MANILA — For the first time in his life, former President Rodrigo Duterte is facing judges not as the strongman who once dictated the course of the nation but as a suspect answering for alleged crimes against humanity.

During his initial appearance before the International Criminal Court (ICC) via video link, he appeared visibly weak, subdued, and hesitant—a stark contrast to the tough-talking, defiant persona he cultivated throughout his political career. Duterte now seems to grapple with the reality of being held accountable by an international court, an institution he has long rejected.

Even his former spokesperson, Atty. Harry Roque, acknowledged Duterte’s apparent frailty. “Napakahina niya,” Roque said, suggesting that the former president may not be able to endure detention. “Feeling ko hindi siya tatagal doon sa loob.”

Now acting as part of Duterte’s legal team, Roque is working to have the case dismissed before the September 23 hearing. He argues that Duterte’s transfer to ICC custody was unlawful, likening it to kidnapping. Roque also plans to challenge the court’s jurisdiction, citing the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2019.

However, under Article 127(2) of the Rome Statute—the treaty that established the ICC—the court retains jurisdiction over crimes committed before a country’s withdrawal. This means that despite Duterte’s decision to pull the Philippines out of the ICC, he remains accountable for alleged crimes committed while the country was a member. The Philippines was under ICC jurisdiction from November 1, 2011, until its withdrawal took effect on March 17, 2019. The case against Duterte covers this period.

Furthermore, Duterte’s camp invokes Article 59 of the Rome Statute, which outlines how a State Party must handle arrest and surrender requests from the ICC. It states that the country must follow its own legal procedures (Article 59(1)) and ensure the suspect’s rights are protected before surrendering them (Article 59(2)). However, this provision applies only to ICC member states. Since the Philippines withdrew from the ICC in 2019, it is no longer bound by these procedures, and different legal considerations now apply.

A Familiar Theatrical Act?

Observers, however, question whether Duterte’s frailty is genuine or if this is another instance of the former president using theatrics to gain sympathy. Critics recall his past grand gestures—kissing the Philippine flag, promising to ride a jetski to the West Philippine Sea, and vowing to eliminate crime in six months. His current display of weakness and helplessness, they argue, could be a calculated move to influence public sentiment.

For Duterte’s critics and concerned netizens alike, the former president facing the ICC signifies a pursuit of justice that no theatrics can save him from.

“He’s done for, get used to it. All they can do now is try to churn up sympathy for him—so his children can benefit and be elected,” said writer Ninotchka Rosca. “The more fool you are if you vote for his ilk, who are only good at one thing—and you know what that is.”

According to former Solicitor General Florin Hilbay, “The Real Rody” is now exposed—”naked and vulnerable, stripped of all the usual privileges. Unplugged from public power, the inflated ego was reduced to a frail body and a quivering voice.” He emphasized, “With Rody’s deflated self in full display, the world witnessed the real person behind the persona.”

Carlo C. remarked, “First time makita na medyo may takot si Tatay Digs. Nanginginig magsalita at parang umurong ang dila. Nawala ang tapang. Akala ko sasampalin at sisipain niya ang mga judges. He just showed typical bully behavior. Tumiklop nung nakakita ng katapat.” He then addressed Duterte’s supporters, saying, “Kaya mga DDS, tigilan nyo na yung myth ninyo na matapang at walang kinatatakutan si Tatay nyo. Front niya lang ‘yun at duwag talaga.”

Kyle P. dismissed Duterte’s antics during the ICC hearing as mere performance for a local audience. “But let’s get one thing clear, those theatrics weren’t for the ICC. It wasn’t for the ‘whites’ who care nothing about the country’s politics and have already made their judgment through his arrest and detention. No, Medialdea’s manifestation and the old man’s performance were for a more domestic audience.”

Meanwhile, Gin “Tagapagmulat” Laroza pointed out that Duterte’s demeanor inside the ICC was completely different from his behavior in local hearings. “Ibang Rodrigo Roa Duterte ang natunghayan natin sa Senate hearing at QuadComm hearing—na maangas at nagmumura. Ibang Rodrigo Roa Duterte ang natunghayan natin sa loob ng ICC—garalgal, nanginginig, at nanlalamig.”

Whether Duterte is truly struggling or playing the victim, one thing is clear—he is no longer in control. His usual bravado has faded in the face of an impartial tribunal that cannot be swayed by political pressure or influence.

📷 ICC, Rody Duterte FB