Duterte’s Arrest: A Victory for EJK victims or an injustice to his legacy?

DAVAO CITY – The arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has sent shockwaves throughout the nation, dividing Filipinos between those who see this as a long-overdue reckoning for the thousands of victims of the war on drugs and those who believe it is a grave injustice against a leader who prioritized public safety above all else.

For families of victims of extrajudicial killings (EJKs), Duterte’s detention marks a milestone in their fight for justice. For nearly a decade, they have sought accountability for the countless deaths—estimates ranging from 6,000 to 30,000—linked to police anti-drug operations and vigilante-style executions during Duterte’s presidency. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has now brought the weight of international law upon the former president, setting a global precedent for holding leaders accountable for human rights abuses.

Yet, for Duterte’s loyal supporters, his arrest is nothing short of a political vendetta, an attack against a man whose only crime, they argue, was his commitment to eradicating crime and drugs to protect the Filipino people. The same war on drugs, they claim, made the streets safer and saved future generations from the dangers of addiction.

Before his detention, Duterte addressed supporters during the Pasasalamat sa OFW event in Hong Kong, where he disclosed that he had already been informed about the ICC’s reported warrant of arrest.

In his speech, he remained defiant but composed “If the accusations against me were true, then let history judge me. But everything I did was for the protection of the people,” Duterte told the crowd.

Despite facing the looming threat of arrest, he returned to the Philippines, choosing to face the charges instead of seeking exile.

Upon landing in Manila, Duterte made no dramatic escape, no plea for defiance—he left quietly, avoiding any action that could sow chaos or put his supporters in harm’s way. He departed with a heavy heart, but with the resolve of a man who knew the weight of leadership and the price of peace. Instead of rallying his base to revolt, he bore his pain in silence, unwilling to allow division to tear apart the country he once led.

Duterte’s supporters argue that the war on drugs was a necessary evil, that the elimination of criminal elements saved more lives than it took. They believe the ICC is meddling in the country’s affairs, imposing Western ideals of justice on a nation with its own legal system.

On the other hand, human rights advocates and EJK victims’ families assert that the suffering of thousands cannot be ignored. They insist that justice delayed is justice denied, and Duterte’s accountability is a step forward in ensuring that no leader can rule with impunity.

Duterte’s arrest is more than just a domestic issue—it has far-reaching consequences for global governance and human rights. If the ICC successfully prosecutes him, it will set a precedent for other world leaders accused of committing crimes against humanity.

However, if Duterte is vindicated or acquitted, it could call into question the effectiveness of international justice mechanisms, particularly the ICC’s reach and influence over sovereign nations.

As Duterte awaits trial at The Hague, the Philippines stands at a crossroads. Will his case bring closure to the victims of the drug war, or will it be remembered as a political crucifixion of a strongman leader?

History will decide whether Rodrigo Duterte was a ruthless human rights violator or a misunderstood warrior against crime. For now, the nation watches, divided yet again, as the former president faces the greatest battle of his life—not on the streets of Davao but in the courtroom of international justice.