DAVAO CITY — Former President Rodrigo Roa Duterte has been conferred the Golden Pillar of Law Award by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) in recognition of his 50 years in the legal profession — a move that has drawn both commendation and outrage from various quarters.
The award was presented on October 6, 2025, at the Hall of Justice in Davao City as part of the nationwide celebration of Law Month. Duterte, a 1972 graduate of San Beda College of Law, began his career as a prosecutor before serving in various political capacities, including as vice mayor, congressman, and mayor of Davao City for a total of 22 years. He later became the country’s 16th president from 2016 to 2022.
In its citation, the IBP recognized Duterte’s “distinguished and dedicated service in the legal profession, upholding the ideals of justice, integrity, and the rule of law, whether in private practice or public service.” The national organization described his half-century in law as “a pillar of inspiration to the legal community.”
However, Duterte’s conferment comes amid his detention at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Netherlands. He was arrested in the Philippines last March and faces charges of alleged crimes against humanity in connection with the “war on drugs” campaign carried out during his years as Davao City mayor and president.
IBP Clarifies: “Non-Political and Based on Objective Criteria”
Following intense backlash online and within the legal community, the IBP Davao City Chapter released an official statement on October 8 clarifying that the award is “non-political” and based solely on objective criteria set by the IBP National Office.
According to the statement, the Golden Pillar of Law Award is a nationwide recognition automatically granted to lawyers in good standing who have practiced law for 50 years or more. It is implemented under a memorandum issued on August 20, 2025, by IBP National President Atty. Allan G. Panolong.
In Davao City alone, 27 lawyers, including Duterte, received the same distinction.
“While certain members of the legal community have expressed personal sentiments against the conferment of the award, we are duty-bound to uphold the precept that judgment must rest on evidence and final conviction, not mere perception,” the chapter said. “Every person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.”
The IBP emphasized that the award does not endorse any political act or ideology but merely recognizes “professional longevity and good standing” as defined by the organization’s by-laws.
Critics Denounce the Award
Despite the clarification, several lawyers and activists condemned the IBP’s decision, calling it a “horrendous idiocy” and a “betrayal of justice.”
One IBP member publicly demanded the resignation of all officers of the IBP Board of Governors, particularly President Allan Panolong, saying, “Where in the world has a mass murderer and plunderer like Rodrigo Duterte been recognized for upholding justice and integrity? He has ordered killings without due process — that is not rule of law but genocide.”
The critic also cited Duterte’s alleged involvement in corruption, human rights violations, and political repression through mechanisms such as the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), saying these “contradict every principle the legal profession stands for.”
Another lawyer remarked sarcastically, “Really, IBP? For ‘dedicated practice’? Even just citing the lawyer’s oath—‘to promote the rule of law, truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace’—he already fails. How can he be a model lawyer after the persecution of Maria Ressa, ABS-CBN, and Senator Leila de Lima?”
A Divided Legal Community
The IBP’s conferment of the Golden Pillar of Law Award to Duterte has once again highlighted the deep divisions within the Philippine legal community — between those who emphasize adherence to procedural rules and those who demand moral accountability.
For Duterte’s supporters, the award symbolizes recognition of decades of public service and professional endurance. For his critics, it represents an insult to the victims of alleged extrajudicial killings and an erosion of the legal profession’s moral compass.
As the debate continues, the IBP maintains its stance that the award merely follows long-standing criteria — one that, for better or worse, has now placed the spotlight once again on one of the country’s most polarizing figures.