In a democratic country, the end of a term is often expected to signal the end of an influence. However, in the case of former President Rodrigo Duterte, his political presence continued to echo beyond his presidency, remaining deeply embedded in public sentiment and within parts of the government. The line between leadership and loyalty becomes increasingly blurred—raising the question of how a jailed former leader still maintains influence over the country’s political system, and how far his legacy continues to shape Philippine politics.
Rodrigo Duterte secured his presidency in May 2016 with over 16.6 million votes. Much of his political image centered on his widely publicized “war on drugs,” built around campaign promises to eradicate drugs and criminals within three to six months. Further enforcing the police and military to go after suspected criminals and drug offenders—and if they resisted, they would be killed. With his experience as a long-standing mayor of Davao City, this helped him win the election on a landslide.
However, Duterte’s years in Davao were also shadowed by allegations surrounding the Davao Death Squad (DDS). During the House Quad committee investigation into extrajudicial killings, Leila De Lima stated that the DDS was not merely a loosened organized group of killers, but a highly structured and state-backed death squad. On October 28, 2024, Duterte himself later confirmed the existence of the DDS during his time as mayor
Ironically, the same acronym - DDS - later became associated with “Diehard Duterte Supporters,” the loyal core fanbase that strongly defended Duterte throughout his campaign and presidency. According to an article published by the Spheres of Influence, many supporters of Duterte remain deeply loyal because they view him as a strong paternal figure who represents order, protection, and decisive leadership. This loyalty persisted despite widespread concerns over human rights violations linked to the drug war. As noted by Professor Walden Bello, many supporters were fully aware of the killings yet continued to support Duterte because they believed he had successfully removed criminals from society.
This strong support for Rodrigo Duterte gradually evolved into fanaticism and blind loyalty—something particularly dangerous in a democratic society where criticism and accountability should remain essential. For instance, many Duterte supporters have become known for refusing to criticize Duterte while aggressively attacking those who oppose him, often through online harassment, insults, and even threats of violence. The article also mentioned how Kay Conales, a faculty member from University of San Carlos, became a target of backlash after posting photos of demonstrations organized by the university’s Political Science department protesting the Duterte administration’s extrajudicial killings linked to the war on drugs.
This loyalty and admiration persisted even after Duterte came under the custody of the International Criminal Court (ICC)—recalling his arrival where supporters were seen to be carrying Philippine flags and signs saying, “We stand with FPRRD.” Even his detention did not weaken his political influence, as he was elected mayor of his home city during the 2025 Midterm Elections. Across the country, supporters continue to organize protests echoing the chant, “Bring him home.”
But Rodrigo Duterte’s influence did not end with his supporters—it also extended deeply into the government itself. According to an article released by Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, titled “Polarized Opinion: The Arrest of Duterte”—during his presidency, Duterte strategically appointed allies to key positions within the courts and constitutional commissions, allowing his influence to remain embedded within political institutions even after his term. Over time, this loyalty among certain politicians strengthened political alliances tied to the Duterte family rather than prioritizing public service for the Filipino people. Now, with Sara Duterte facing an impeachment trial, these loyalties appear to be surfacing even more, revealing where the focus and allegiance of some officials truly lie.
When Sara Duterte was impeached by the House of Representatives, the Senate impeachment proceedings quickly became a major political focus. Amid this, Alan Peter Cayetano was elected Senate President on May 11 after a majority of senators voted to declare all leadership positions vacant, effectively ending the tenure of Vicente Sotto III. However, Cayetano’s long-standing political ties to the Duterte family immediately drew public attention. In 2016, he served as the running mate of former President Rodrigo Duterte, making many Filipinos question whether loyalty could influence decisions surrounding the impeachment trial.
Even so, Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa—who had reportedly been absent for six months, stated in an interview on Kapuso Mo, Jessica Soho that he returned partly because of the planned change in Senate leadership. Dela Rosa is widely recognized as one of Rodrigo Duterte’s closest political allies, he served as police chief of Davao City during Duterte’s term as mayor, and when Duterte later assumed presidency, Dela Rosa was appointed chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP)—further strengthening his ties to the Duterte administration.
If those entrusted to uphold the law become deeply bound by loyalty to a former president, the consequences extend beyond politics—they affect the very people they are meant to serve. It is both fascinating and deeply alarming that in a democratic country, political figures can command such intense admiration that accountability begins to blur.
Loyalty to the Dutertes becomes a betrayal of the country when blind devotion took priority over accountability. Not because they are Dutertes, but because Filipinos should place the nation’s welfare above devotion to any politician they glorify. Democracy can not thrive when leaders are looked up upon and defended at all costs.
In times when politicians openly prioritize political alliances over what is just and beneficial for the nation, the responsibility of safeguarding democracy falls into the hands of the people. In moments like these, civic awareness and critical thinking becomes a must—not only in holding leaders accountable, but also in ensuring that the government remains anchored in public service rather than blind loyalty.
Rodrigo Duterte’s legacy did not end with the conclusion of his term—it continues to remain deeply embedded in many ways—still influential within both the public and parts of the government.
Democracy demands citizens who are willing to question, discern, and stand firm for what is right, even when it challenges familiar names and such loyalties. A government rooted in personalities may divide the public, but an informed society possesses the power to reclaim democracy and remind leaders that public office is a duty to serve the nation.
Before anything else, the reminder remains clear— above all roles and allies, we are Filipinos. Bound by a single duty to serve what is best for our nation, and not out of blind devotion.
Written by Alexandria Fernando
Alexandria Fernando is a dedicated campus journalist and contributor. Their insightful writing sparks meaningful conversations and keeps the community informed.
