On March 11, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested under a warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC). He faces charges of crimes against humanity related to his violent “war on drugs,” which led to the killings of thousands without trial. The arrest has created an immediate controversy in the Philippines. The Facebook comments section of a post by BBC News reporting the news quickly became a battleground, with responses ranging from calls for justice – “Jail and let Duterte pay for his crimes!!” one user commented – to claims that the arrest was “illegal” or part of a conspiracy.
Within a week, the post had amassed over 3,000 comments. It was not an isolated case. Hundreds of Facebook posts by news outlets and individuals alike have been overwhelmed with debates, disinformation, and conspiracy theories – manifestations of the online political trolling that became a hallmark of Duterte’s presidency. During his time in power (2016–2022), his supporters utilized digital harassment to discredit opponents, spread misinformation, and target journalists, activists, and political figures. Now, these same tactics are likely to be turned against global leaders, ICC prosecutors and judges, and news organizations covering the case. While such interactions once mainly occurred on Philippine social media, they have now spread globally, as Duterte’s arrest has gained international attention.
The Role of Social Media in Philippine Politics
Social media has long been important for Philippine political discourse, serving as a powerful tool for political engagement and debate. Filipinos are among the most active social media users globally, spending an average of more than three hours on platforms each day, the highest in the Asia-Pacific region. Facebook, in particular, is not only the most popular platform but also the primary source of news for many Filipinos – more so than newspapers or radio.
This heavy reliance on social media has transformed it into a key arena for political discussion, where ideas, narratives, and public opinion are shaped and contested. As the 2016 Philippine presidential election approached, social media emerged as a major battlefield. Supporters of Duterte used platforms like Facebook and Twitter to rally behind their candidate, often engaging in heated debates and online arguments with his critics. The divide was stark, with pro-Duterte forces promoting his tough stance on crime, while opponents highlighted concerns over human rights abuses.
This environment laid the groundwork for the rise of online political trolling. Paid trolls, fake followers, bots, and “cyber troops” – as they were often referred to – helped amplify Duterte’s message, suppress dissent, and flood social media with pro-Duterte content. In a country with a thriving social media ecosystem, these tactics blurred the line between genuine public sentiment and orchestrated political campaigns.
The Legacy of Duterte’s Social Media Tactics
The use of social media as a tool for political warfare also became a hallmark of Duterte’s administration. From the moment he won the presidency in 2016, the online activity that had started during his campaign only intensified. His supporters continued to use social media to defend his policies, justify his controversial actions, and attack his critics. The Philippine government itself was accused of employing “cyber troops” to wage an online campaign of disinformation and harassment against those who spoke out against Duterte.
Maria Ressa, the Philippines’ first Nobel laureate and a vocal critic of Duterte, has explained how trolls and disinformation became integral to the online environment in the country. According to Ressa, these trolls worked to manipulate public perception by presenting a false image of widespread support for Duterte, drowning out critical voices, and fostering a toxic online culture. The trolling tactics ranged from discrediting opponents, spreading conspiracy theories, and coordinating digital harassment campaigns against journalists, activists, and political leaders.
This digital strategy made it hard to distinguish between legitimate debate and aggressive online bullying, and effectively shaped public discourse. It was not just about winning online arguments. It was about creating a parallel reality where Duterte’s actions were justified, and opposition was silenced or demonized. The proliferation of fake news, the amplification of supportive messages, and the harassment of dissenting voices were all part of a coordinated effort to create a digital echo chamber.
The Globalization of Political Trolling
What we are seeing now, in the wake of Duterte’s arrest, is the globalization of Philippine political trolling. Since his arrest, social media platforms have been flooded with competing narratives surrounding his trial. On one side, the former president’s supporters continue to defend him, claiming that his arrest was politically motivated and that he was effectively “kidnapped.” They argue that the ICC has no jurisdiction over a sovereign nation like the Philippines. On the other side, those in favor of the arrest view it as a step toward justice for the victims of Duterte’s war on drugs.
However, these debates are no longer confined to Philippine spaces on social media. As international news outlets began to cover Duterte’s arrest, his supporters flooded the comment sections of articles and social media posts, defending their former president and pushing back against what they perceive as biased coverage. The international audience is now witnessing the same online political dynamics that dominated Philippine discourse during Duterte’s presidency.
The former president’s supporters have not only engaged with content about Duterte’s trial but have also targeted ICC officials. Notably, LinkedIn posts by ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I Presiding Judge Iulia Motoc were bombarded with comments demanding Duterte’s release, and similar comments flooded the social media accounts of other ICC officials. The online harassment tactics used by Duterte’s supporters against his critics and political opponents are now playing out on a global stage.
News outlets covering Duterte’s arrest and trial should be prepared for this digital onslaught. The global scope of these activities is unprecedented. The same tactics that were once used to shape political discourse in the Philippines are now being employed to influence global perceptions of Duterte’s legal proceedings. For ICC officials, journalists, and anyone involved in the trial, this means that they will likely face the same type of political harassment that Duterte’s critics endured during his presidency. Media reports have also highlighted that many of the social media posts targeting these individuals appear strikingly identical or coordinated, further suggesting a well-organized effort to influence public opinion.
The fact that these political activities have shifted from a local to a global scale marks a significant evolution in the way political trolling is conducted. It is no longer just about influencing domestic political outcomes. It is about shaping international narratives and engaging with a global audience.
For better or for worse, the rest of the world is now witnessing firsthand the complexities and challenges of Philippine online political engagement. The spread of coordinated trolling campaigns could distort the narrative surrounding Duterte’s trial, undermining the credibility of media coverage and influencing public perception. As these digital tactics blur the lines between genuine discourse and orchestrated manipulation, the trial’s global impact may be shaped as much by online propaganda as by the legal proceedings themselves.