Former Philippine President Duterte Arrested, Faces ICC Charges for Crimes Against Humanity
In a landmark event echoing the pursuit of justice across international borders, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was apprehended at Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport on March 11, 2025, immediately upon his return from Hong Kong. He was subsequently extradited to The Hague, Netherlands, to stand trial before the International Criminal Court (ICC) for charges of crimes against humanity. This arrest marks a significant moment in international jurisprudence, underscoring the principle that no individual, regardless of their former position of power, is exempt from the rule of law. Duterte’s arrest is particularly relevant to the victims of his controversial "war on drugs," a campaign marred by allegations of widespread extrajudicial killings and human rights abuses.
The Movement Against Disinformation (MAD), spearheaded by its founding president and author of this article, affirms its solidarity with the victims of the drug war, individuals who have been subjected to systematic demonization, dehumanization, and silencing through a pervasive climate of fear and strategically deployed misinformation. Disinformation, MAD argues, played a pivotal role in creating a narrative that attempted to legitimize these alleged atrocities. The state, according to MAD, orchestrated the fabrication of evidence through tactics such as "tanim droga" schemes (planting of drugs), staged frame-ups, and the manipulative use of the term "nanlaban" (fought back) to justify extrajudicial killings.
MAD emphatically counters this narrative, citing official records indicating over 6,000 deaths in anti-drug operations, while human rights organizations estimate a significantly higher toll, potentially reaching 30,000, with the vast majority of victims being drawn from impoverished communities. MAD maintains that the ICC’s actions are firmly anchored in the Rome Statute, established tenets of international law, and domestic legal frameworks. However, the organization recognizes that the battle against disinformation persists and demands a concerted effort to counter its spread across various platforms, from street protests and international rallies to online engagements.
The ongoing disinformation campaign necessitates a multi-pronged approach to effectively combat its insidious effects. MAD has identified ten key points to address this challenge: First, disinformation campaigns are not spontaneous occurrences but rather carefully planned, organized, and directed by networks of individuals and groups. Second, identifying the root sources of these networks, which may include public relations agencies and practitioners, and dismantling their operations is critical. This requires leveraging existing research on disinformation networks, such as the work of scholars like Jonathan Ong. Third, tracing the financial flows that support these networks, exposing the sources of funding, and pursuing legal action against those involved is crucial, as these funds often originate from illicit or even criminal activities, potentially including foreign interests.
Fourth, recognizing the current dominance of disinformation campaigns both domestically and internationally, MAD emphasizes the urgent need to reverse this trend and plans to scale up its efforts accordingly. Fifth, while the disinformation campaign may not ultimately benefit Duterte’s legal defense at The Hague and could potentially backfire, MAD warns of its potential to significantly influence electoral outcomes in 2025 and especially in 2028. Sixth, existing laws offer sufficient mechanisms to target the networks, their origins, and funding sources, negating the need for new legislation that could potentially infringe on freedom of speech and expression.
Seventh, despite existing remedies, a significant gap remains in holding social media platforms – "big tech" – accountable for the disinformation they facilitate. MAD advocates for more effective measures to address this issue. Eighth, restrictions on freedom of speech and expression should only be implemented in cases of a clear and present danger of serious harm to society, such as through red-tagging or incitement to violence by individuals with significant online influence. However, the “clear and present danger” standard must be rigorously and narrowly interpreted. Ninth, those who propagate disinformation for financial gain, as opposed to genuine beliefs or patriotism, should not be afforded the protections of press freedom guarantees as they do not function as legitimate journalists. Conversely, journalists retain protections beyond free speech for their reporting, even in cases of inaccuracies or controversial viewpoints.
Finally, MAD underscores the need for a national, collective effort to combat disinformation, likening it to a societal plague. The pursuit of accountability for Duterte, culminating in his appearance at The Hague, is a testament to the cumulative impact of numerous actions taken since 2016. Paraphrasing journalist Maria Ressa, it took "a thousand cuts" to bring Duterte to face justice, and similarly, a multi-faceted and sustained effort will be required to dismantle the pervasive threat of disinformation. This collective responsibility requires vigilance and active participation from all segments of society to safeguard the truth and uphold democratic principles.
