Tensions are running high in the Philippines as a heated public spat unfolds between Davao City first district Representative Paolo "Pulong" Duterte and former Philippine National Police (PNP) chief General Nicolas Torre III. At the center of the controversy is Torre’s recent statement regarding the possible arrest of Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa, a prominent Duterte ally, over charges filed with the International Criminal Court (ICC). The exchange has not only reignited debates about the Philippines’ relationship with international legal bodies but also raised questions about leadership, credibility, and the boundaries of free speech in the country’s fragile democracy.
It all began on November 19, 2025, when Rep. Duterte took to social media to lambast Torre’s public comments about being ready to implement an ICC warrant for Senator dela Rosa, should such an order arrive. According to Manila Bulletin, Duterte was scathing in his assessment: “Before Torre fantasizes about ‘arresting anybody,’ he should first arrest the memory gap of the Filipino public because almost no one remembers he was PNP chief.” The lawmaker went on to describe Torre’s brief tenure as "an intermission, a placeholder, a bookmark in a chapter that nobody read."
Duterte’s criticism did not stop at Torre’s time in office. He questioned the former police chief’s authority to speak on matters of international law, emphasizing that the Philippines is no longer a member of the ICC. “As if a few days in office suddenly makes him the oracle of sovereignty?” Duterte remarked, as reported by GMA News Online. He drew a sharp contrast between Torre and Senator dela Rosa, noting, “Bato actually served, fought, and bled for this country. Torre barely had time to find the comfort room in Camp Crame before being replaced.”
The roots of this dispute stretch back to March 11, 2025, when, during Torre’s brief stint as PNP chief, former President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested by the ICC. The arrest sparked a national debate, with many—especially Duterte supporters—arguing the move was unlawful, given the Philippines’ withdrawal from the ICC. Torre, for his part, maintained that he was prepared to enforce any ICC warrant, including one targeting Senator dela Rosa, should it ever materialize. “If the order comes,” Torre said in an interview, “we will implement it.”
These remarks were met with derision by Rep. Duterte, who insisted that such pronouncements “should not be given weight,” reiterating the position long held by the Duterte family and their allies: that the Philippines is no longer bound by the ICC’s jurisdiction. “Everyone knows that the country was no longer a part of the ICC, and that threatening dela Rosa will not elevate Torre,” Duterte stated. He further accused Torre of “bitterness masquerading as relevance,” arguing that credibility is earned over time—a quality he claims Torre never had the opportunity to develop due to his short-lived leadership.
Torre, for his part, seemed unfazed by the criticism. When reached for comment by GMA News Online, he responded with a curt, almost mocking retort: “Who is Pulong Duterte? Hahahahaha.”
The debate over the ICC’s reach in the Philippines is far from settled. Ombudsman Jesus Crispin "Boying" Remulla previously claimed that the ICC had already issued an arrest warrant for Senator dela Rosa. The Department of Justice (DOJ) echoed this sentiment, stating that the Philippines would comply with an ICC arrest warrant if one were issued. “I believe that we will have to comply… One of the possible situations would be just determining the length of time when it will be actually implemented,” Prosecutor General Richard Fadullon explained in a press briefing. Yet, as of now, the ICC itself has not confirmed the existence of any such warrant.
The legal limbo has not stopped the political maneuvering. Senator dela Rosa, a former PNP chief himself and a close Duterte ally, sought a motion to compel Remulla to furnish a copy of the alleged warrant, only for the Supreme Court to deny the request. Meanwhile, the PNP, under Torre’s leadership earlier this year, reportedly began preparing for the possibility of further ICC warrants, particularly against high-profile figures like dela Rosa.
Rep. Duterte’s attacks on Torre were not limited to questions of international law. He also took aim at Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) Secretary Jonvic Remulla, who had suggested that rallies and public criticism could border on “inciting sedition.” Duterte bristled at what he saw as an attempt to suppress dissent, reminding Remulla and the public that freedoms of speech, expression, and assembly are fundamental democratic principles enshrined in the 1987 Constitution. “Until now, the Constitution seems like it is just optional reading for you,” Duterte quipped. “Freedoms of speech, expression, and assembly form fundamental democratic principles. Not everyone who disagrees with you is committing sedition.”
For many observers, the escalating war of words is emblematic of deeper divisions within the country’s political and law enforcement establishments. The saga also highlights the uncertainty surrounding the Philippines’ position on international legal obligations. While the Duterte camp maintains that the country’s withdrawal from the ICC shields its citizens from prosecution, others in government—such as the DOJ and the Ombudsman—have signaled a willingness to cooperate with international authorities, at least in principle.
The controversy has also shed light on the challenges of leadership transitions within the PNP. Torre’s term as chief, which ended abruptly in August 2025, has been described by Duterte as “faster than a press conference.” According to Duterte, the only thing shorter than Torre’s service was “the patience of PNP officers who wondered how someone so politically weak had become their leader.”
As the debate rages on, the fate of Senator dela Rosa—and the broader question of accountability for alleged crimes committed during the Duterte administration’s war on drugs—remains uncertain. The ICC has yet to confirm any new warrants, but the mere possibility continues to inflame passions on all sides. Supporters of the former president and his allies see the ICC’s actions as foreign interference, while others argue that justice must be served, regardless of political affiliation or international membership status.
For now, the country waits. The dispute between Paolo Duterte and Nicolas Torre III may be personal, but it reflects larger questions about the rule of law, the limits of power, and the enduring struggle for justice and accountability in the Philippines. The coming months are likely to bring further twists, as legal, political, and personal interests collide on the national stage.