Disinformation over Duterte's ICC arrest hits new low as ‘Putin', ‘Michelle Yeoh' weigh in
Rodrigo Duterte has emerged following his arrest by the International Criminal Court (
ICC ), with analysts arguing the misinformation campaign could not only fail to help his case but also backfire by affecting judicial decisions on his interim release.
Advertisement
Even before the aircraft left Manila, Duterte loyalists began circulating fake stories, including claims that the
Philippine Supreme Court had granted a temporary restraining order to halt his transfer.
02:23
Former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte arrested under ICC warrant
Former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte arrested under ICC warrant
Their fabrications grew bolder from there. When the former president appeared before ICC judges on March 14 for an initial hearing, his supporters falsely claimed the case had been dismissed, when in fact the judges swiftly set his first hearing date for September.
Joel Butuyan, one of only five Filipino lawyers accredited to the ICC and president of the Centre for International Law, told This Week in Asia, 'I don't think it's going to affect the ongoing case in the ICC with respect to the merits. But it might potentially affect any application for interim release.'
The fake reports have ranged from the outlandish to the malicious. One post purported to show
Russian President
Vladimir Putin refusing peace talks with
Ukraine for as long as the ICC held Duterte. Another rumour claimed the Supreme Court accepted a petition with 16 million signatures demanding President
Ferdinand Marcos Jnr 's resignation and was going to rule on it.
One fake news article purported to show Russian President Vladimir Putin refusing peace talks with Ukraine for as long as Duterte was held by the ICC. Photo: Kremlin Pool/AP
In a statement released on Monday, the high court condemned rumours about itself and Duterte being granted a temporary restraining order as 'acts of disinformation' and said they would be referred 'for appropriate action.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTHK
9 hours ago
- RTHK
Trump moves nuclear subs after Medvedev comments
Trump moves nuclear subs after Medvedev comments US President Donald Trump has been sparring with the former Russian president on social media. Photo: Reuters US President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of two nuclear submarines on Friday in an extraordinary escalation of what had been an online war of words with a Russian official over Ukraine and tariffs. Trump and Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of Russia's security council, have been sparring on social media for days. Trump's post on his Truth Social platform abruptly took that spat into the very real -- and rarely publicised -- sphere of nuclear forces. "Based on the highly provocative statements," Trump said he had "ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that." "Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances," the 79-year-old Republican posted. The nuclear sabre rattling came against the backdrop of a deadline set by Trump for the end of next week for Russia to take steps to ending the conflict in Ukraine or face unspecified new sanctions. Despite the pressure from Washington, Russia's onslaught against its pro-Western neighbour continues to unfold at full-bore. An AFP analysis on Friday showed that Russian forces had fired a record number of drones at Ukraine in July. Russian attacks have killed hundreds of Ukrainian civilians since June. A combined missile and drone attack on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv early Thursday killed 31 people, including five children, said rescuers. Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has consistently rejected calls for a ceasefire, said Friday that he wants peace but that his demands for ending his nearly three-and-a-half year invasion were "unchanged". Those demands include that Ukraine abandon territory and end ambitions to join Nato. (AFP)
AllAfrica
20 hours ago
- AllAfrica
Why Trump can't stop the Ukraine and Gaza wars
In yet another twist in his unpredictable decision-making, US President Donald Trump has dramatically shortened his original 50-day ultimatum to Vladimir Putin to call a ceasefire in Ukraine to a mere ten days. It's an unmistakable sign of Trump's frustration with the Russian leader, whom he now appears to view as the main obstacle to ending the war. Progress has been similarly limited on another of Trump's flagship foreign policy projects: ending the war in Gaza. As a humanitarian catastrophe engulfs the territory, Trump and some of his MAGA base are finally challenging Israel's denials that, after almost two years of war, many Gazans now face a real risk of starvation. In neither case have his efforts to mediate and bring an end to the violence borne any fruit. But not all of Trump's efforts to stop violence in conflicts elsewhere in the world have been similarly futile. The administration brokered a ceasefire between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which the two countries' foreign ministers signed in Washington on June 27. The US president has also claimed to be behind the ceasefire between India and Pakistan in May after the two sides had engaged in several days of fierce combat following a terror attack in Indian-administered Kashmir by a Pakistan-backed rebel group. And, drawing a clear parallel between this conflict and the border clashes between Cambodia and Thailand in July, Trump announced he had pushed both countries' leaders to negotiate a ceasefire. All of these ceasefires, so far, have held. By contrast, the ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, to which Trump contributed in January, even before he was inaugurated for his second term, broke down in March and fighting has escalated ever since. A short-lived ceasefire in Ukraine in April was barely worth its name given the countless violations. Three factors can explain Trump's mixed record of peacemaking to date. First, the US president is more likely to succeed in stopping the fighting where he has leverage and is willing to use it to force foreign leaders to bend to his will. For example, Trump was very clear that there would be no trade negotiations with Thailand or Cambodia 'until such time as the fighting STOPS.' The crucial difference, so far, with the situation in the war against Ukraine is that Trump has, and has used, similar leverage only with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky. This led to a US-Ukraine agreement on a 30-day ceasefire proposal just two weeks after the now-notorious row between Trump and Zelensky in the Oval Office. The mere threat of sanctions against Russia, by contrast, has done little to persuade Putin to accept whatever deal might Trump offer him. Trump's threats – which he has never followed through on – did not work in January or May. The Kremlin's initial reactions to the latest ultimatum from the White House do not indicate a change in Putin's attitude. A second factor that may explain why Trump has had peacemaking success in some cases but not others is the level of complexity of US interests involved. When it comes to US relations with Russia and Israel, there is a lot more at stake for Trump. The US president still appears keen to strike a grand bargain with Russia and China under which Washington, Beijing and Moscow would agree to recognize, and not interfere in, their respective spheres of influence. This could explain his hesitation so far to follow through on his threats to Putin. Similarly, US interests in the Middle East – whether it's over Iran's nuclear program or relations with America's Gulf allies – have put strains on the alliance with Israel. Trump also needs to weigh carefully the impact of any move against, or in support of, Israel on his domestic support base. In the deal Trump brokered between Rwanda and the DRC, the issues at stake were much simpler: access for US investors to the mineral riches of the eastern DRC. Just days into his second term, Trump acknowledged that the conflict was a 'very serious problem.' Congo's president, Felix Tshisekedi, responded by offering the US access to minerals in exchange for pushing Rwanda to a deal to end the invasion and stop supporting proxy forces in the DRC. This leads to the third factor that has enabled Trump's peace-making success so far: simpler solutions are easier to achieve. Thailand and Cambodia and India and Pakistan can go back to the situation before their recent fighting. That does not resolve any of the underlying issues in their conflicts, but returns their relations to some form of non-violent stability. It is ultimately also in the interests of the conflict parties. They have had a chance to make their violent statements and reinforce what they will and won't tolerate from the other side. The required investment by an external mediator to end battles that have achieved what the warring sides want anyway – to avoid further escalation – is consequently quite limited. Getting to any kind of stability in Ukraine or the Middle East, by contrast, requires prolonged engagement and attention to detail. These conflicts are at a stage in which a return to how things were before is not in the interests of the parties or their external backers. Nudging warring parties along on the path to agreement under such conditions requires a well-designed process, which is absent in Ukraine and failing in Gaza. Thanks to funding and personnel cuts, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is now required to perform multiple roles. Trump relies on personal envoys with at best limited foreign policy expertise, while insisting he makes all the decisions. This ultimately suggests that the White House simply may not have the bandwidth for the level of engagement that would be necessary to get to a deal in Ukraine and the Middle East. This is a self-inflicted opportunity lost, not only for the United States but also for the long-suffering people of Ukraine and the Middle East. Stefan Wolff is professor of international security, University of Birmingham This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
AllAfrica
a day ago
- AllAfrica
US-China trade talks threaten to explode over Russia oil
The United States has urged China to halt its purchases of oil and gas from Russia, threatening it with secondary sanctions, including possible 100% tariffs. The warning came after the US reached trade deals with the European Union and Japan that set tariffs at 15%. In meetings in Stockholm, Sweden, earlier this week, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent expressed to trade negotiators led by Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng Washington's displeasure with China's continued purchases of sanctioned Russian as well as Iranian oil. Bessent also complained about China's sales of over US$15 billion worth of dual-use technology goods to Russia that have reputedly supported Moscow's war against Ukraine. In a briefing on Wednesday (July 30), Bessent told the media that Chinese officials responded to his call by stating that China is a sovereign nation with its own energy needs and that oil purchases would be based on the country's internal policies. 'The Chinese take their sovereignty very seriously. We don't want to impede their sovereignty, so they'd like to pay a 100% tariff,' Bessent said, sarcastically. He told the press that US and Chinese officials did not strike a deal to extend their 90-day tariff truce, which is set to expire on August 12. He said that US President Donald Trump would decide whether the US would extend the deadline, typically by 90 days, or reimpose punishing tariffs. During his presidential election campaign, Trump vowed to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of becoming president. Since Trump took office on January 20, he has tried to bring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table. On March 14, Trump admitted that he was being 'a little bit sarcastic' when he said he could end the Ukraine war within a day. In early July, reports said he came to the realization that Putin had no intention of engaging in negotiations. On July 14, Trump set a 50-day deadline for Moscow to end the war, or the US will send billions of weapons to Ukraine, impose a 100% tariff on Russian goods, and also on products coming from countries that bought Russian oil. On July 22, Bessent said that he would discuss China's oil purchases from Russia and Iran with Chinese officials. On Monday, Trump said Putin's new deadline to end the war would be 10 or 12 days. That would be a few days before the US-China tariff truce ends on August 12. The world's spotlight is now on whether Beijing will distance itself from Russia to avoid 100% US tariffs. 'China will take energy supply measures that are right for China based on our national interests. Tariff wars have no winners,' Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said Wednesday. 'Coercion and pressuring cannot solve problems. China will firmly safeguard its own sovereignty, security, and development interests.' Chinese commentators said the China-Russia-Iran alliance will not be broken by US pressure. Chen Fei, an associate professor of international relations at Central China Normal University, says in an article that the United States' wish to break China's ties with Russia and Iran is unlikely to succeed. 'As one of the world's largest crude oil importers, China maintains close energy cooperation with Russia and Iran,' he writes. 'The US tried to include this issue in the Sino-US trade negotiation framework and intended to exert pressure on China, attempting to use energy issues as a bargaining chip. This is a strategic test of Sino-Russian and Sino-Iranian relations.' He opines the US played this 'energy card' because it faced an unfavorable political and economic situation within its country. 'China will not change its foreign policy and the direction of international cooperation due to unilateral pressure from the US. It will continue to work hand in hand with like-minded countries to respond to global challenges jointly,' he adds. Xin Qiang, a professor at China's Fudan University, said China would not allow the US to make non-tariff issues the focus of the trade negotiations or bundle trade matters with non-trade issues. A Shandong-based columnist argues that the US cannot intervene in China's purchases of Russian and Iranian oil products, as all these transactions are settled in renminbi, rendering US sanctions a 'paper tiger.' Citing Customs data, the writer says that Russia has been China's top crude oil supplier for 20 consecutive months, delivering 2.16 million barrels daily via pipeline, approximately 600,000 barrels more than those from Saudi Arabia. He says Iran also ships 1.8 million barrels of crude oil to China daily at peak times. 'The US wants to use secondary sanctions to force China to stop buying Russian and Iranian oil and shift to buy its shale oil,' he says. 'China has not bought shale oil from the US for three consecutive months. The US seemed tough but exposed its anxiety about falling oil exports.' He says the US will only fuel its inflation if it imposes an additional 100% tariff on Chinese imports. He says that European countries, including Germany and France, will not follow the United States' call to reduce oil and gas imports from Russia and Iran, respectively. Trump said he decided to shorten Putin's deadline to end the Ukraine war from 50 days to 10-12 days because he saw no progress being made toward achieving a ceasefire. His decision followed two significant developments. On July 23, Trump announced that the US had agreed to a 'massive' trade deal with Japan where Tokyo committed to invest $550 billion in the US, while the US will only impose a 15% tariff on Japanese imports. On July 27, Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen met in Scotland and agreed on a similar 15% US tariff on all EU goods. 'I think that the Chinese were surprised by the magnitude of the Japan deal, and by the magnitude and the terms of the European deal,' Bessent said Wednesday. 'I believe they were in more of a mood for a wide-ranging discussion. The discussion centered on the two economies.' He said the US side expressed its concern about Chinese overcapacity globally and its impact on other countries within the next few years. He said he would not be surprised if Europe, Canada and Australia followed in the United States' footsteps and imposed anti-dumping tariffs on Chinese goods at some point. The fact that the Trump administration had reached trade deals with the EU, Japan and some ASEAN countries before the meeting with the Chinese side has created some pressure on Beijing, said Yang Shuiqing, a researcher at the Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. He said that under their trade deals with Washington, the EU and Japan will open their markets to US companies, while their tariffs will hurt Chinese firms' competitiveness. Additionally, the EU and Japan have pledged to increase investment in the US, potentially leading to a reduction in investment in China. Yang said that, fortunately, China has a 'rare earth card' to play, making America unable to ignore its demands. Yuyuan Tantian, a social media account affiliated with the state-owned China Central Television, reported on Wednesday that Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao met with representatives from approximately 10 American companies in Beijing. It stated that Wang discussed business opportunities for US firms in China. Some other Chinese commentators also believed that the US would not escalate its trade war with China in the short term, as Trump does not want to jeopardize his chance to visit China on September 3, when China celebrates the 80th anniversary of its victory in the War against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War. Read: China-EU play nice despite widening cracks
