Inside the 12-hour Facebook blitz that framed Duterte's ICC arrest as 'kidnapping'

Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!

Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.

Visit Suniway.ph to learn

This report forms part of Philstar.com's coverage of influence operations, which involve the spread of false information and propaganda that can mislead, cause confusion and prevent informed understanding and discourse. Read our explainer on influence operations. 

MANILA, Philippines — Hours before former President Rodrigo Duterte's family and lawyers publicly claimed his arrest a "kidnapping," around 200 seemingly unconnected Facebook accounts and pages had already posted identical text that accused law enforcers of abducting Duterte to the International Criminal Court.  

Philstar.com's monitoring detected at least 200 different Facebook accounts and pages that publicly posted an identical message that frames any potential arrest of Duterte — specifically by law enforcers acting on the arrest warrant of the ICC — as "kidnapping" and "illegal detention."  Most were posted within the 12-hour window between Duterte's morning arrest on Tuesday, March 11, and his late-night flight to The Hague, while a number were posted days before and after. 

The coordinated message blitz bears signs of what disinformation researchers call "copypasta" – identical text copied and pasted across the internet by individuals, usually at the same time. 

Most of the posts were shared by profiles that appeared authentic, featuring years of posting history, genuine photos and consistent interaction with non-political content, based on Philstar.com's analysis of the roughly 200 Facebook posts. 

The message reads as follows:

Remember that Philippines is not an ICC member country, so any arrest warrant issued by that foreign court is null and void. Only Filipino courts can issue an arrest warrant against Duterte.
Any Filipino police officer who implements the arrest warrant will be guilty of kidnapping and illegal detention. 
ICC, as a foreign court, has no jurisdiction / authority over (Philippine flag emoji). Constitution only rests judicial power in the (Philippine flag emoji) Supreme Court and (Philippine flag emoji) regional trial courts. 

"For a while now, the Philippine disinformation scene has been advancing to a gray area where it's almost impossible to tell whether content comes from fake players or not," said Regine Cabato, a Filipino journalist covering disinformation and influence operations in the Philippines. 

"I have no doubt that some of these accounts are real people. I also have no doubt that some of them are manufactured," Cabato told Philstar.com.

'Kidnapping' claim echoed by Duterte family

The "kidnapping" narrative that dominated Facebook soon appeared in official statements from Duterte's family and legal team.

On the evening of March 11, hours before Duterte's plane took off for The Hague, Duterte's daughter, Veronica "Kitty" Duterte, posted on Instagram: "This is the plane they used to kidnap my dad. #NeverForget." 

Vice President Sara Duterte told reporters at the Villamor Air Base that same night: "It's some sort of—I don't know—what you call 'state kidnapping.'"

Also on the evening of March 11, former presidential spokesperson Harry Roque wrote on Facebook:  

Final decision of fPRRD: “- Let's end this madness.

- Hindi ako papayag.

- This is a govt-sponsored kidnapping.

I want to be tried by a filipino judge before a filipino court.”

His words.

The day after they landed in The Hague and Duterte was taken into ICC custody, Medialdea doubled down on the kidnapping narrative during an interview outside The Hague when he claimed to have been told Duterte was not at the ICC detention facility.

"We were told there is no Rodrigo Duterte in this facility ... Lokohan na 'to [This is deception]. I think this is part of their grand plan to kidnap the president, to extract the president from the Philippines and brought to a jet without known destination," Medialdea told reporters on Thursday, March 13.

A day later, at the ICC initial appearing hearing, Medialdea repeated this position, telling the court that Duterte was "abducted from his country" and that "for less legal minds it's pure and simple kidnapping."

How the blitz spread

Most of the 200 posts were posted in the hours between Duterte's arrest at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (9 a.m.) and the takeoff of the chartered plane carrying Duterte and Medialdea to The Hague, Netherlands (11 p.m.).   

Philstar.com's analysis found that most accounts sharing identical text had real profile photos and regular activity patterns. 

Hours before former President Rodrigo Duterte's family and lawyers publicly claimed his arrest a "kidnapping," around 200 seemingly unconnected Facebook accounts and pages had already posted identical text that accused law enforcers of abducting Duterte to the International… pic.twitter.com/h8VNz5bduE

— Philstar.com (@PhilstarNews) March 18, 2025

Several accounts identified themselves as "digital creators," while others were small business pages or accounts typically sharing viral videos and general news content.

Engagement on most posts was limited, with reactions and shares in the single or double digits. 

Two accounts achieved significantly higher engagement than the others:

• Bagong Pilipinas 2022, a page with 75,000 followers that tags itself as a "News & media website" based in Makati City, posted the message at 2:03 p.m. on March 11 alongside an AI-generated image. The post received 114 shares and 133 reactions.
• Batingaw Mindanao, which had a smaller number of followers at 2,400, generated the highest engagement when it shared the text with a photo of Duterte bearing the words "WE STAND WITH FPPRD." This post received 2,300 shares, 66 comments, and 643 reactions.

Messages shared to community groups

Despite the low engagement, several posts were shared with local community groups. Philstar.com detected the same text appearing in buy-and-sell groups and barangay community pages within hours of the initial wave. 

Some shares included little variations, such as adding "CTTO" (credit to the owner) or "copy paste" disclaimers at the end of the message. 

No account identified or credited the original author of the text.

"It's important to look not just at who these individuals are, but the net effect of their behavior, coordinated or otherwise," said Cabato, who previously worked on a project at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism in Oxford University on how journalists can better cover and protect themselves from malign influence campaigns. 

"We are witnessing the live production of myth-making. And more people should know that there are a good part of these myths are coordinated and manufactured, so they will think twice about believing and sharing them," she added.

Post before arrest. While most posts appeared on March 11 during the 14-hour window between Duterte's arrest and departure, Philstar.com detected a number of identical messages appearing as early as March 9.

Maria Fema Duterte, a candidate for Cebu's 7th district congressional seat in the 2025 elections, posted the message on her Facebook page on March 9, 12 p.m. – two days before the actual arrest. 

Maria Fema used the now-widespread text as a caption while sharing a post that features a Rappler article dated March 8, in which Rappler reported on a possible ICC arrest warrant for Duterte and the Philippine National Police's arrest plan. In Maria Fema's post, she also claimed that Rappler was spreading "fake news."  

Some Facebook users appeared to have copied and pasted Maria Fema's post without removing the reference to Rappler. One Facebook user reposted Fema's text calling Rappler "fake news" while sharing a quote card by GMA News.

Additional posts continued appearing on March 12, after Duterte had already left the country.

Campaign matches previous Duterte-related influence operations

The synchronized messaging around Duterte's arrest follows patterns of previous influence operations that Philstar.com has documented involving pro-Duterte networks.

In November 2023, Philstar.com tracked multiple pro-Duterte accounts and pages that simultaneously amplified survey findings positioning the former president as the top senatorial candidate for the 2025 elections. The coordinated posts appeared within hours or days of each other over a 10-day period, with at least five prominent Facebook pages using nearly identical captions to promote the survey results.

That campaign, like the current "kidnapping" messaging blitz, showed hallmarks of a coordinated influence operation based on timing and similarity of posts.

Fact-checkers have also monitored a surge in overall disinformation following Duterte's arrest.

Journalist Cabato noted that Duterte and his allies are "reaping the gains of investing in its online disinformation machinery early."

"This is a network that has been working to feed the Filipino hyper-partisan views since 2016, when he became president," Cabato told Philstar.com.

Cabato said the actors in the pro-Duterte disinformation network have evolved over time, following the combination with pro-Marcos networks and their subsequent split. "But even as it has changed shape, size, and personalities throughout the years, its following and the market it appeals to has not left. Some have become even more deeply entrenched in their pro-Duterte views to the point that they will act, spread lies, and harass others for free," she added.

Polarized, poisoned discourse

While the coordinated campaign to frame Duterte's arrest as a kidnapping will have little effect on the ICC, Cabato warned that the lasting damage is to public discourse itself and the ability of citizens to engage with complex issues based on factual information.

"There are undoubtedly many pro-Duterte forces at work, both trolls and real people, but we should neither overestimate nor underestimate them," the journalist said. "Society is polarized. Tactics like astroturfing the ICC and Supreme Court might backfire against Duterte supporters legally, but they poison the well of public perception, stoking distrust and fear among people who just want to find out verified information or engage in decent public discourse."

Claims in viral text contradict established principles

The viral copy-pasted message contains several legal claims that legal experts have consistently refuted:

Claim: "Philippines is not an ICC member country, so any arrest warrant issued by that foreign court is null and void."

Fact-check: While the Philippines withdrew from the ICC in 2019, the court retains jurisdiction over crimes allegedly committed when the country was still a member (2011-2019). Article 127 of the Rome Statute explicitly states that withdrawal "shall not affect any cooperation" with the court regarding investigations that began before the withdrawal took effect.

RELATED: Fact check: Philippines has obligations despite leaving ICC in 2019

Claim: "Only Filipino courts can issue an arrest warrant against Duterte."

Fact-check: The ICC operates under the principle of complementarity – stepping in only when national courts are unwilling or unable to investigate. The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber determined that Philippine domestic proceedings were insufficient before issuing the warrant.

RELATED: ICC grants new inquiry into Duterte's deadly 'war on drugs'

Claim: "Any Filipino police officer who implements the arrest warrant will be guilty of kidnapping and illegal detention."

Fact-check: Law enforcers acting on a legitimate international warrant are executing lawful duties, not committing kidnapping. This principle is recognized in both international law and domestic legal systems. Duterte's arrest was specifically done in compliance with the Philippines' commitments to the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol).

Claim: "ICC, as a foreign court, has no jurisdiction/authority over the Philippines."

Fact-check: The Philippines voluntarily accepted the ICC's jurisdiction when it ratified the Rome Statute in 2011. This acceptance covers crimes committed during membership, even after withdrawal.