Duterte’s ICC Trial: A Legal Battle and Political Drama Unfold in the Philippines

As former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte faces charges of crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court (ICC) over his brutal anti-narcotics campaign, a parallel battle is brewing on home soil. Supporters rallied at Liwasang Bonifacio in Manila on 15 March, holding prayers and protests in solidarity with the embattled ex-leader. Yet, beyond the courtroom in The Hague, Duterte’s camp appears to be orchestrating a deliberate strategy to transform the judicial process into a political spectacle, aimed at swaying public opinion and shaping the nation’s electoral future.

The charges stem from Duterte’s infamous “war on drugs,” which, according to human rights groups, resulted in thousands of extrajudicial killings between 2016 and 2022. The ICC’s investigation, launched after years of international outcry, has now placed the former president under unprecedented scrutiny. But as the legal proceedings unfold, observers warn that the trial risks becoming a stage for political theater, with far-reaching implications for the Philippines’ stability and democratic institutions.

A Dual Trial: Legal and Public

From the outset of the ICC pre-trial hearings, it has become evident that Duterte’s defense team is not solely focused on the courtroom. During the initial hearing on 15 March, Duterte’s preliminary counsel, Salvador Medialdea, launched a scathing attack on both the ICC and current Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Accusing the two of forming an “unlikely alliance” to orchestrate what he called the “kidnapping” of Duterte, Medialdea’s rhetoric was laden with political undertones. He went as far as to label the ICC a “troubled legal institution” desperate for a high-).

ICC Presiding Judge Iulia Motoc, unmoved by the accusations, reminded Medialdea that prior requests for postponement had been denied multiple times, emphasizing that the initial hearing required minimal preparation. Despite this, Medialdea persisted with his remarks—comments that legal analysts suggest were not intended for the judges but for the millions of Filipinos watching the proceedings. This tactic, experts argue, signals a clear intent to frame the trial as a narrative of victimhood and injustice in the court of public opinion.

The strategy appears multi-pronged. Analysts believe Duterte’s camp aims to stoke civil unrest, bolster support for allied candidates in the 2025 midterm elections, and ultimately pave the way for a return to power in the 2028 presidential race. By portraying Duterte as a frail, elderly figure persecuted by foreign powers, his team hopes to evoke sympathy and galvanize his base, particularly in regions like Mindanao, where his populist rhetoric has long resonated.

The ICC’s Challenge: Maintaining Judicial Integrity

The ICC now faces a delicate balancing act. Legal scholars caution that allowing the trial to be hijacked by political grandstanding risks undermining the court’s credibility. Duterte’s defense has already shown a willingness to exploit emotional and non-legal arguments, a tactic that could turn the proceedings into what one Manila-based commentator described as a “long-running soap opera” for Filipino audiences.

To counter this, ICC prosecutors and judges are urged to maintain strict control over the courtroom narrative. This includes promptly striking down irrelevant statements, issuing stern warnings, and imposing sanctions if necessary. There is also a growing call for the court to ensure that the trial does not appear as an exclusively foreign affair, which could fuel nationalist sentiments among Duterte’s supporters. Critics of the ICC argue that without visible Filipino representation or context in the proceedings, the narrative of “foreign interference” could gain traction, further polarizing the nation.

A Surge of Disinformation and Intimidation

Parallel to the legal battle, a wave of disinformation has swept across social media platforms in the Philippines. Troll accounts and manipulated news stories portraying Duterte as a victim of international conspiracy have proliferated, often in sync with key developments in the ICC case. On platforms like X, hashtags supporting Duterte have trended alongside false claims of judicial bias, amplifying the narrative of persecution.

More alarmingly, reports have emerged of harassment and intimidation targeting families of drug war victims, particularly in Mindanao. Human rights organizations note that many of these families fear for their safety, citing the violent tendencies of some Duterte loyalists. Such acts of coercion, if unchecked, could silence critical voices and further distort public perception of the trial.

The Drug War Legacy: A Nation Divided

At the heart of the ICC case lies Duterte’s controversial anti-drug campaign, which he launched upon taking office in 2016. Official figures from the Philippine government claim over 6,000 deaths during police operations, but independent estimates by groups like Human Rights Watch suggest the toll could be as high as 30,000, including vigilante killings allegedly encouraged by Duterte’s rhetoric. His unapologetic stance—often punctuated by public statements urging police to “kill” suspected drug users—drew both fervent support and fierce condemnation.

For many Filipinos, particularly in urban slums where drug-related crime was rampant, Duterte’s iron-fisted approach was seen as a necessary evil. Supporters at the Manila rally on 15 March echoed this sentiment, with some describing him as a “hero” who cleaned up the streets. “He did what others couldn’t” said Maria Reyes, a 52-year-old vendor attending the prayer rally. Yet, for the families of those killed, the campaign represents a dark chapter of impunity, one they hope the ICC trial will finally address.

The division over Duterte’s legacy extends into the political sphere. While his allies continue to wield significant influence, particularly through his daughter, Vice President Sara Duterte, opposition forces see the ICC trial as a chance to hold him accountable. However, the risk of politicizing the case looms large, with potential to deepen societal fractures ahead of critical elections.

Geopolitical and Domestic Implications

If the Duterte camp succeeds in framing the ICC trial as a foreign attack on Philippine sovereignty, it could have broader geopolitical ramifications. The Philippines, a key US ally in the Indo-Pacific, has oscillated between alignment with Western powers and a more independent, often China-friendly stance under Duterte. A surge in nationalist sentiment fueled by the trial might complicate Manila’s foreign relations, particularly if public opinion turns against international institutions like the ICC.

Domestically, the trial’s impact on the 2025 midterms cannot be understated. A strong showing by Duterte-backed candidates could embolden his political dynasty, potentially setting the stage for a comeback in 2028. Conversely, if public support wanes amid revelations from the trial, it could mark the beginning of a decline for his brand of populist politics.

A Test for Justice and Democracy

As the ICC trial progresses, it will test not only the court’s ability to deliver justice but also the resilience of Philippine democracy. The Duterte camp’s apparent strategy to “kidnap” the narrative risks turning a landmark case into a political weapon, one that could destabilize an already polarized nation. For the ICC, maintaining focus on the legal merits—while navigating the cultural and political sensitivities of the case—will be paramount.

For Filipinos, the trial is more than a reckoning with the past; it is a mirror to the nation’s future. Will the pursuit of accountability prevail over political maneuvering, or will the specter of Duterte’s legacy continue to shape the country’s trajectory? As hearings continue in The Hague and rallies persist in Manila, these questions hang heavy over a nation at a crossroads.