The Reckoning: ‘Diversionary Tactic’: Critics Charge ICC Arrest Warrant Saga Is Smokescreen for Widespread Flood Control Corruption

In the turbulent world of Philippine politics, where spectacle often overshadows substance, a new and deeply corrosive narrative is taking hold. The high-stakes legal drama surrounding the potential International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant for former police chief and sitting Senator Bato Dela Rosa is, according to a growing chorus of critics, not the main story at all. Instead, it is being denounced as a meticulously planned “diversionary tactic” orchestrated by the current administration, an elaborate smokescreen designed to shield itself from an escalating crisis: widespread corruption in vital infrastructure, particularly in the failing flood control system.

The core of this explosive debate unfolded during an interview between veteran journalist Karen Davila and Attorney Christina Conti, an Assistant to the Counsel for the ICC. While the legal expert provided sober analysis on the secretive nature of international law, Filipino commentators seized on the public’s immediate, visceral suspicion, translating it into a full-scale political indictment. The question being asked on every street corner and social media feed is simple: Is the threat of an ICC warrant being weaponized to keep the nation from focusing on the literal flooding caused by years of alleged government plunder?

The Secret War: Why Warrants Stay Hidden
Attorney Christina Conti’s interview segment provided crucial insight into the highly confidential protocols of the ICC, particularly regarding warrants issued against powerful political figures. Her explanations quickly confirmed the legal possibility that a warrant for Senator Dela Rosa could exist, even if it has not been publicly announced.

Davila pressed the legal expert on how the public or government could confirm an arrest warrant, to which Attorney Conti explained that, per the ICC’s e-court protocol, documents generally “has to be uploaded” to the public website. However, this is not always immediate or complete.

Conti elaborated on the secrecy surrounding high-profile cases, stating that: “Most documents of the ICC especially those pertaining to or relating to witnesses o kaya contains private information about persons are not immediately known public.” The classification is an act of precaution, intended to safeguard witnesses and the judicial process itself.

Drawing parallels to the former head of state, Conti noted the precedent: “In the case of of Duterte it was not made public immediately but was enforced. Oo kaya ah may kaibahan yung public ah pero walang nahuli Secret pero may nahuli Oo.” This chilling analysis—that there is a difference between a public warrant and a secret but enforced one—underscores the pervasive uncertainty currently dominating political circles.

Furthermore, Attorney Conti clarified why the ICC focuses its attention on people in authority, like Senator Dela Rosa. She explained that the court targets individuals accused of only four grave crimes, specifically seeking “persons with considerable authority and money” who they believe might “abscond or kumbaga not cooperate.”

She directly addressed the situation involving Dela Rosa’s past refusal to engage with the court: “The summons in the case of bato could have been issued… he was being summoned or invited to the ICC to cooperate at hindi siya hindi niya pinansin Hindi niya pinansin Oo.” This suggested that the transition from a diplomatic summons to a more serious, confidential arrest warrant might have been triggered by the accused’s own defiance. The logic, according to Conti, is that the ICC concentrates on those with power and resources—those who have privileges in local courts, not “simpleng mamamayan” (ordinary citizens).

The Unstoppable Tide of Corruption Allegations
Despite the measured legal explanations provided by the ICC representative, the narrative was immediately hijacked by local commentators who found the timing of the ICC saga far too coincidental to be random. The core of their argument is that the government is facing a profound legitimacy crisis stemming from chronic corruption that is now literally manifesting in public view.

The Filipino commentator, in a fiery segment, fiercely rejected Attorney Conti’s polite dismissal of the “diversionary tactic” theory. He launched a scathing attack on the administration, arguing that the public’s attention is being involuntarily redirected away from its most egregious failures.

He pointed to the most visible sign of government negligence: flooding. Every heavy rain, he argued, acts as a grim, unwelcome reminder of unpunished corruption. He stated, in words that resonate with millions of flood-weary citizens: “nare-remind yung tao na corrupt itong gobyernong ito. Baha na naman tayo dahil kinurup na naman ang flood control.” (People are reminded that this government is corrupt. We have floods again because the flood control was corrupted again.)

This environmental and infrastructure failure, he asserted, is the “filth and scandal” that the administration is desperately trying to bury.

The Anatomy of Political Deception
The commentator did not stop at mere accusation; he laid out a detailed charge of political manipulation, describing the announcement of the ICC threat as a cynical, pre-planned strategy. He argued that the warrant issue was “part of their plan para to divert the attention of the taong bayan” (part of their plan to divert the attention of the populace).

The strategy is simple: introduce a loud, emotionally charged political firestorm that dominates headlines and social media feeds. The ICC, the Senator, and the drama become the focus of every blogger and mainstream media outlet. The resulting noise successfully drowns out the quiet, devastating reality of corrupt flood control contracts, leading the public to forget the issues that directly impact their daily lives.

The commentator’s profound skepticism extended even to the country’s highest office, which he characterized as a master of public manipulation. He called the current president a “magaling mambudol” (a great swindler), claiming, “Nabudol na nga tayo sa 2022” (We were already swindled in 2022). This implies that the current administration’s very rise to power was achieved through sophisticated deception, making any subsequent political drama immediately suspect.

In this view, the administration is not battling the ICC; it is battling the unflattering reality of its own performance. The narrative suggests that officials, seeing the public connecting devastating floods with endemic corruption, consciously chose to deploy the political equivalent of a shiny object to redirect the public’s gaze.

The Crisis of Public Trust
The divergence between the dry, procedural world of international law and the highly emotive reality of Philippine politics highlights a fundamental crisis of public trust. When a journalist has to ask, and a commentator has to passionately assert, that a major national political story is a lie designed to conceal administrative failure, it signals a complete breakdown in the relationship between the government and the governed.

The detailed analysis of the ICC’s processes, while technically accurate, does little to assuage the fear that the system is being exploited. When the populace believes their leaders are actively working to distract them from corruption that is costing lives and livelihoods, every action, no matter how legally sound, is viewed through a lens of manipulation and self-preservation.

The tragedy, as the critics see it, is that the very people suffering from the consequences of corruption—the citizens wading through polluted floodwaters—are the ones being swindled by a political drama that shifts the blame and consumes the national conversation. The fight over the ICC arrest warrant, therefore, becomes less about the fate of one senator and more about whether the truth about the nation’s infrastructural decay and political “filth” can ever truly surface. Until the “kababuyan” (filth/scandal) is addressed, every major political development will rightly be questioned as nothing more than a desperate attempt to divert the public’s gaze from the painful, flooding reality.