Supreme Court and ICC Targeted by Disinformation Campaign Following Duterte’s Arrest: A Deep Dive into the Spread of Fake News
MANILA, PHILIPPINES - The arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte on March 11, 2024, on charges of crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court (ICC) has sent shockwaves across the globe. The arrest, stemming from Duterte’s controversial "war on drugs" that allegedly claimed the lives of nearly 30,000 people, has not only reignited debates about accountability and justice but has also sparked a disinformation campaign targeting both the Philippine Supreme Court and the ICC. This article delves into the events surrounding Duterte’s arrest, the subsequent spread of fake news, and the implications of disinformation on judicial processes and public perception.
 |
| ICC Photo |
Rodrigo Duterte, the 16th President of the Philippines, served from 2016 to 2022. His presidency was marked by a brutal anti-drug campaign that drew widespread condemnation from human rights organizations and the international community. Critics accused Duterte of endorsing extrajudicial killings, with reports suggesting that thousands of suspected drug users and dealers were killed by police and vigilantes. Despite these allegations, Duterte maintained significant domestic support, with many Filipinos viewing his tough-on-crime stance as necessary for public safety.
In 2018, the ICC launched a preliminary examination into the drug war, and in 2021, it announced a formal investigation. Duterte, however, withdrew the Philippines from the ICC in 2019, claiming the court had no jurisdiction over him. Despite this, the ICC proceeded with its investigation, culminating in the issuance of an arrest warrant on March 11, 2024. Duterte was taken into custody at Villamor Air Base in Manila and later flown to The Hague, Netherlands, to face trial The Hearing: A Procedural Step Toward Justice.
The Role of the Philippine Supreme Court
On the same day as Duterte’s arrest, Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa, a close ally of Duterte and former chief of the Philippine National Police, filed a petition with the Philippine Supreme Court. The petition sought a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt Duterte’s transfer to the ICC. Dela Rosa argued that the arrest violated Duterte’s constitutional rights and questioned the ICC’s jurisdiction over the former president.
The Supreme Court, in response, conducted a special raffle to assign the petition to a justice and scheduled a virtual deliberation. However, no TRO was issued immediately, as the court needed time to review the 94-page petition. Despite this, disinformation began to spread rapidly, claiming that the Supreme Court had already granted the TRO in Duterte’s favor.
The Disinformation Campaign
The spread of fake news began on the night of March 11, just hours after Duterte’s arrest. Social media platforms were flooded with posts claiming that the Supreme Court had issued a TRO, effectively preventing Duterte’s transfer to the ICC. These false claims were amplified by Duterte’s supporters, who used them to justify protests outside Villamor Air Base and to fuel outrage against the arrest.
Duterte’s legal team, including lawyer Israelito Torreon, further contributed to the confusion by publicly stating that they had received information about the issuance of a TRO. Torreon and his colleagues even visited the Supreme Court compound late at night to verify the claims, despite the court’s operating hours ending at 4:30 pm. This move lent an air of credibility to the disinformation, as it suggested that the legal team had insider knowledge.
The false narrative was further propagated by pro-Duterte media outlets and social media influencers, who framed the arrest as an attack on Philippine sovereignty and a violation of Duterte’s rights. Supporters argued that the Supreme Court’s alleged TRO meant Duterte could not be extradited to the ICC, despite the lack of any official confirmation.
The Supreme Court’s Response
On March 12, Supreme Court spokesperson Camille Sue Mae Ting issued a statement to clarify the situation. She emphasized that no TRO had been issued and that the court had, in fact, denied the petition after a majority vote. Ting explained that the petitioners had failed to establish a clear and unmistakable right to the immediate issuance of a TRO. The court also uploaded its full resolution on Dela Rosa’s petition, providing transparency and countering the false claims.
Despite these efforts, the disinformation had already taken root, with many supporters refusing to accept the Supreme Court’s clarification. This highlights the challenges faced by judicial institutions in combating fake news, particularly in highly polarized political environments.
The ICC and Disinformation
The ICC, too, has been a target of disinformation campaigns. Critics of the court, including Duterte’s allies, have accused it of being a tool of Western powers and of unfairly targeting leaders from the Global South. These narratives have been amplified by state-sponsored media and online trolls, who seek to undermine the ICC’s legitimacy.
In the case of Duterte, fake news stories have claimed that the ICC lacks jurisdiction over the former president and that the charges against him are politically motivated. These claims ignore the fact that the ICC’s investigation was initiated following a referral from the Philippine government in 2018, before Duterte withdrew the country from the court.
The spread of fake news following Duterte’s arrest underscores the growing threat of disinformation to judicial processes and democratic institutions. By sowing confusion and undermining trust in the courts, disinformation campaigns can erode the rule of law and hinder the pursuit of justice.
In the Philippines, where political polarization is deeply entrenched, disinformation has become a powerful tool for shaping public opinion and mobilizing support. The case of Duterte’s arrest illustrates how fake news can be weaponized to protect political figures from accountability and to stoke nationalist sentiments.
Moreover, the targeting of the ICC highlights the challenges faced by international institutions in addressing crimes against humanity. Disinformation campaigns can undermine the credibility of these institutions and make it more difficult to hold perpetrators accountable.
The arrest of Rodrigo Duterte and the subsequent disinformation campaign targeting the Philippine Supreme Court and the ICC serve as a stark reminder of the power of fake news in the digital age. As judicial institutions grapple with the spread of false information, it is imperative for governments, civil society, and tech companies to work together to combat disinformation and uphold the rule of law.
The case also underscores the importance of media literacy and critical thinking in an era where misinformation can spread rapidly and have far-reaching consequences. By equipping citizens with the tools to discern fact from fiction, societies can build resilience against disinformation and ensure that justice is served without interference.
Ultimately, the fight against disinformation is not just about protecting the integrity of judicial processes; it is about safeguarding democracy itself. As the world continues to grapple with the challenges of the digital age, the lessons learned from the Duterte case will be invaluable in shaping a more informed and just future.
____
Supreme Court and ICC Under Siege: Disinformation Campaigns Escalate Following Duterte’s Arrest
The arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte on March 11, 2025, by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on charges of crimes against humanity has not only sparked legal and political debates but has also unleashed a wave of disinformation targeting the Philippine Supreme Court (SC) and the ICC. This disinformation campaign, fueled by fabricated documents and aggressive social media tactics, has raised serious concerns about the integrity of judicial processes and the role of social media in shaping public opinion. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the events, the spread of fake news, and the broader implications for democracy and the rule of law.
The Context: Duterte’s Arrest and the ICC’s Role
Rodrigo Duterte, who served as the 16th President of the Philippines from 2016 to 2022, is widely known for his controversial "war on drugs." This campaign, which aimed to eradicate illegal drugs in the country, resulted in the deaths of nearly 30,000 people, according to human rights groups. Critics accused Duterte of endorsing extrajudicial killings, leading to widespread condemnation from the international community.
In 2018, the ICC launched a preliminary examination into the drug war, and in 2021, it announced a formal investigation. Despite the Philippines’ withdrawal from the ICC in 2019 under Duterte’s administration, the court proceeded with its investigation, citing its jurisdiction over crimes committed while the country was still a member. On March 11, 2025, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Duterte, leading to his detention at Ninoy Aquino International Airport and subsequent transfer to The Hague, Netherlands.
The Supreme Court’s Involvement
Following Duterte’s arrest, his allies and family members launched legal efforts to challenge the ICC’s actions. Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa, a close ally of Duterte and former chief of the Philippine National Police, filed a petition with the Supreme Court on March 11, seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt Duterte’s transfer to the ICC. Dela Rosa argued that the arrest violated Duterte’s constitutional rights and questioned the ICC’s jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court acted promptly, conducting a special raffle to assign the petition to a justice and scheduling a virtual deliberation. However, no TRO was issued immediately, as the court needed time to review the 94-page petition. Despite this, disinformation began to spread rapidly, claiming that the Supreme Court had already granted the TRO in Duterte’s favor.
The Disinformation Campaign: Fabricated Documents and Social Media Tactics
The disinformation campaign escalated on March 16, 2025, when Meta accounts “Choose Libungan” and “Bernard Flores Maicon” posted a fabricated Supreme Court document. The fake document, dated March 16, was titled “Supreme Court Receives Petition on 16 Million Signatures Calling for President Marcos’ Resignation.” The same accounts claimed that the Supreme Court en banc would convene on March 17 to discuss the fake petition.
The Supreme Court swiftly debunked these claims, stating, “This is completely untrue. The Supreme Court has not received any such petition, and no En Banc session is scheduled today for this matter.” The High Court also announced that it would investigate the incidents and take necessary measures, including imposing sanctions on those responsible.
This was not the first time the Supreme Court had been targeted by disinformation. On March 11, false reports claimed that the court had issued a TRO in favor of Duterte, leading to widespread confusion and protests. The court had to issue a clarification, emphasizing that no TRO had been granted and that the petitioners had failed to establish a clear right to such an order.
Social Media Flooding: From Support to Aggression
The disinformation campaign was accompanied by a coordinated effort to flood the Supreme Court’s social media accounts with comments. On March 10, the general tone of the comments on the SC’s Meta posts was supportive, with many urging the court to intervene in Duterte’s ICC situation. However, the tone shifted dramatically after Duterte’s arrest on March 11.
Hours after the arrest, Meta users began flooding the SC’s March 11 posts with more assertive and aggressive comments. When the SC announced that it had acted upon and raffled Dela Rosa’s petition, Duterte supporters initially posted positive comments, thanking the court for its action. However, this goodwill was short-lived.
By March 12, the comments turned negative, with many criticizing the Supreme Court and claiming that the local justice system was no longer functioning. The SC’s subsequent posts, including one about the justices’ presence at the Philippine Women Judges Association’s 2025 Annual Convention, were inundated with hostile comments. Some users accused the judiciary of being a failure, while others called for drastic measures to address perceived injustices.
Interestingly, the Supreme Court’s YouTube page, which does not allow comments, remained relatively untouched, while the reply tabs on the court’s X (formerly Twitter) account were less flooded compared to its Meta account. This suggests that the disinformation campaign was strategically focused on platforms where it could have the most significant impact.
In addition to Dela Rosa’s petition, three of Duterte’s children filed separate writ of habeas corpus petitions, seeking their father’s return from the ICC. The Supreme Court consolidated these petitions into one and required Philippine government officials named as respondents to submit their comments. However, legal experts have pointed out that the Supreme Court may not have jurisdiction over the ICC, raising questions about the effectiveness of these efforts.
The Broader Implications of Disinformation
The disinformation campaign targeting the Supreme Court and the ICC highlights the growing threat of fake news to judicial processes and democratic institutions. By spreading false information, malicious actors can undermine public trust in the courts, manipulate public opinion, and obstruct the pursuit of justice.
In the Philippines, where political polarization is deeply entrenched, disinformation has become a powerful tool for shaping narratives and mobilizing support. The case of Duterte’s arrest illustrates how fake news can be weaponized to protect political figures from accountability and to stoke nationalist sentiments.
Moreover, the targeting of the ICC underscores the challenges faced by international institutions in addressing crimes against humanity. Disinformation campaigns can undermine the credibility of these institutions and make it more difficult to hold perpetrators accountable.
The Supreme Court’s Response and the Path Forward
The Supreme Court has taken a firm stance against disinformation, vowing to investigate the incidents and impose sanctions on those responsible. The court’s proactive approach, including issuing clarifications and debunking false claims, is a step in the right direction. However, combating disinformation requires a multi-faceted approach involving governments, civil society, and tech companies.
Media literacy and critical thinking are essential tools for empowering citizens to discern fact from fiction. By equipping individuals with these skills, societies can build resilience against disinformation and ensure that justice is served without interference.
The arrest of Rodrigo Duterte and the subsequent disinformation campaign targeting the Philippine Supreme Court and the ICC serve as a stark reminder of the power of fake news in the digital age. As judicial institutions grapple with the spread of false information, it is imperative for all stakeholders to work together to combat disinformation and uphold the rule of law.The case also underscores the importance of transparency, accountability, and public trust in maintaining the integrity of democratic institutions. By addressing the root causes of disinformation and fostering a culture of truth and accountability, societies can safeguard democracy and ensure that justice prevails.
ICC Under Fire: Disinformation Campaigns Target International Criminal Court Following Duterte’s Arrest
The arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on March 11, 2025, has not only sparked legal and political debates but has also unleashed a wave of disinformation targeting the ICC itself. From false claims about the arrest process to personal attacks on ICC officials, the disinformation campaign has sought to undermine the court’s credibility and obstruct its pursuit of justice. This article provides a detailed analysis of the disinformation tactics employed against the ICC, the court’s response, and the broader implications for international justice and accountability.
The Context: Duterte’s Arrest and the ICC’s Mandate
Rodrigo Duterte, the 16th President of the Philippines, is widely known for his controversial "war on drugs," which human rights groups estimate claimed the lives of nearly 30,000 people. The campaign, characterized by extrajudicial killings and widespread violence, drew international condemnation and prompted the ICC to launch an investigation into alleged crimes against humanity.
Despite the Philippines’ withdrawal from the ICC in 2019 under Duterte’s administration, the court asserted jurisdiction over crimes committed while the country was still a member. On March 11, 2025, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Duterte, leading to his detention at Ninoy Aquino International Airport and subsequent transfer to The Hague, Netherlands.
Disinformation Tactics Against the ICC
The ICC, as an institution dedicated to holding individuals accountable for the most serious crimes, has long been a target of criticism and misinformation. However, the disinformation campaign following Duterte’s arrest has been particularly aggressive, employing a range of tactics to discredit the court and its officials.
False Claims About the Arrest Process
One of the most pervasive false claims propagated by Duterte’s camp and supporters was that the former president was arrested without a warrant. This claim was quickly debunked, as the ICC implemented its arrest warrant through Interpol, and a copy of the warrant was made available to the public. The warrant detailed the charges against Duterte, including his alleged role in orchestrating extrajudicial killings during his drug war.
Despite the availability of the warrant, the false narrative persisted, with Duterte’s supporters using it to frame the arrest as an illegal and politically motivated act. This narrative was amplified on social media platforms, where it gained traction among Duterte’s loyal base.
Misinformation About Salvador Medialdea’s Role
Duterte’s former executive secretary, Salvador Medialdea, who accompanied the former president to The Hague, also became a focal point of disinformation. Medialdea claimed that he was forced to board the plane without a visa, suggesting that the ICC and Philippine authorities had acted improperly.
However, this claim lacked context. The Philippine embassy in the Netherlands clarified that upon landing, Medialdea was granted a 15-day visa, allowing him to assist Duterte during the legal proceedings. The embassy’s statement effectively debunked the narrative that Medialdea had been mistreated or denied due process.
Medialdea further fueled confusion by claiming that Duterte was "missing" after their arrival in The Hague. “We are told that there is no President Duterte at this facility, we are at a loss at this time and lokohan na ‘to (this is foolish),” he said. ICC spokesperson Fadi El Abdallah quickly refuted this claim, confirming that Duterte was in ICC custody at the detention center in Scheveningen and was undergoing medical checkups.
Targeting ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan
ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, who has been instrumental in pursuing the case against Duterte, has also been a target of disinformation. A video of Khan was posted in the Meta group “Protect Vice President Sara Duterte,” where his statement was taken out of context to falsely claim that Duterte had not been found guilty of the charges against him.
This misleading narrative was fact-checked by Rappler, a Philippine news outlet, which rated the claim as false. Despite this, the false information continued to circulate, further muddying the waters and undermining public trust in the ICC’s proceedings.
Presiding Judge Iiula Motoc, who heads the ICC’s pre-trial chamber handling Duterte’s case, has also faced personal attacks and harassment. Duterte supporters left negative comments on her Meta photos, accusing her of bringing chaos to the Philippines.
One comment read, “You are not here in the Philippines but you’re one who brought chaos here. Only former President RODRIGO DUTERTE makes this place safer than ever, safe for us ordinary Filipinos except addicts and drug lords during his term.”
Judge Motoc’s LinkedIn profile was also targeted, with comments urging her to return Duterte to the Philippines. While a few comments expressed support for Motoc, the majority centered on the alleged effectiveness of Duterte’s drug war and his advanced age, which supporters argued should exempt him from prosecution.
In addition to these attacks, some Duterte supporters resorted to misogynistic remarks, echoing the former president’s history of sexist and derogatory comments. These attacks not only sought to discredit Judge Motoc but also reflected a broader pattern of using gender-based harassment to intimidate and silence women in positions of authority.
The ICC has remained steadfast in its commitment to transparency and accountability, despite the disinformation campaign. Spokesperson Fadi El Abdallah has been proactive in addressing false claims, providing clarifications, and reaffirming the court’s adherence to due process.
In response to the attacks on Judge Motoc and other officials, the ICC has emphasized the importance of respecting the independence and integrity of the judiciary. The court has also called on social media platforms to take stronger action against disinformation and harassment targeting its officials.
The Broader Implications for International Justice
The disinformation campaign against the ICC highlights the challenges faced by international institutions in the digital age. By spreading false information and targeting officials, malicious actors can undermine public trust in the court and obstruct its ability to deliver justice.
The case of Duterte’s arrest also underscores the importance of media literacy and critical thinking in combating disinformation. As false narratives continue to proliferate on social media, it is essential for individuals to verify information and rely on credible sources.
Moreover, the attacks on ICC officials, particularly women, reflect a broader trend of using harassment and intimidation to silence dissent and undermine accountability. Addressing these issues requires a concerted effort from governments, civil society, and tech companies to create a safer and more informed digital environment.
The disinformation campaign targeting the ICC following Duterte’s arrest serves as a stark reminder of the power of fake news in shaping public opinion and obstructing justice. From false claims about the arrest process to personal attacks on officials, the campaign has sought to undermine the court’s credibility and derail its pursuit of accountability.As the ICC continues its work, it is imperative for all stakeholders to support the court’s efforts and combat disinformation. By fostering a culture of truth and accountability, societies can ensure that justice prevails and that the rule of law is upheld.The fight against disinformation is not just about protecting the ICC; it is about defending the principles of justice, accountability, and democracy that underpin our global community. In the face of these challenges, the lessons learned from the Duterte case will be invaluable in shaping a more just and resilient future.