DAVAO CITY (MindaNews / 2 Oct) — Acting Davao City Mayor Sebastian “Baste” Duterte has filed a disbarment case against Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, National Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro, and two other officials before the Supreme Court on Thursday in connection with the alleged unlawful arrest and turnover of former President Rodrigo R. Duterte to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, the Netherlands.
Justice Undersecretary Nicholas Felix L. Ty and Prosecutor General Anthony Fadullon were also named as co-respondents in the complaint filed by Sebastian’s lawyer, Israelito Torreon. The acting mayor was not present during the filing.
In an interview with reporters streamed on ABC-CBN’s YouTube channel, Torreon declined to discuss the grounds of the complaint, citing the confidential nature of the disbarment case.
Sebastian’s legal team, however, maintained that the unlawful arrest, detention, and extra-judicial rendition of the former President violated the lawyers’ Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA) and the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
“As to the contents and the specifics, I think you know that I could not expound on the same, but this is related to the kidnapping as well as expulsion of former President Rodrigo Roa Duterte to The Hague, Netherlands,” he said.
The ICC charged the 80-year-old former President with three counts of murder as crimes against humanity. Based on the publicly redacted version of the Document Containing the Charges, the detained former leader has been accused of being an “indirect co-perpetrator” in the extrajudicial killings in connection with his war on drugs that allegedly took place between November 1, 2011, and March 16, 2019, during his tenure as mayor of Davao City and later as President of the Philippines.
Torreon said that Sebastian filed the complaint in his capacity as the child of the former President, acting with authority from his family.
The lawyer emphasized that Sebastian did not file the disbarment complaint to obstruct the nomination of Remulla for the Ombudsman post.
“This is principally to make him (Justice Secretary Remulla) liable for violations that he had committed under the CPRA, and on the side, if that would cause the blocking of his appointment, then that is one of the consequences of his actions,” he said.
On September 15, 2025, Sebastian filed criminal and multiple criminal and administrative complaints against Justice Secretary Remulla, Teodoro, Ty, and Fadullon before the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Mindanao in Davao City.
Named as co-respondents of the complaints were Interior and Local Government Secretary Juan Victor “Jonvic” Remulla, National Security Adviser Eduardo Año, former Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Rommel L. Francisco Marbil, his successor Nicolas Torre III, and former PNP spokesperson Brig. Gen. Jean Fajardo, Ambassador Markus V. Lacanilao, and Anthony D. Alcantara, executive director of the Philippine Center on Transnational Crimes.
The affidavit-complaint alleges eight counts of kidnapping; eight counts of arbitrary detention; violation of Section 14 in relation to Section 12 of Republic Act No. 9745 or the Anti-Torture Act of 2009; qualified direct assault; expulsion; violation of Section 4 of R.A. No. 7438, a law defining the rights of persons under custodial investigation; usurpation of judicial functions; and violation of Sec. 3(a) of R.A. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
The former President was arrested on March 11 upon arrival at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport from Hong Kong, was detained at Villamor Airbase, and shipped out of the Philippines on the same day.
Last March 14, Duterte made an initial appearance before the ICC.
The ICC set the confirmation of charges hearing for September 23 this year, but announced last September 8 that it had postponed the commencement of the confirmation hearing following the request from Duterte’s legal team for an indefinite adjournment of the proceedings, alleging that he is “not fit to stand trial.”
It said that the majority of the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber I considered “that a limited postponement of the hearing on the confirmation of charges was warranted to allow sufficient time to adjudicate the request and related matters.”
“The Chamber will, if applicable, set a specific date once it has addressed such outstanding matters,” it added. (Antonio L. Colina IV / MindaNews)
