DAVAO City Vice Mayor Sebastian “Baste” Duterte yesterday filed criminal and administrative complaints before the Office of the Ombudsman for Mindanao against Cabinet officials and police generals, alleging that his father, former president Rodrigo Duterte, was unlawfully arrested and flown out of the country to the Hague in the Netherlands.
Named respondents in the 160-page affidavit-complaint were Interior Secretary Juan Victor “Jonvic” Remulla, Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro, special envoy for Transnational Crimes Markus Lacanilao, Justice undersecretary Nicholas Felix Ty, and National Security Adviser Eduardo Año.
Likewise included were former PNP Chiefs Rommel Francisco Marbil and Nicolas Torre III, Philippine Center for Transnational Crimes executive director Anthony Alcantara, Prosecutor General Richard Anthony Fadullon, PNP spokesperson Police Brig. Gen. Jean Fajardo, and the owner and operator of the Gulfstream G550 jet that flew Duterte to the Hague.
The younger Duterte, who is the acting mayor of Davao City, sought their indictment for kidnapping, arbitrary detention, violation of the Anti-Torture Act (RA 9745), violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019), and Usurpation of Judicial Functions.
Aside from the criminal complaints, the respondents are also facing administrative charges for serious dishonesty, gross neglect of duty, grave misconduct, oppression, disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
The vice mayor alleged that his father was illegally detained by the police led by Torre, then the head of the PNP – Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG), upon arrival from Hong Kong on March 11, 2025 before he was flown and turned over to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague to face trial for crimes against humanity.
He also claimed that his father’s partner, Honeylet Avanceña, their daughter Veronica “Kitty” Duterte, former executive secretary Salvador Medialdea, Manuel Ramos, Nestor Quinsay, Filmore Escobal, and Alex Monteagudo were also allegedly illegally held by the police.
Citing closed-circuit camera footage taken at the passenger bridge as well as screengrab photos of the incident, Vice Mayor Duterte said his father and Medialdea, who are both lawyers, challenged the validity of the arrest after “no valid Philippine warrant of arrest was presented by Torre or any member of the PNP team present.”
“The respondents and the police officers present were silent as they failed to present any Philippine court-issued arrest warrant that could justify the arrest,” he stressed in his complaint.
He also said that no legal explanation was offered by the arresting police officers, even as it turned out later that the paper presented to the former president was an Interpol diffusion notice, “not an arrest warrant, nor a red notice.”
He likewise said that his father and his companions “did not undergo the normal process of immigration clearance despite the fact that they arrived from a foreign country,” pointing out they were immediately loaded into a police bus and taken to the Villamor Airbase within the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) complex.
“Despite objections and the protestations of Duterte and his legal team, without a valid legal basis of apprehension, …(they) were forcibly escorted from the arrival area… transported to Villamor Airbase against their will and were placed under strict police custody,” he alleged.
The Davao City vice mayor was assisted by counsels from the law firm of Torreon and Partners, Tolentino and Associates, and Delgra Law Office in filing the complaint.
He said that in arresting and turning over his father to the ICC, the provisions of Presidential Decree No. 1069 (Law on Extradition) were not observed faithfully, including applying to a Regional Trial Court (RTC) for the issuance of a valid warrant of arrest.
“The procedure of PD 1096 was not followed in this case. There was no formal request, and if there was, it was not addressed to the Secretary of Foreign Affairs. While respondents Remulla, Fadullon, and Ty were involved with the Department of Justice, there was no petition that was filed before the proper RTC and there was no decision for extradition,” he said.
Pending resolution of his complaint, he asked the Ombudsman to place the respondent public officials under preventive suspension, saying the “evidence of guilt is strong, the charge involves oppression and grave misconduct, and their continued stay in office may prejudice the case.”
“The respondents wield insurmountable power; they were able to arrest, detain, and expel a former president within just a day. They did not have a Philippine arrest warrant, and only relied only a questionable ‘soft copy.’ Our case will be futile if the respondents were to remain in power. Thus, a preventive suspension would be necessary… to protect us, the complainants,” he said.
‘POLITICAL SPECTACLE’
Justice Secretary Remulla dismissed the complaint as a form of “political spectacle” and “forum shopping,” saying this was meant to derail his bid for the top Ombudsman post.
Remulla is one of those vying for the post following the retirement last July 27 of Ombudsman Samuel Martires.
“It is really part of an organized effort for them to shoot down my candidacy as Ombudsman. They’re really timing it in that way that will make it impossible for they want to make it impossible for the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) to get the requirements that I have to submit,” he told reporters.
“The case is already pending before the Supreme Court with the certiorari case they filed. So it’s really forum shopping,” he added.
Remulla needs a clearance from the Office of the Ombudsman for him to qualify for the shortlist of candidates vying for the Ombudsman post that will be submitted to Malacañang, which has 90 days to make an appointment after Martires left the anti-graft agency.
The JBC, the body tasked by the 1987 Constitution to vet and screen nominees in the Judiciary, is reportedly set to hold deliberations on the shortlist they will submit to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. within the week.
Despite the development, Remulla remained unfazed, saying he would “just roll with the punches.”
“I think the JBC can see through these kinds of acts that are being perpetrated by the opposite political camp. They’re making it into a political spectacle, which should not be the case,” he said.
Aside from the younger Duterte’s charges, Sen. Imee Marcos has also filed a similar complaint against Remulla and other Cabinet officials before the Ombudsman.
Meanwhile, Interior Secretary Remulla and Marbil said it is the right of the acting Davao City mayor to file charges.
“It’s a legal tactic that they have a right to file. I am confident with my defense,” Remulla said in a message.
Asked what his defense is and if he is confident the case will be dismissed, he said: “I’ll wait to read the charges. I haven’t received it.”
Marbil, who was the PNP chief when the elder Duterte was arrested, said: “It’s their right to file (the case) if they feel aggrieved.”
In a phone interview, Marbil maintained that the PNP followed protocols in the implementation of the ICC arrest warrant against Duterte, adding that the police merely helped in the service of the warrant.
“We followed the procedure to arrest. There is no violation on our part… We observed the proper procedure. We did not violate (the procedure),” he said, as he expressed confidence that the case would eventually be dismissed.
“Of course, that will be dismissed. But as I said, they (Dutertes) made the right move if they feel aggrieved,” said Marbil.
“But for us, our policemen did their job properly. What we did is within bounds,” he also said.
Año, Torre III, and Fajardo, who were also included in the charged sheet, did not respond to messages for their reaction.
INHIBIT
In a related development, Sen. Imee Marcos said she has submitted last September 12 an urgent motion asking acting Ombudsman Dante Vargas and the panel of investigators, namely, Sandy Alcantara, Roseann Claudine Passion, Corrine Joie Garillo-Arellano, Napoleon Malimas, Leilani Tagulao-Marquez, and Nellie Boguen-Golez, to inhibit from resolving the Motion for Reconsideration that she filed after the Ombudsman dismissed last week her complaint against DOJ secretary Remulla and six others for graft, usurpation of authority, and arbitrary detention.
Her complaint was based on the findings of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which she previously chaired, that there was a conspiracy among the accused to arrest and surrender Duterte to the ICC even if the Philippines had withdrawn from the Rome Statute effective March 2019.
Marcos alleged that Vargas and the panel of prosecutors were biased in favor of the respondents, especially DOJ secretary Remulla, claiming that she has supposedly “verified” that the spouse of the acting Ombudsman “is the UP law classmate of one of the respondents herein, namely Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla.”
“The fact that OIC (officer-in-charge) Vargas did not even disclose to the parties in this case such a fact is already highly irregular and improper on his part,” she said in her urgent motion to inhibit.
She also said: “To make matters worse, on 12 September 2025, under the command and control of OIC Vargas, the panel of investigators resolved to dismiss without prejudice the above-captioned case on the ground that the pending Supreme Court cases surrounding the arrest of former president Rodrigo R. Duterte raise prejudicial questions.”
“This was the ruling despite the fact that the set of issues in those cases is vastly different from the instant case,” she said.
She also said that she has received information that DOJ Secretary Remulla was already at the Office of the Ombudsman “to claim his clearance” when the decision to dismiss the complaint against him and the others was rendered.
“These circumstances very evidently display the bias of OIC Vargas and the panel of investigators,” Marcos said.
In a press conference yesterday, Marcos said the DOJ chief has not yet secured a clearance from the Ombudsman because of the appeal that she filed.
“Therefore, Secretary Remulla still has a pending case before the Office of the Ombudsman. Any Ombudsman clearance which will state otherwise is not true and whoever comes out with this is guilty of deception,” she said in Filipino.
She said she will raise the matter to the Supreme Court if the Ombudsman dismisses her Motion for Reconsideration. — With Ashzel Hachero and Victor Reyes
