Rodrigo Duterte: From Tough-Talking Leader to ICC Accused

The Rise of Rodrigo Duterte: The “Nuisance" Candidate Who Took the Presidency

Rodrigo Duterte’s rise to power was as unexpected as it was dramatic. When he announced his candidacy for the 2016 Philippine presidential election, many initially dismissed him as a “nuisance candidate,” especially since he entered the race late.

His candidacy was already controversial from the start, as he had originally filed for re-election as mayor of Davao City. However, before the filing period ended, Duterte became the substitute candidate for PDP-Laban’s original standard-bearer, Martin Diño.

Diño withdrew his presidential bid to clear the way for Duterte, setting the stage for one of the most unconventional and surprising electoral victories in Philippine history.

As the long-time mayor of Davao City, Duterte was an outsider in national politics, going up against established political figures:

• Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago – a respected stateswoman known for her intellect and sharp wit.

• Vice President Jejomar Binay – a veteran politician with a strong grassroots network.

• Former Interior Secretary Mar Roxas – the administration’s official candidate, backed by then-President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III.

• Senator Grace Poe – an independent candidate and the adopted daughter of film legend Fernando Poe Jr., who ran for the presidency in 2004.

At first, it seemed like a three-way battle between Binay, Roxas, and Poe. Duterte was seen as an unconventional and unlikely contender, largely due to his brash personality, expletive-filled speeches, and unpolished public image. His campaign events often felt more like street rallies, with Duterte casually dressed, cracking crude jokes, and delivering fiery rhetoric that resonated with ordinary Filipinos.

But while traditional politicians were engaged in political infighting, Duterte’s popularity gradually surged, particularly among working-class voters who saw him as a no-nonsense alternative to the political elite.

His key campaign promise? To eradicate crime and illegal drugs within six months—a bold claim that many Filipinos, desperate for change, believed in.

Davao City’s “Punisher”: A Legacy of Fear and Admiration

Before entering national politics, Duterte had been the undisputed ruler of Davao City, serving as mayor for over two decades (1988–1998, 2001–2010, 2013–2016).

Duterte transformed Davao from a crime-ridden city into what many called “one of the safest cities in the Philippines.” However, his leadership style was deeply controversial.

He earned the nickname “The Punisher” due to his iron-fisted approach to law enforcement. Under his rule, crime rates reportedly dropped, but human rights organisations accused him of enabling, if not directly ordering, extrajudicial killings.

The most notorious aspect of his tenure was his alleged connection to the Davao Death Squad (DDS)—a vigilante group responsible for executing suspected criminals, often without trial. Although Duterte never fully admitted to leading DDS, he often made incriminating remarks, at times even boasting about personally killing criminals.

His leadership in Davao City divided public opinion. Supporters credited him for bringing order, while critics accused him of turning a blind eye to state-sponsored killings. Regardless, his reputation as a crime-fighter played a pivotal role in his meteoric rise to the presidency.

The War on Drugs: From Promise to Humanitarian Crisis

On June 30, 2016, Rodrigo Duterte was sworn in as the 16th President of the Philippines, and he wasted no time in implementing his most infamous campaign promise—the war on drugs.

Rodrigo Duterte launched Oplan Tokhang, an aggressive anti-drug campaign that resulted in the deaths of thousands of suspected drug users and dealers. While the government justified the operations as necessary for public safety, the campaign quickly became notorious for its brutality and lack of due process.

According to official government figures, around 6,000 people were killed in anti-drug operations between 2016 and 2022. However, human rights organisations argue that the actual death toll could be significantly higher, possibly exceeding 30,000, with many of the killings linked to police abuses and extrajudicial executions carried out by death squads.

Critics of Duterte’s drug war highlighted its disproportionate impact on the poor, noting that low-income communities bore the brunt of the crackdown, while high-profile drug lords and corrupt officials largely escaped prosecution.

Reports also emerged of police officers manipulating crime scenes, planting evidence, and extorting money from suspects, further fuelling concerns about widespread abuse of power. Despite the mass killings, the illegal drug trade persisted, proving that Duterte’s approach failed to address the root causes of the problem.

Duterte’s unapologetic stance on human rights abuses drew condemnation from world leaders, including Pope Francis and former US President Barack Obama. When questioned about extrajudicial killings, Duterte lashed out at Obama in 2016, calling him a "son of a b**ch." The remark led to the cancellation of a scheduled bilateral meeting between the two leaders.

While international critics faced Duterte’s verbal attacks, local opponents endured far worse consequences. Among the most high-profile cases was Senator Leila de Lima, a former justice secretary who had launched a Senate inquiry into extrajudicial killings. In 2017, she was arrested on politically motivated drug charges and imprisoned for nearly seven years before being acquitted in 2023.

Duterte’s crackdown also extended to the media, particularly outlets that reported critically on his administration. In 2020, ABS-CBN, the Philippines’ largest television network, was forced off the air after Congress refused to renew its franchise, a move widely seen as retaliation for its critical coverage. Meanwhile, Maria Ressa, veteran journalist and CEO of the news platform Rappler, faced multiple legal cases, including cyber libel, leading to a conviction that was later overturned.

Throughout his presidency, Duterte systematically targeted the free press and opposition figures, prompting fears of democratic backsliding and an erosion of civil liberties in the Philippines.

Withdrawal from ICC

Due to mounting concerns from both local and international human rights organisations over the massive killings linked to Duterte’s war on drugs, several groups filed cases with the ICC, particularly regarding allegations of state-sanctioned executions.

The ICC’s involvement was triggered by a formal complaint in 2017, filed by Filipino lawyer Jude Sabio, who accused Duterte and his officials of committing crimes against humanity. This complaint was supported by testimony from former police officers and self-confessed hitmen, who alleged that Duterte had directly ordered or encouraged extrajudicial killings, even during his time as mayor of Davao City.

The case was further reinforced by opposition figures and human rights advocates, including former senator Antonio Trillanes IV, who provided additional evidence of police abuses and state-sponsored violence.

In 2018, ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda announced a preliminary examination into Duterte’s war on drugs, assessing whether there was enough evidence to justify a full investigation.

Duterte reacted aggressively, denying the ICC’s jurisdiction and arguing that the Philippine judicial system was fully capable of addressing human rights violations.

He dismissed the probe as foreign interference, claiming it was politically motivated. In March 2019, Duterte formally withdrew the Philippines from the ICC, a move widely seen as an attempt to evade accountability.

However, the ICC maintained that it retained jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed before the withdrawal took effect, meaning Duterte could still be investigated for actions taken prior to March 2019.

In September 2021, the ICC formally authorised an investigation, stating that there was strong evidence of crimes against humanity.

Despite this, Duterte refused to cooperate, repeatedly dismissing the ICC’s inquiry as an attack on Philippine sovereignty. His administration maintained that the anti-drug campaign was a legitimate law enforcement initiative, aimed at reducing crime and dismantling drug syndicates.

However, families of victims, human rights organisations, and international bodies continued to demand justice and accountability, arguing that the Duterte administration enabled a culture of impunity and systematically targeted the most vulnerable sectors of society.

Duterte’s Foreign Policy: A Shift Towards China and Russia

Unlike his predecessors, Duterte sought to distance the Philippines from the United States, its long-standing military ally, in favour of closer ties with China and Russia.

One of his most controversial foreign policy moves was his decision to downplay the 2016 ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which had invalidated China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea. Instead of asserting Philippine sovereignty, Duterte embraced economic diplomacy, securing billions of dollars in Chinese investments and loans.

However, critics argued that his soft stance on China allowed Chinese military expansion in the disputed waters, harassment of Filipino fishermen, and increased Chinese influence in Philippine infrastructure projects.

Similarly, Duterte strengthened ties with Russia, frequently expressing admiration for Vladimir Putin and expanding defence cooperation.

While Duterte’s realignment in foreign policy was framed as a move toward greater independence, it also raised concerns about the Philippines' strategic vulnerabilities. The United States had long been the Philippines' primary defence ally, with agreements such as the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) and the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) serving as pillars of regional security.

Duterte repeatedly threatened to terminate these agreements, arguing that the Philippines should not be dependent on foreign military forces. However, geopolitical realities, including tensions in the South China Sea and threats from extremist groups, ultimately led to the suspension of his decision to cancel the VFA. By the end of his presidency, Duterte’s administration had maintained security ties with the U.S., though relations remained strained.

Duterte’s foreign policy shift had lasting implications for the Philippines. While he succeeded in diversifying the country’s diplomatic engagements, his approach also exposed weaknesses in his strategy, including the promised Chinese investments, which did not fully materialise, and territorial disputes in the South China Sea remained unresolved.

The Marcos-Duterte Alliance and Falling Out

By the 2022 presidential election, Rodrigo Duterte was already seen as a lame-duck president, with his term nearing its end.

The battle to succeed him centred on two key figures: then Vice President Leni Robredo, the leading opposition candidate, and Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., son of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr. Notably, Duterte’s father had once served as a minister in Marcos Sr.’s administration.

In a historical twist, Marcos Jr. formed an alliance with Duterte’s daughter, Sara Duterte-Carpio, who had succeeded her father as mayor of Davao City. She became his running mate under the UniTeam banner—a coalition that brought together the Marcos dynasty from the north and the Duterte dynasty from the south. This partnership united their devoted supporters and ultimately led to their landslide victory in 2022.

It was a marriage of convenience for both parties. Marcos Jr. relied on Sara Duterte’s popularity, particularly in the southern Philippines, to secure victory, while the Duterte camp sought a powerful ally in government to shield them from potential legal consequences.

Therefore, the Marcos-Duterte alliance was unsurprising. After all, it was Duterte himself who allowed the burial of Marcos Sr.’s remains at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (Heroes’ Cemetery)—a longstanding demand of the Marcos family that previous administrations had rejected.

For the first time in decades, the Philippines had a president and vice president from the same ticket, unlike past administrations where political rivalry often led to tensions between the two offices. But this alliance did not last long.

A Brewing Rivalry

While supporters celebrated, critics saw the Marcos-Duterte coalition as a dangerous consolidation of power. Both families had histories of human rights violations—from Marcos Sr.’s martial law era to Duterte’s war on drugs. The UniTeam alliance seemed like a force that would shield both from accountability, particularly regarding crimes committed under martial law and the bloody drug war.

This concern became more palpable when Marcos Jr. was asked if he would allow the ICC to investigate Duterte’s human rights cases.

He said, "I'll allow them to come here [in the Philippines] as tourists because the way I understand it, the ICC is there if there is no judiciary operating in a country, like if there's a war or the economy collapses, or for whatever reason, that's when the ICC comes in. We have a functioning judiciary; that's why I do not see the need for a foreigner to come and do the job for us and for our judicial system."

However, by mid-2023, cracks in their alliance began to show. One of the earliest signs of tension was Marcos Jr.'s refusal to appoint Sara Duterte as Defence Secretary, despite her apparent desire for the position. Instead, she was given the post of Education Secretary, which she reluctantly accepted.

Further differences emerged in foreign policy. While the Dutertes leaned pro-China, Marcos Jr. moved back towards the country’s traditional ally, the United States.

He strengthened ties with Washington, reinforced Philippine claims in the South China Sea, and backed the 2016 Arbitration Ruling against China. This did not sit well with Beijing. In July 2023, Chinese President Xi Jinping even invited former President Duterte to China in a highly publicised visit, seen as an attempt to undermine Marcos Jr.’s foreign policy shift.

But Marcos Jr. stood firm.

The Marcos-Duterte Feud Explodes

By mid-2024, tensions between Marcos Jr. and Sara Duterte had escalated further.

In July 2024, Sara Duterte resigned as Education Secretary, a clear indication of her growing discontent. By September 2024, she publicly stated that she and Marcos Jr. were "never friends", but merely running mates for political convenience.

The feud between Marcos Jr. and Sara Duterte took a personal and political turn when legislators—primarily Marcos Jr.'s allies in Congress—launched an investigation into the Office of the Vice President's "confidential funds."

The inquiry focused on the alleged misuse and lack of transparency surrounding these funds, which had been allocated to Sara Duterte’s office without clear justification. The controversy further deepened the rift between the two factions, escalating tensions within the ruling coalition.

In October 2024, Sara Duterte lashed out at Marcos Jr., claiming he "does not know how to be president" and has led the country "on the road to hell." She even claimed in a bizarre statement that she had dreamed of beheading Marcos Jr. and threatened to exhume Ferdinand Marcos Sr.’s body and throw his remains into the West Philippine Sea.

The situation worsened in November 2024, when Sara Duterte allegedly communicated with a contract killer, suggesting that if she were assassinated, Marcos Jr., his wife Liza, and House Speaker Martin Romualdez should also be targeted. The Marcos administration saw this as an active threat, which ultimately led to Sara Duterte's impeachment by the House of Representatives on February 5, 2025.

By this point, the political battle was no longer just between Marcos Jr. and Sara Duterte—it had escalated into a full-blown war between their families, political allies, and supporters.

The Arrest of Rodrigo Duterte

The Marcos-Duterte rivalry became even more intense in the lead-up to the May 2025 mid-term elections, with both families fielding candidates from local positions up to the Senate. As campaign season heated up, so did public attacks between the two camps.

Then, in a dramatic turn of events, Rodrigo Duterte was arrested on March 11, 2025, upon his arrival at Ninoy Aquino International Airport in Manila. He had just returned from Hong Kong, where he was campaigning for his political allies running in the upcoming elections.

Duterte’s family and supporters immediately condemned the arrest, calling it "illegal detention." The 79-year-old former president, who had known health issues, was denied requests for hospitalisation. Instead, by the evening of March 11, he was placed on a jet and flown to The Hague, Netherlands, where he was transferred to the custody of the ICC.

The swift nature of his arrest led his family to call it an "abduction," blaming Marcos Jr. for orchestrating the transfer. However, in a press conference, Marcos Jr. defended his actions, stating that he was merely upholding the rule of law. The arrest warrant from the ICC had come through via Interpol, and since the Philippines is a member of Interpol, the Philippine National Police assisted in carrying out the arrest.

Be that as it may, the ICC has no authority to arrest Duterte if the Philippine government refuses to cooperate, as it relies on member states to enforce its arrest warrants because the ICC does not have its own police force. Since the Philippines is no longer an ICC member, Duterte's arrest remains uncertain on legal and jurisdictional grounds.

For his allies, the arrest is viewed as a political manoeuvre by the Marcos Jr. administration, perceived as an attack on their camp. Many believe that his transfer to the ICC was a deliberate act of handing over the former leader to a foreign court.

Due to the nature of Duterte's arrest, his legal counsel, British-Israeli lawyer Nicholas Kaufman, confidently believes that the former president will be acquitted immediately. In an interview, he stated, "We will be filing all necessary applications in due course... [he] was completely denied all his rights in the Philippines. That will obviously be a heated argument in the course of his defence."

On March 14, 2025, Duterte appeared before the ICC, where he was formally charged with crimes against humanity. His confirmation of charges hearing was scheduled for September 2025.

In addition to his supporters demanding his return to the Philippines, Beijing, a close ally of Duterte, has expressed its concern, stating that it is closely monitoring the situation and urging the ICC to prevent politicisation while upholding impartiality and the rule of law.

As his supporters, family, and political allies called for his repatriation, human rights organisations and victims’ families celebrated the development, believing that justice was finally being served.

Is Duterte’s Influence Diminishing?

Despite his arrest, Rodrigo Duterte’s popularity remains strong, especially in his hometown of Davao City, where he was actually running for mayor in the 2025 election.

According to the Commission on Elections, Duterte remains an eligible candidate, as the Omnibus Election Code allows candidates with pending cases, without conviction, to run. This means that Duterte could still win, even while being detained in The Hague.

Meanwhile, daily protests and rallies continue, with his supporters demanding his release and blaming Marcos Jr. for betraying their alliance.

Duterte’s arrest has deepened political divisions in an already polarised Philippines. His supporters see him as a victim of political persecution, while human rights groups see his ICC trial as long-overdue accountability.

In the recent national survey conducted by the Social Weather Station (SWS), commissioned by Stratbase, 51% of Filipino respondents agreed that Duterte should be held accountable for all the extrajudicial killings (EJK) associated with his war on drugs. The survey, which included 1,800 respondents, was conducted between February 15 and 19, 2025.

As Rodrigo Duterte’s trial unfolds, the Philippines stands at a defining moment. A conviction could reaffirm international justice and the rule of law, setting a precedent for accountability in Philippine politics. Yet, an acquittal could be seen as a vindication for his supporters, strengthening his influence even from afar.

Regardless of the verdict, the divisions within the country will not easily fade. His supporters remain steadfast, his critics continue to push for justice, and the political landscape remains volatile.

Whether this chapter ends with justice served, a leader restored, or a nation further divided, one thing is certain—the story of Rodrigo Duterte is far from over.

-Asia Media Centre