The arrest is the culmination of years of probes into Duterte's bloody campaign on illegal drugs that were reported to have claimed thousands of extrajudicial killings as a Davao City mayor and president of the Philippines from 2016 to 2022.
The chronology of the events has far-reaching consequences for the midterm election campaign, congressional politics, global justice, and the ongoing battle for accountability in human rights abuse cases.
The arrest and transfer
In the early morning hours of March 11, Interpol Manila received the official copy of the arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court against the former president. This set in motion an operation that would unfold on the very same day. At approximately 9:20 a.m., Duterte arrived at Ninoy Aquino International Airport Terminal 3 from Hong Kong, where he was immediately taken into custody by Philippine authorities.
The former president campaigned in Hong Kong for senatorial candidates before the May 12 midterm elections and planned to run for mayor of Davao City again. Upon his return, Duterte, who was photographed walking with a cane, was arrested by the Philippine National Police on an Interpol Red Notice. He was then brought to Villamor Air Base for temporary detention and was administered a medical examination for health reasons.
Access to him was limited, with more than 370 police personnel deployed. With the escalating tensions, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. ordered Duterte's transfer to The Hague for turnover to the International Criminal Court, disclosing coordination between Philippine law enforcers and international law enforcement to neutralize possible unrest.
Duterte’s claims and defense
Before his arrest, Duterte claimed that everything he has done in the war on drugs has been for the gain of the Filipino people and not for vested interests. In a campaign rally in Hong Kong, he asserted, "I did what I did for the Filipino people."
This statement highlighted his defense of the controversial anti-drug campaign, which he framed as essential for public safety against perceived threats to society. He further reinforced this narrative by rhetorically asking, "Why did I do that? For my own benefit? No, it was for you and your kids." Following his arrest at Villamor Air Base, he protested the legality of his detention and insisted that he be shown the legal basis for his detention, asserting that it was not on his own volition.
Duterte restated his stand that the ICC has no jurisdiction over him and the country after its 2019 withdrawal from the Rome Statute, questioning the foundation of any purported crimes and demanding trials in the local courts. Though having previously belittled issues on international detention and human rights complaints, the threat of detention appeared to shift his tone with greater emphasis on due process.
Critics pointed out the drastic inconsistency with this position and his earlier stand of extrajudicial measures against drug suspects. Nevertheless, he remains unapologetic, arguing that his controversial policies are essential for maintaining peace and security in the Philippines.
A call for people power
In an escalated political response to Duterte's arrest, former presidential spokesperson Harry Roque called for supporters to gather at EDSA in a demonstration reminiscent of the 1986 People Power Revolution that toppled the Marcos dictatorship.
The appeal to public mobilization represented perhaps the most direct challenge to the legitimacy of the arrest and the current administration's handling of the situation.
"We are calling on people to exercise their democratic rights to make their voices heard. What is at stake here is not just the rights of Former President Duterte, but the rights of all Filipinos as a sovereign nation," Roque declared during an interview with One News.
Roque framed the issue as national sovereignty, aiming to engage those concerned with Philippine independence beyond Duterte's supporters. He argued that no law mandates treating certain notices as arrest warrants, challenging the legal basis of operations. Roque outlined the legal actions being pursued, stating he and Duterte's team were filing habeas corpus and certiorari petitions in court.
"A habeas corpus petition because the ICC's warrant is not a legal basis for arrest, and a certiorari petition because the cooperation of President (Marcos) and the PNP constitutes grave abuse of discretion," he explained.
These legal measures were the outcry against the detention and relocation of Duterte, even if the rapidity with which the incidents happened, culminating in Duterte already on his way to The Hague by the evening, put into question the usefulness of these legal remedies considering that the former leader was already beyond Philippine jurisdiction when the objections could be thoroughly heard by the courts.
The duality she faces
Vice President Sara Duterte's response to the situation reflected her dual role, a high-ranking government official and the child of the detained former leader, while emphasizing her filial loyalty. In a characterization that gained immediate media attention, Vice President Duterte described her father's arrest as "state kidnapping" during an impromptu interview at Villamor Air Base where she had been denied entry to visit him.
Her failed bid to see her detained father at Villamor Air Base, after being rejected, underscored family separation and even possible state overreach, and was a media top story. She was set to accompany him to The Hague. The tension between leaders of the country underscored a weakening of their political alliance and questioned government stability. Her statement of "state kidnapping" marked a significant challenge to President Marcos, intensifying executive branch tensions during a crucial time.
A late night address on the arrest
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. released a statement on the arrest and detention of former President Duterte, justifying the legality of what the Philippine authorities had conducted. He stated, "We followed every necessary procedure," stressing the legality in issuing the warrant as well as the respect afforded Duterte's rights.
Marcos refutes the complaints of Duterte's lawyers, characterizing the arrest as a normal police operation rather than a political one. "It is proper and correct," he told reporters, putting aside charges of impropriety. He went on to explain that the Philippines worked with Interpol, not the ICC, and what the world was looking for in democratic leadership.
The concept of the arrest placed it as the expression of international obligation and distancing from the ICC, thereby potentially allaying domestic sovereignty concerns and leaving the door open to the international warrant. Despite the Philippines' withdrawal from the ICC under Duterte, it remains part of the global law enforcement community via Interpol.
When faced with accusations of political motivation, President Marcos rebuffed such claims, emphasizing the ICC investigation's initiation in 2017, prior to his presidency. The administration portrays the arrest as the climax of a lengthy legal process, not a political move, asserting its role in law enforcement without vendetta against Duterte. Marcos’ acknowledgment of Duterte's quick transfer to The Hague suggests thorough preparation and collaboration with international entities, countering ideas that the operation was impulsive or disorganized.
Implications on the night of justice
The arrest of the Former President Duterte is a historic shift in Philippine history, with an aftermath for local politics and global justice. The groundbreaking move has the consequence that no politicians are exempted from the law for crimes against humanity, and it may transform politicians' dependence on violence as a means of governing. The rapidity and synchrony of the events—from Duterte's arrival in Manila to extradition to The Hague—reveal meticulous pre-planning by the government and global agencies, such as Interpol and ICC.
The move is apparently designed to forestall legal challenges or social unrest, evidencing the incumbent administration's determination at the cost of political sacrifice. The arrest follows heightened tension between the Duterte and Marcos dynasties, which previously spoke as a unified voice during the 2022 elections, threatening to make the next administration complicated and deliver rival power factions.
Also it raises electoral stakes, with possible effects on voter mood and party loyalties closely watched as the political scene of alliance and coalition for the midterm election might happen in response to his arrest by an international body.
The case concerning the ICC's jurisdiction over the Philippines’ post-withdrawal from the Rome Statute raises critical legal issues. While the ICC asserts jurisdiction over crimes committed when the Philippines was a member, this claim is disputed by supporters of Duterte.
Meanwhile, employing an Interpol Red Notice to execute the ICC warrant provides an available route for global justice when cooperation with the ICC was hard to attain. For Filipinos, Duterte's arrest and transfer to the ICC are a reckoning moment regarding the drug war record. Reactions are binary; human rights advocates eagerly anticipate possible accountability, while Duterte supporters view this as political persecution and highlight divisions in society.
Harry Roque's call for demonstrations along the lines of the 1986 revolution is a signal of potential civil unrest, which will push the Marcos administration to balance legal propriety with political stability in the context of such tensions.
On the international stage, this case is being closely monitored internationally as a critical test of the ICC effectiveness. It marks one of the highest-profile arrests in the international tribunal’s history, which could affect perceptions of its relevance and power.
The Philippine government's cooperation, much as it accompanies pulling out of the ICC, can persuade other countries to follow suit and reinforce the court's stance in the international legal context. With trials of the former president Duterte already set to commence in The Hague, they will affect not only his own destiny but also the general dynamics of international criminal justice and human rights accountability.
In the Philippines, there is doubt where local politics conflict with international events. The split executive branch has Vice President Sara Duterte calling the arrest "state kidnapping," while President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is claiming it as rightful. And protest cries also raise doubt, challenging the mettle of Filipino democracy. In the end, Duterte's arrest will mark in Philippine history and in international criminal law development.
The stage is set to unlock a process that will continue to unfold on national and international scenes, with deep significance for accountability, sovereignty, and rule of law. Filipino political commentator Richard Heydarian noted Duterte's arrest marks "the start of a new chapter in Philippine history," and the entire saga is yet to be written.
