A Senate hearing that obscures, not clarifies, the issue of Duterte’s arrest

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led by presidential sister Imee Marcos, convened a public inquiry that, rather than shedding light on the arrest of former President Rodrigo Duterte, only served to further obfuscate the matter.

With a loud and forceful presence, Imee Marcos seemed more interested in grandstanding than in addressing the serious charges facing her brother. The hearing became a stage for intimidation rather than a forum for clarity, as senators, many of whom are lawyers, sought to exploit technicalities while ignoring the broader issue at hand: the quest for justice for victims of Duterte’s brutal war on drugs.

Imee Marcos’ conduct at the hearing is worth examining. Despite having no legal background, she openly defied the sub judice rule, which prohibits discussions about ongoing legal cases.

The issue at hand—the arrest of Duterte, who faces crimes against humanity charges at the International Criminal Court (ICC)—is not only sensitive but crucial. Yet, Marcos pushed forward with her political agenda, focusing more on intimidating top officials and dismissing legal procedures than on seeking accountability. Instead of addressing the gravitas of the situation, the inquiry quickly devolved into a debate over the technicalities of Duterte’s arrest, distracting from the larger, more pressing issues.

The senators present at the hearing, many of whom seemed intent on protecting Duterte, argued that the arrest was somehow unlawful. They focused on minute details—like the supposed absence of a warrant of arrest—as if it were a defense against the very real crimes committed during Duterte’s presidency.

The debate over whether or not Duterte’s arrest was lawful was nothing more than a distraction. These lawmakers seemed intent on casting doubt on the actions of government officials who simply carried out their duties in enforcing the law. For the families of those killed during Duterte’s drug war, the argument that Duterte was ‘kidnapped’ by the police is an insult. They want justice—not legal arguments meant to obfuscate the real issues.

What is clear from the Senate hearing is that those pushing for Duterte’s defense are out of touch with the victims of his extrajudicial killings. Families of the deceased do not care about the legal technicalities of Duterte’s arrest; they care about the fact that their loved ones were never given the opportunity for a day in court. They are eager to testify and have their voices heard, but the slow, bureaucratic nature of the legal process raises deep concerns.

Their loved ones were murdered without any due process, and now the architect of that violence is being treated with an extraordinary level of care in jail. His arrest may have come late, but it was a victory for those seeking justice. However, the fact that Duterte is housed in a cell with all the amenities one might expect, including full medical attention, only highlights the disparity between the treatment of victims and the treatment of perpetrators.

Perhaps the most chilling part of the proceedings was the case of a victim who had been shot in the head, only for the autopsy to state that pneumonia was the cause of death. Such discrepancies are not isolated. They underscore the depth of the injustice that occurred under Duterte’s reign. While senators split hairs over legal technicalities, the families of those who suffered at his hands fear that the wheels of justice may grind too slowly, leaving witnesses vulnerable to further threats or even death before they can testify.

As the trial of Duterte looms, it is critical that the focus be placed where it belongs—on the victims of his crimes and the pursuit of accountability, not on the distraction of political maneuvers or technicalities. The Senate inquiry, unfortunately, has done little to advance the cause of justice and much to delay it.