In a dramatic turn of events, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested on 11 March in Manila on an International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for alleged crimes against humanity. The charges stem from his controversial “war on drugs,” a campaign that saw thousands killed under his administration from 2016 to 2022. Duterte, once a towering figure known for his brash rhetoric—including a notorious statement that he would be “happy to kill three million addicts”—now faces a reckoning that could reshape the political landscape of the Philippines.
The arrest, executed with unexpected precision by Philippine authorities in coordination with Interpol, marks a significant moment in the country’s turbulent history. It raises profound questions about accountability, public sentiment, and the future of Duterte’s political dynasty. As the nation watches, the battle for public opinion and the potential for extradition to The Hague loom large over a leader who built his legacy on defiance.
A Return Marked by Defiance
Duterte’s arrest followed intense speculation about his intentions after a recent trip to Hong Kong. Rumours swirled that he might seek asylum in China to evade capture, a theory fuelled by the Philippines’ often porous political secrets. However, such a move would have been fraught with complications. China, keen to project itself as a defender of the international rules-based order, has cooperated with Interpol in the past, including through the election of Yong Wang as Delegate for Asia at Interpol’s 92nd General Assembly in Glasgow in November 2024. Harbouring Duterte could have undermined Beijing’s global image. 
Ultimately, Duterte chose to return home. Analysts suggest that fleeing would have shattered his carefully cultivated image as a fearless strongman, a persona central to his political brand. By facing arrest on home soil, he retains the possibility of rallying his base and framing himself as a martyr against international overreach. Yet, whether this gambit will succeed remains uncertain in a country with complex and often contradictory views on power and victimhood.
The War on Drugs: A Brutal Legacy
At the heart of the ICC case are allegations of crimes against humanity linked to Duterte’s signature policy, the “war on drugs.” Launched shortly after he took office in 2016, the campaign aimed to eradicate drug use through aggressive policing. Official figures report over 6,000 deaths in police operations, though human rights groups estimate the true toll could be as high as 30,000, including extrajudicial killings by vigilantes allegedly emboldened by Duterte’s rhetoric.
His unapologetic stance—exemplified by his inflammatory remarks about killing millions—drew both fervent support and fierce condemnation. For many Filipinos, particularly in poorer communities plagued by drug-related crime, Duterte was a hero who brought order. For others, including international observers and local activists, his methods represented a horrifying disregard for human rights and the rule of law.
The ICC’s investigation, initiated in 2018, gained traction after Duterte left office, when the Philippines’ withdrawal from the court in 2019 no longer shielded him from scrutiny. If extradited, he would face a trial that could set a precedent for holding leaders accountable for state-sanctioned violence. However, the road to The Hague is far from certain, given domestic political dynamics and potential resistance from Duterte’s allies.
Public Opinion: Underdog or Fallen Strongman?
The arrest has ignited a fierce debate over Duterte’s place in the Filipino psyche. Two competing narratives dominate public discourse. On one hand, there is a cultural tendency to root for the underdog, a sentiment that could cast Duterte as a victim of international persecution. On the other, many Filipinos equate power with legitimacy, often viewing the defeated with contempt. As one local commentator noted, “Can a man who mocked the weak become a martyr when he falls?”
Duterte’s political identity complicates this further. His rise was rooted in rejecting the “people power” movements that defined Philippine democracy in the late 20th century, such as the 1986 revolution that ousted Ferdinand Marcos. Having positioned himself as an anti-protest, anti-mobilization leader, he may struggle to inspire the kind of mass support needed to challenge his arrest. While some anticipated unrest upon his return, the streets of Manila remained largely calm, suggesting that his charisma of intimidation works only as long as he remains untouchable.
Fractures in the Duterte Dynasty
Adding to the complexity are visible rifts within Duterte’s inner circle. His family and political allies appear divided at a critical juncture. His daughter, Vice President Sara Duterte, often seen as his political heir, has remained conspicuously silent since the arrest. Despite accompanying him to Hong Kong, she neither returned with him nor issued a public statement, a decision some interpret as a calculated move to preserve her own political future. As one observer on social media remarked, testing her influence now could backfire if public support fails to materialize.
Meanwhile, Duterte spent his final moments of freedom with his partner—referred to as his “common-law wife”—and close ally Senator Bong Go, rather than his children. This choice underscores a reported fracture between his immediate family and his second circle of confidants. Political analysts point to broader discontent among the elite, including business and political classes resentful of Duterte’s past disruptions and slights, as well as the perceived squandering of political capital by his eldest daughter.
The arrest of Apollo Quiboloy, a powerful religious leader and Duterte ally, on separate charges in Davao—Duterte’s political stronghold—further weakens his network. Similarly, the muted response to rallies by the Iglesia ni Cristo, another influential group, suggests that key pillars of support have been neutralised or are unwilling to mobilise on his behalf.
The Road to Extradition and Beyond
The immediate question is whether Duterte will be extradited to face trial at the ICC. While the Philippine government under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has shown willingness to cooperate with international bodies—partly to distance itself from Duterte’s policies—there are legal and political hurdles. Domestic courts may need to weigh in, and Duterte’s remaining allies in Congress could attempt to block the process.
If extradition proceeds, it would mark a historic moment, not just for the Philippines but for global justice. A trial could expose the full extent of abuses during the drug war, potentially implicating other officials. However, if Duterte remains in the Philippines, his arrest could still serve as a symbolic victory for accountability, even if a full reckoning is delayed.
Beyond the legal battle, the arrest poses existential questions for Duterte’s political machine. His movement, built on the image of unassailable strength, struggles to adapt to a narrative of defeat. The inability of his base to organise effectively during past showdowns, combined with the neutralisation of key allies, suggests that his influence may be waning. Yet, in a country where loyalty often shifts with the winds of power, a resurgence cannot be entirely ruled out.
A Nation at a Crossroads
Rodrigo Duterte’s arrest is more than a legal proceeding; it is a litmus test for the Philippines’ democratic resilience and its relationship with international norms. For a nation still grappling with the scars of authoritarianism—under Marcos Sr. and now Duterte—the case offers a chance to confront past abuses and redefine justice.
For now, the “Great Eagle Father,” as some of his supporters call him, sits behind bars, his defiance intact but his future uncertain. Whether he emerges as a martyr to rally his base or a cautionary tale of power’s limits depends on the coming days and the unpredictable currents of public opinion. What is clear is that the Philippines stands at a crossroads, with the world watching to see if accountability can triumph over impunity.
As speculation continues about the political fallout, one thing remains evident: Duterte’s arrest has reopened old wounds and ignited new debates. If confirmed, the charges against him could lead to a broader examination of state violence, though no evidence yet guarantees a conviction. For Filipinos and observers alike, the stakes could not be higher.
