BAGUIO CITY – When Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte said in November 2024 that the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague in Netherlands was a “silly” court, he never expected for a moment that someday, he will be a detention resident in the ICC facility.
During the House of Representatives Quad Committee, Duterte bluntly told the house representatives that “It’s (the ICC) a silly court. It did not do anything; no one is actually being jailed.”
“They just keep on filing cases. We have seen a lot of world leaders from Africa committing acts of murdering his people, murdering his neighbor, but I did not hear these leaders being jailed,” Duterte proudly said.
When Duterte uttered those words, he threw down the gauntlet and challenged the ICC. In the season of disturbance, he yielded to temptation of losing control of judgment and gave way to passion and prejudice.
On March 12, 2025, MR. Duterte was surrendered to the ICC after being arrested by authorities in accordance with a warrant of arrest.
Duterte mocked the ICC, never believing what it stood for, given the fact that the ICC is a “supranational tribunal” that can supersede national sovereignties and directly prosecute individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes of aggression.
It can claim “automatic jurisdiction,” meaning it can prosecute individuals even if their own governments have not recognized or ratified the treaty.
In a nutshell, the ICC was established to investigate and prosecute persons accused of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity and to impose prison sentences upon those found guilty of such offenses.
ICC has its headquarters at The Hague, in Netherlands. As a permanent institution, the ICC has a functional purpose built premises to effectively fulfill its mandate in the fight against impunity for perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crime of aggression.
Far from being silly as Duterte claimed, ICC offers essential features for the court to work more efficiently, provide protection for witnesses and victims and ensure fair and transparent proceedings.
Design of the ICC building as explained by ICC President Judge Silvia Fernandez reflects the transparency of the institution and its innovativeness.
As explained, ICC “combines striking architecture with stringent security measures, while showcasing best practices in sustainability and respect for nature, within the natural dune landscape between The Hague and the North Sea.
As part of The Hague’s International Zone, it is near Peace Palace, Europol, with other international organizations. Netherlands, the host state has made the site available, free of charge.”
ICC’s building complex consists of six towers connected on the ground and the first floors and offer over 1,200 workplaces. The largest tower called the “Court Tower,” accommodates here courtrooms and a media center.
Public area on the ICC ground floor welcomes visitors to the public galleries of the courtrooms as well as the visitor center and cafe.
Ever since its opening in July 1, 2002, ICC was temporarily located in two buildings on the other side of The Hague. “In December 2007, the Assembly of State Parties decided that ICC should be provided with newly-built and permanent premises,” Fernandez further explained.
“In 2010, following an international competition, the Danish firm, Schmidt Hammer Lassen was selected to design the new premises and in October 2012, Courtys, a consortium of VolkerWessels subsidiaries and Smit Bouw and Boele & van Eesteren, was chosen for the realization,” Fernandez further added.
Construction work for the permanent ICC started on April 16, 2013.
For Duterte, calling the ICC a silly institution is a long, long way off, since the ICC project funded by State Parties (or those countries who approved of the establishment of the ICC) cost around 204 million euros.
For crimes stated herein and no hope of these being resolved in countries where they are committed, ICC is thus called the Court of Last Resort.
It can be said that in the sentiment of every conservative member of the human race, that race then bears the reputation of law-abiding and law-respecting people. And that every iota of influence that humans possess should be used to get rid of the criminal and loafing element and to make decent, law abiding citizens. Which Duterte, as a leader, failed to show to the Filipino people.
Since his inauguration, he announced a war on drugs and his campaign was dubbed “Operation Double Barrel.” It was made to appear that the operation was to arrest drug dealers and users.
In reality, it was a campaign of extrajudicial slaying of said persons in places in the Philippines particularly in impoverished areas of Manila and other urban settings.
Duterte’s outspoken endorsement of the campaign implicates him and other officials in possible incitement to violence, investigation of murder and in command responsibility for crimes against humanity.
According to Human Rights Watch, it discovered official police reports invariably asserting self-defense to justify police killings of drug users and peddlers, contrary to eye-witness accounts that the same were cold-blooded murders.
As part of his mockery, Duterte even dared earlier in that day of the Quadcom meeting for the ICC to come to the Philippines and investigate him over the alleged crimes against humanity in his anti-drug campaign.
“I am asking the ICC to hurry up and start the investigation tomorrow, “he quipped.
Who was it who said, “Be careful what you wish for” For it might just come true. Such a phrase can double as a cautionary tale, reminding us that unintended consequences often accompany the best intentions.
In September 30, 2016, Duterte also said “Hitler massacred three million Jews. Now, there are three million drug addicts. I’d be happy to slaughter them. If Germany had Hitler, the Philippines would have me.”
On this score, You, as a Filipino voter and upon fully digesting the words of Duterte, would commence an inquiry by asking what qualifications would be most pleasing to possess one should acquire upon entering government service which would be commendable.
By allowing fancy to have unlimited scope, like what Duterte said, “If Germany had Hitler, Philippines would have me, “it only creates a fair picture of blasting any sanguine hope that hardly can we depend our safety on leaders of his caliber.
What a blessing it is if Duterte — supposed leader of the land — would have properly regulated his tongue, one who has proper command of himself, who can keep down the fires of his disposition and converse coolly as a true philosopher.
But philosopher he was not. Instead, he dared the wrath of Fate by saying during the May 2016 presidential election by saying, “If by chance that God will place me there, watch out because the 1,000 (people allegedly executed while Duterte was mayor of Davao City) will become 100,000. You will see the fish in Manila Bay getting fat. That is where I will dump you.”
Three months later after saying that speech, he again reminded the Filipino people by saying, “If I became president, you better hide. That 1,000 will reach 50,000. I would kill all of you who make the lives of Filipinos miserable.”
A year later on May 9, 2016, Duterte, then 71, was elected president. And his first six months into office, human rights took a hit.
Tyrants have existed throughout human history and who have routinely ordered the slaying of people for political and other reasons with some having done so with no logic or reasoning.
These individuals have directed systemic destruction of groups or the murder of people by their governments in order to establish their own power or simply because the means were there for such leaders to do it.
But majority of Filipinos never thought that such a wild idea would happen in the Philippines. But it did. And when it did, a minority of Filipinos called by the press and social media as DDS or Duterte Diehard Supporters even welcomed the killing or even reveled in it.
Were these DDS adoring the making of a tyrant?
When Duterte assumed the presidency, he had in his hands inherent powers belonging to the country’s highest office of which the exercise of the powers is subject to rules and procedures.
Unfortunately, Duterte utilized these powers to reward his supporters and win others to his side and also made use of such powers to intimidate, punish and deter his perceived enemies.
What differentiates Duterte from other past Filipino leaders is that he used the Office of the President to threaten anyone he perceives as his enemy by hurling insults, curses, disrespects and verbal threats.
What starts as an act of brute force – with Duterte publicly pouncing on his enemies – turns becomes a normal application of institutional power wielded by wrong hands. For years that he stayed in office, he never hesitated to bare the naked force behind the veneer of presidential power.
He found absolutely nothing wrong to use the powers of the Presidency to suit his whims or advance his personal agenda.
The effect of such an act is that one can lose one’s respect for such a person abusing such power.
When a tyrannizer is able to carry a travesty of the government by blatantly impelling it as his own personal tool, the fault, however, cannot just be heaped at the footsteps of those who elected such a person into office.
A major responsibility equally pervades on the rest of the government who have observed the making of a despot but failed to use their share of state power to stop the rise of a tyrant.
It is said that evil is a man or leader who sees fit to terminate the lives of people with the use of a superior weapon such as a gun. But pure is evil is a government that abets the killer.
As for Duterte now at the silly facility of ICC, he is presumed innocent until proved guilty before the court. Until then, Filipinos will wait with bated breath.
It is curious to think that Duterte, now at the ICC facility, the time for reckoning is at hand and so strangely feel whether time is long and every minute wearisome until it arrives.
Oddly, so strange is human feeling constituted when one is imprisoned that the person jailed would, if possible, annihilate the brief portion of time that hangs heavy on the mind.
