The political and legal drama surrounding former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte has taken a new turn, as his son, Davao City Acting Mayor Sebastian “Baste” Duterte, formally accused several high-ranking government officials and police generals of kidnapping and related crimes over the ex-leader’s arrest and transfer to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. The complaint, filed on September 15 and 16, 2025, intensifies a growing rift between the Duterte family and the current administration, while raising thorny questions about sovereignty, international law, and the future of Philippine justice.
According to Panay News and other Philippine media outlets, Baste Duterte’s 160-page affidavit-complaint names some of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s most influential Cabinet members—including Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, Interior Secretary Juan Victor “Jonvic” Remulla, Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro, and National Security Adviser Eduardo Año—as well as top police officials like former PNP chief Gen. Rommel Francisco Marbil and ex-CIDG director Maj. Gen. Nicolas Torre III. Prosecutor General Richard Anthony Fadullon, DOJ Undersecretary Nicholas Felix Ty, and other law enforcement officers were also listed as respondents. The charges range from kidnapping and arbitrary detention to grave misconduct, usurpation of judicial functions, direct assault, and violations of the Anti-Torture Act and Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
The controversy erupted after Rodrigo Duterte’s dramatic arrest at Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport on March 11, 2025. Returning from Hong Kong, Duterte and his entourage—including former executive secretary Salvador Medialdea—were intercepted by law enforcers who invoked an ICC warrant coursed through Interpol. The former president was then transported under heavy guard to Villamor Air Base, held in custody, and flown to The Hague, where he now awaits trial for crimes against humanity linked to his administration’s notorious war on drugs. The ICC maintains that the arrest was carried out lawfully and with international cooperation, but Duterte’s lawyers and family have consistently rejected the legitimacy of the ICC’s actions under Philippine law.
Baste Duterte’s complaint, as reported by Panay News, alleges that his father was “forcibly brought to Villamor Air Base, held under tight guard, and flown to The Hague without due process—while being denied prompt medical care despite his diabetes.” The document further contends that the authorities’ actions amounted to “kidnapping” and violated Philippine sovereignty. “He cannot file the case himself since he is still abroad, so I felt compelled to seek justice,” Baste Duterte explained, underscoring the family’s sense of grievance and urgency.
The Duterte family’s narrative is not new, but the formal complaint escalates their longstanding claims into a direct legal challenge. Both Baste and Vice President Sara Duterte have repeatedly referred to the arrest as “kidnapping,” insisting that the transfer to the ICC was unlawful and breached due process. Their rhetoric has not gone unnoticed: ICC prosecutors cited Sara Duterte’s statements as evidence in their arguments against granting Rodrigo Duterte interim release, warning that such remarks could undermine the legitimacy of the court and embolden attempts to obstruct justice.
For the Duterte camp, the incident is not only a legal battle but a deeply personal ordeal. Veronica “Kitty” Duterte, the former president’s youngest daughter, offered a glimpse into the family’s emotional state, writing in a public post: “You would always say, ‘keep on loving, it is what makes the world go round.’ You always called me the flower of your life. I pray you know you are the sunlight of mine.” Such words highlight the human cost behind the headlines—a family grappling with separation, uncertainty, and the weight of global scrutiny.
At the heart of the dispute is a clash between two legal and political realities. On one side, the ICC insists it was acting within the bounds of international law, executing a valid warrant with the cooperation of Philippine authorities. On the other, Duterte’s defense team and supporters argue that the ICC’s actions have no standing under Philippine law, and that the former president was essentially abducted. As reported by Panay News, Duterte’s lawyers rejected the ICC warrant’s validity, contending that it should not override national sovereignty or domestic legal protections.
Beyond the legal wrangling, concerns about Rodrigo Duterte’s health have added another layer of complexity. His legal team has asserted that he suffers from “impaired memory” and an inability to retain new information, conditions that prompted the ICC to postpone the confirmation of charges hearing while a comprehensive medical assessment is conducted. The complaint filed by Baste Duterte also alleges that his father was denied prompt medical care during his arrest and transfer, despite his diabetes—a point that, if substantiated, could have significant implications for both the legal process and Duterte’s well-being.
The fallout from these events has sent ripples through Philippine politics. The officials named in Baste Duterte’s complaint now face serious accusations, with potential legal and reputational consequences. The case also puts President Marcos Jr.’s administration in a delicate position, balancing its obligations to international law with the fierce loyalty of Duterte’s supporters and the broader public’s divided sentiments about the war on drugs and the ICC’s involvement.
For many Filipinos, the spectacle of a former president detained in The Hague—while his family wages a high-profile campaign at home—has become a flashpoint for broader debates about justice, accountability, and national sovereignty. Some see the ICC proceedings as a necessary reckoning for the thousands of deaths associated with Duterte’s anti-drug campaign, while others view the arrest and transfer as an affront to Philippine independence and a dangerous precedent for foreign intervention in domestic affairs.
Meanwhile, the legal process grinds on. The ICC has postponed its confirmation of charges hearing to allow for Duterte’s medical evaluation, but the stakes remain high. If convicted, Duterte could face a lengthy prison sentence; if acquitted or released, the political reverberations would be felt across the region. The kidnapping complaint filed by Baste Duterte ensures that the battle will not be confined to The Hague but will play out in Philippine courts, the media, and the court of public opinion.
As the world watches, the Duterte saga continues to unfold, weaving together questions of law, politics, and family in a story that is far from over.